Either way, the problem is Republicans

[babylonsister]

Either way, the problem is Republicans



So, I posted earlier today about what jackass crazy fuckwits run the Republican party and that's why we're in this current crisis, I suppose the inevitable thing happened in comments: I got scolded about my priorities. Apparently, I'm supposed to be focusing like a laser on how Obama is actually a double agent for the GOP and this was his evil plan all along to gut important social programs. Okay. I can actually sympathize with that point of view, since I remember being a newly minted lefist in college and feeling the allure of "rah rah Nader, Bush and Gore are no different". It was a fairly useless point of view, but it made me feel self-righteous, and at 21, that felt really fucking good. Now I'm older and tired and I look back at Clinton and realize I was being unfair, because while he's far from perfect, suggesting he was the problem is like having cancer and suggesting your hair falling out is your major problem. I was thoroughly cured by 8 years of Bush of this kind of thinking, and am mildly surprised to see how quickly everyone forgot about all that.

Either way, I reject the notion that the complete batshit craziness of the Republicans is merely a distraction from the Real Problem that our who-knew dictator Obama isn't so benevolent. For one thing, I seriously don't think he has as much power, due to the constitutional republic thing, as his angry critics are attributing to him and therefore the theory that he's selling the farm in a desperate bid to stop the crazies from driving this country over the cliff remains a persuasive theory. But more importantly, I don't think it matters.

Yes, I'm saying it right here: whether Obama is a secret Republican or whether he's a well-meaning Democrat who is simply being blackmailed is irrelevant. The problem, either way, is Republicans.

more...

http://pandagon.net/index.php/site/comments/either_way_the_problem_is_republicans

[Sarah Ibarruri]

1. What is he being blackmailed with? I remember he entered the WH being nice to the wingnuts

I didn't like that from the beginning.

[babylonsister]

6. Too bad. He has tried repeatedly to work w/the rethugs, because

that is what the country wanted and expected. Not you, 'the country', those folks who don't pay attention.
I'm sorry if you don't 'get' that, but I did and do. Am I happy with it? Not always, but you get more bees with honey and a man who doesn't flinch when it might be easy to do so. He represents the country, not just you or me.

[TheKentuckian]

9. Lame cop out. The country wants all kinds of shit we ain't even about to see in effort

invested in getting any of it for us.

Bipartisanship with a bunch of loony fucks, intent on destroying you with a completely and utterly failed and destructive ideology is suicidal and there is no argument it isn't so you can't walk hand in hand with them and expect anything good to come of it.

Popularity is no excuse for insanity and even more sadly, you are living a strategy that polls well but has no indication of have any real influence on votes.

It buys nothing but ruin, the electorate does not reward such notions and no one thinks they do either, it is nothing but cover for nefarious schemes.

[Cosmocat]

16. It is what he campaigned on ...

it isn't a cop out ...

Sorry, BO did not campaign as a fire breathing progressive, I know a lot of people WANTED to think that, but he did not.

His whole campaign was based on having a new tone and tenor in DC.

He is upholding HIS end of what he campaigned on.

Look - I hate like hell that he does fold on taxes. I was gravely disappointed when he did not just let the Bush tax cuts expire, and I have a bad feeling where this is headed UNLESS the party stops it. And, THAT is the problem, the party.

They let themselves get steamrolled by BS on HCR reform, got all afraid of it, and let the framing of it get twisted into the bizarre crape it got turned into and used against them. BO has a hand in not leading the fight, definitely.

But, end of the day, he is doing what he campaigned on - being the adult in the room.

That the Rs are lunatics, that the MSM is bought and sold and a republican party extension, that the Ds are a normal political party with real subgroups and not one big unified voting block driven by its more idealistic elements ... All of this is not BOs issue. As noted, he has limited power here.

Again, I have a bad feeling I am about to be gravely disappointed again. But, unless the party gets a set and FIGHTS, he has limited options.

That being said - I think he is too focused on a "grand deal" with this, and should have staked out the fall back option being the simple raising of the debt ceiling.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

17. I agree with you partially.

I agree that for the past 31 years, the right wingers have run the show, EVEN WHEN we have had Democratic presidents, or a Democratic Congress.

I think CHRISTIAN CHURCHES are to blame for getting in bed with right wingers and becoming fascist instruments of bullshit, rather than representing those people whom Christ is said to have defended.

I think non-politician Democrats are tired. It's been 31 fucking fascist years, and we're all tired.

Add to that that our laws are fundamentally designed to hurt everyone but the mega-rich. For example, the lobbying that is allowed, the elections that are allowed to be funded by the most powerful so the most funded almost always wins, the culture of punishment, the 'each man out for himself' bullshit fake theory of America, which abandons all those who are helpless, ill, old, poor, feeble-minded.

There's a LOT wrong with America, and what's wrong is precisely what enriches the mega-rich and corporations, and hurts the rest of us.

Meanwhile, churches keep promoting what hurts the majority. I hate them.

What I disagree with you on is that Obama entered office with the same ideology as Bush, Cheney, Reagan, etc. YES, I HATE the fact that Obama LIKES Cheney, but he campaigned on changing things. If he didn't mean it, he does not deserve a second term. And right now, I'm seeing him be very sweet to the f******ds that have spent the past 31 years destroying our country.

There's NO reason he cannot, should not, or is not allowed to reach out to the population of the U.S. by TV, radio, speeches, and anything else he desires, and state: THE PAST 31 YEARS, THE REPUBLICANS HAVE WORKED VERY HARD TO BRING YOU TO THIS CURRENT DISASTER. WE MUST OPEN OUR EYES AND FIGHT BACK, AND BRING AMERICA BACK TO WHAT IT WAS BEFORE THEY PUT THEIR HANDS ON IT. This is now an emergency situation, and he needs to do this.

But he isn't doing it. He's keeping the right wing way, and I want to know the reason. Did he lie in his campaign when he promised change?

[Cosmocat]

22. IMO, he is pretty much what I saw him campaign on

I agree he does not try to push public opinion enough - I think the media also picks and chooses, it ignors when he does push and amplifies what they want to to amplify. And, the MEGAPHONE the rich/corporations/republicans have in the "liberal media" is infinitely greater than it has ever been.

Look, the guy said he was similar in some ways to Reagen when he campaigned.

And, again, he campaigned on changing the TONE.

He was not very specific about policy and did not campaign as a progressive.

He campaigned on process and tone, flat out ...

He also has overseen some BIG stuff - he DID get HCR reform pushed though and wall street reform, has done a lot of good stuff on the environment.

People tend to get myopic about single things or the moment, but he HAS gotten a fair amount of progessive work done. I know a lot here don't want to give him credit for it, and yeah, he did not fight enough for it, and yeah, I think it falls WELL short of what we really need, but he got HCR DONE, and given what he had in the senate, it was as much as could have gotten done, and he is the first president in generations to get ANY HC done.

Again, I HATE that he caves on taxes to the republicans - I think it is clearly THE thing that defines us against them. I was VERY disappointed he let them box him into extending the Bush tax cuts. And, I hate what the smoke is saying about this deal.

But ...

I think he does a lot more good than bad, by a long shot.

And, the Rs are ALL on one page, all the time.

He is not perfect, but he is our guy.

Being frustrated with him/things is one thing.

But, the Rs are going to vilify him, and attack him, our party, our country relentlessly.

We can barely keep holding back on things as is, but if we turn on our guys we have no shot.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

23. I don't trash him. I just wish to GOD he'd use his giant, public megaphone to seek our support

He could RALLY US! Why isn't he doing that? Other presidents have done that.

[Cosmocat]

25. Yeah ...

I think in part, again, the media simply picks and chooses.

First, what they allow to get out, and second, what they keep harping on/spinning.

But, I agree, he most definitely could lead more. It might not have changed it a lot, but he could have more positively impacted the outcome on HCR had they had a plan and he not sat on the sidelines until the very end.

As an example.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

18. You said it perfectly. nt

[Sarah Ibarruri]

15. Did the country want to reason with people who have spent 31 years hurting the country?

Or, better asked, is it conscionable to continue hurting this country by destroying it according to the dictates of right wingers, as has been done for the past 31 years? If reasoning with right wingers is right, then this country has some very bad goals. Look where it got us.

[babylonsister]

26. Sorry, but the majority of our fellow countrymen want compromise.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43813173/ns/politics/t/poll-americans-want-compromise-debt/

Poll: Americans want compromise on debt
But nearly two-thirds of Tea Party supporters say leaders should hold their ground

http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2011/04/cnn-poll-more-a.php

CNN Poll: More Americans Credit Obama, Dems For Budget Compromise

[treestar]

2. the Republicans are the problem

They deserve all blame and so do the voters for giving them Congress.

It's sickening to see Obama blamed rather than the Republicans.

The business about "caving" is Bullshit. The Republicans have the House.

[Crazy Dave]

5. But what did our side do when they had control of both houses for 2 years?

:shrug:

[treestar]

8. Has nothing to do with what is happening now

Presumably the debt ceiling would have been raised without issue.

Why is the Republican House ignored, as if it does not matter?

[Tx4obama]

11. Our side did NOT really have control of both houses for 2 years - ONLY 49 days

Senator Al Franken was not sworn in until July 2009 and Teddy Kennedy died in August 2009.
That makes it only 49 days that the democrats had a 'real' majority in the Senate - since the GOP decided to block 'everything' it takes 60 'yes' votes to invoke cloture in order to get a vote on anything that the democrats try to do in the Senate.

[eomer]

12. Not true. They could have used the budget reconciliation process, which can't be filibustered.

They could have done much of what we need done with only 50 Senate votes by using reconciliation. They just chose not to.

While it's true that what can be done under reconciliation is constrained, the main constraint is that the legislation must be budget-related. So the things we're discussing now about the budget could have been taken care of during 2009/2010 by the Democrats in Congress together with (ideally under the leadership of) the Democratic President. They just chose not to.

They also chose to disinform people with the constant claim that they were blocked by Republicans and there was nothing they could do. But it is not true - there was something they could do and it is called reconciliation.

And most of the things we need done that aren't budget-related could have been done (could still be done) by Presidential order so they also could not be stopped by Republicans. On this list are bringing the troops home, not starting new wars, not claiming the right to assassinate people (citizens or foreigners), not continuing and furthering Bush's state secrets claims, prosecuting war criminals, prosecuting Wall Street mega-criminals, and the list goes on.

The claim that the Republicans blocked them from doing anything is pure BS, particularly with regard to 2009/2010 when Democrats controlled both houses.

[polmaven]

14. The House was very productive

during those 2 years. The problem came when those bills passed in the House went to the Senate, and were filibustered and the - minority - party of NO would not allow a vote. We really did not have "control" of the Senate the way LBJ did when he had overwhelming majorities in both the House and the Senate.

[Armstead]

3. They are half the problem

The other half is a Democratic Party that fails to stand up to them and debunk their bullshit and propose real liberal /progressive populism as an antidote.

[denbot]

4. K&R

Well said as always babylonsister

[provis99]

7. it's only a thought experiment,

but I wonder what kind of policies we would get if there were only the current Democratic members in Congress, no Republicans. The problem is realizing how much of what the Democrats do is simply grandstanding to oppose Republicans, and understanding what their true political policy preference really are. Because a lot of Democrats seem pretty gung ho about damaging Social Security and other entitlements, regardless of any consideration of what Republicans want.

[DCBob]

10. Obama negotiating with the Repukes is like playing chicken with certified lunatics.

much too risky to just go for it.

[Tennessee Gal]

13. Very good post. I completely agree.

And I too wonder how so many here could have forgotten the 8 horrible years of the Bush administration. What we have now, while far from perfect, is much, much better.

[Stuart G]

19. k & r

[emulatorloo]

20. Kick and rec n/t

[swilton]

21. The problem is whatever the opposition is to the Republicans

is not being heard other than from Bernie Sanders.

[politicasista]

24. Kick

Guess Obama's allies are now danged if they do, or danged if they don't. :shrug: The GOP is the problem.

[dflprincess]

27. Including the ones who put a "D" after their name n/t