22 Jun 09
3 edits
Originally posted by kmax87Indeed. I guess McCain's only critique of the President was that he was dissappointed in his decision to close down club Gitmo and he was upset Obama did not condemn Iran for murdering some the protestors about the rigged elections, but hey, no ones perfect!! 😉
not bad. Kudos from a dude that couldnt shake [my] hands.
22 Jun 09
Originally posted by whodeyGitmo was a complete and utter disgrace. And sticking an oar in in Iran strengthens the hand of the oppressors and would probably costs even more lives.
Indeed. I guess McCain's only critique of the President was that he was dissappointed in his decision to close down club Gitmo and he was upset Obama did not condemn Iran for murdering some the protestors about the rigged elections, but hey, no ones perfect!! 😉
22 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeySaying good things about that Commie whose middle name is Hussein? -- TREASON!!!! 😀
DId you hear the good news Republicans? John McCain says that the first year as President thus far has gone well for Obama.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090621/ap_on_go_co/us_mccain_obama
Nice to see McCain rediscovering his inner maverick.
22 Jun 09
Originally posted by AThousandYoungthe problem is that the Republicans have been shutting themselves out.
This election has shown Man's noble side on so many levels. I question how much influence Obama's letting the Republicans though. Shutting them out will just piss them off, just like shutting out fundamental Islamists will piss them off in Turkey.
22 Jun 09
3 edits
Originally posted by AThousandYoungSeems like the Republican strategy is to just oppose everything the Democrats plan to do, call it "socialism" or something like that, and hope that that will be enough to win the next election. I get the feeling that no matter what compromises the Democrats make, the Republicans will still oppose it.
How so?
I believe that Obama really wants to have broad bipartisanship - his weakness might be that he might focus on this too much - If the Republicans are willing to play ball, Obama is likely to accomodate them (which would allow legislation to pass that might alienate hard-line liberals) - but if the Republicans remove themselves from the process, it forces the Democrats to pass legislation by themselves.
Seems like the Republicans almost WANT the Democrats to go too far and pass a lot of stuff that won't work or will be unpopular - hoping that Obama "fails" which would allow the Republicans to regain power without having to put forth any new ideas of their own.
22 Jun 09
Originally posted by MelanerpesExcellent analogy. I couldn't agree more.
Seems like the Republican strategy is to just oppose everything the Democrats plan to do, call it "socialism" or something like that, and hope that that will be enough to win the next election. I get the feeling that no matter what compromises the Democrats make, the Republicans will still oppose it.
I believe that Obama really wants to have broad bip ...[text shortened]... low the Republicans to regain power without having to put forth any new ideas of their own.
23 Jun 09
4 edits
Originally posted by MelanerpesThe Republicans are at ground zero. If they participate in the Obama objectives and these objectives are successful, where does that leave the Republican party? However, if they oppose these objectives, which will pass with or without them, and these objectives fail then they have a chance to rub their noses in it next election. Really it is their ONLY chance to be king of the hill again. The Republicans also see the growing uneasy feeling in the general public about Obama and his policies so why not capitalize on that?
Seems like the Republican strategy is to just oppose everything the Democrats plan to do, call it "socialism" or something like that, and hope that that will be enough to win the next election. I get the feeling that no matter what compromises the Democrats make, the Republicans will still oppose it.
I believe that Obama really wants to have broad bip low the Republicans to regain power without having to put forth any new ideas of their own.
The thing that is funny, however, is that much of what "W" and the Republicans were doing Obama is doing now. Its nothing more than a continuation of more of the same except on a larger scale. But now they can step aside and blame the whole mess on those crazy spending liberals once again.
23 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyIf the Republicans participate - and offer their OWN alternative ideas - and the result is a broad bipartisan policy that works brilliantly, they can argue that it was their ideas that made the policy work so well. They could run an inspiring campaign that promoted their own ideas.
The Republicans are at ground zero. If they participate in the Obama objectives and these objectives are successful, where does that leave the Republican party? However, if they oppose these objectives, which will pass with or without them, and these objectives fail then they have a chance to rub their noses in it next election. Really it is their ONLY cha now they can step aside and blame the whole mess on those crazy spending liberals once again.
I hate the idea that the only way that one party can succeed is to hope the other party fails. Where each party bases its campaign on the horrors that will befall the nation if the other party should win.
Perhaps some people are feeling uneasy about some of Obama's objectives. That doesn't mean they're going to suddenly go running into the arms of people "who wanted Obama to fail". They're not going to embrace the party that thinks they can (or should) drown all of government in a bathtub.
And what if Obama's policies succeed? -- or what if they are merely "not quite as bad" as the Communist takeover doomsday scenario the GOP has been banking on? The Republicans might find themselves going the way of the Whigs.
23 Jun 09
Originally posted by MelanerpesGood analysis. That's what I fear. This cycle of crisis leading to crisis as a tool in political warfare is not good.
Seems like the Republican strategy is to just oppose everything the Democrats plan to do, call it "socialism" or something like that, and hope that that will be enough to win the next election. I get the feeling that no matter what compromises the Democrats make, the Republicans will still oppose it.
I believe that Obama really wants to have broad bip ...[text shortened]... low the Republicans to regain power without having to put forth any new ideas of their own.
23 Jun 09
Originally posted by MelanerpesThe Dems did the exact same thing with Bush. That's politics. Unfortunate, perhaps; but politics. In 2002-2004 the same accusations of "party of no" were being bandied about in the opposite direction. Remember "weapons of mass obstruction"?
Seems like the Republican strategy is to just oppose everything the Democrats plan to do, call it "socialism" or something like that, and hope that that will be enough to win the next election. I get the feeling that no matter what compromises the Democrats make, the Republicans will still oppose it.
I believe that Obama really wants to have broad bip ...[text shortened]... low the Republicans to regain power without having to put forth any new ideas of their own.
23 Jun 09
7 edits
Originally posted by sh76Exactly!!.....or did they? After all, the Democrats voted for Bush to go to war and then when he did, they turned on him and made it his war. Likewise, the Republicans at first opposed the bail outs and massive spending but then voted for it under Bush along with the Democrats ONLY when they were allowed to get their pork into the deal. However, now that the Democrats have taken over the roost they now oppose it just the Democrats did with Bush and the war. The beauty for the Republicans is that now it will appear that all the damage will have been done by the high spending Democrats just like the war appeared to be the Republicans fault. When you put it all together, however, what you really have then are two parties who do exactly the same things yet maintain an appearance of bipartisanship. That way you kids out there can dig your heels into the ground and defend your party of choice to the death!! I guess this game at least keeps us all intereted and makes us feel as though we have some representation in Washington. Then the candy is when they throw out issues like gay marriage and abortion for which neither party really cares about in the least other than the money coming into Washington from the abortion industry.
The Dems did the exact same thing with Bush. That's politics. Unfortunate, perhaps; but politics. In 2002-2004 the same accusations of "party of no" were being bandied about in the opposite direction. Remember "weapons of mass obstruction"?