obama blasts congress for inaction

you're right don. however, the american people, by and large, hold the president responsible for almost everything. we saw it during the bush years, the clinton years....the executive is an easy target because he or she is just one person and is the "executive".
 
you're right don. however, the american people, by and large, hold the president responsible for almost everything. we saw it during the bush years, the clinton years....the executive is an easy target because he or she is just one person and is the "executive".

thank you

what is the saying, the president proposes and congress disposes - now congress disposes to the round file marked 'w'
 
There's no question any President needs help from Congress to help pass his agenda. But at the same time, in this instance, Obama has been complaining about Congress and his jobs bill for what seems like a year. People look at the President to lead and he isn't getting anyone to follow. DQ you really don't think Obama hasn't had his agenda passed?
 
There's no question any President needs help from Congress to help pass his agenda. But at the same time, in this instance, Obama has been complaining about Congress and his jobs bill for what seems like a year. People look at the President to lead and he isn't getting anyone to follow. DQ you really don't think Obama hasn't had his agenda passed?

a very limited part and then only while the dems had total control of both houses - since the reps have more than 40 votes in the senate and a majority in the house, none of obama's agenda has been passed
 
a very limited part and then only while the dems had total control of both houses - since the reps have more than 40 votes in the senate and a majority in the house, none of obama's agenda has been passed

Has any previous President had everything they wanted passed? Has any President had to deal with Congress being held by the opposing party?
 
The last few congresses have made no bones about the fact that they are being strategic in terms of playing for the next election.

It's a pretty disturbing trend. A far, far cry from the days of Tip & Reagan, and even Newt & Clinton...
 
Isn't the stated priority of the GOP to get the Black man out of the White House?

 
I would be frustrated with Congress too if I were Obama and maybe this is partisan thinking but if the voting public was happy with his agenda he would have kept his majority in 2010. Now he can't get things like he could before.
 
I would be frustrated with Congress too if I were Obama and maybe this is partisan thinking but if the voting public was happy with his agenda he would have kept his majority in 2010. Now he can't get things like he could before.

then why is congresses approval rating so low (around 13%)
 
Has any previous President had everything they wanted passed? Has any President had to deal with Congress being held by the opposing party?

The last few congresses have made no bones about the fact that they are being strategic in terms of playing for the next election.

It's a pretty disturbing trend. A far, far cry from the days of Tip & Reagan, and even Newt & Clinton...


Congress IS NOT held by the opposing party.....Democrats held the entire congress for some time and now hold the Senate and Presidency....

Obama proposed 2 budgets that managed to get 0 votes from his own party, so it wasn't blocked by any opposing party....
 
Has any previous President had everything they wanted passed? Has any President had to deal with Congress being held by the opposing party?

everything?

how about nothing since kennedy died

check out the number of rep filibusters this session as opposed to previous sessions
 
wrong

when kenndy died obama lost his 60 votes in the senate and the reps have been filibustering ever since

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has regularly used a procedural tactic called “filling the amendment tree” to restrict Senators’ right to debate and offer amendments. While previous Majority Leaders have occasionally used this tactic, Senator Reid has used this tactic often—more than all of his predecessors combined. This tactic combined with another parliamentary maneuver and demonization of the filibuster threatens to squelch dissent in the Senate and further constrict the national debate on important political issues. The Senate could better serve the American people by ending the use of this tactic. The United States Senate is becoming less open and deliberative because Senators’ right to debate and offer amendments has been severely restricted. These changes in how the Senate operates and debates issues have occurred over a long period of time, but the restrictions have accelerated under Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D–NV). Since Reid became Majority Leader in the United States Senate, the majority party has tyrannically seized control of the agenda in the Senate in a manner not contemplated by the Founding Fathers. This abuse of power is an affront to Senate traditions and is chipping away at democracy.

Reid has also used a parliamentary maneuver to block motions to suspend the rules after debate is completed, further constraining the right of Members to offer amendments. Because of Reid’s tactic of blocking amendments during debate, suspending the rules after debate had become the only safety valve for Senators to offer amendments. These two Reid parliamentary tactics have made most Senators irrelevant to the national debates facing Americans today.
Furthermore, Reid and his allies have demonized the filibuster. Many times the filibuster is a tool to extend debate and force the Majority Leader to allow a freer and open amendment process. There is nothing wrong with a Senator filibustering a bill or nomination; therefore, demonizing use of the filibuster is yet another means to squelch dissent.

For example, in 2012, the Senate debated the Violence Against Women Act, reauthorization of the U.S. Postal Service, the “Buffett Rule,” a congressional insider trading bill, a highway bill, a payroll tax holiday, and a resolution of disapproval on a debt limit increase. On many of these bills, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid used a procedural tactic to severely limit amendments and debate.
In many of these circumstances, Members other than Reid offered amendments, but Majority Leader Reid “filled the tree” on some of those bills and then allowed only certain amendments after a lengthy debate. In this way, Reid became a gatekeeper on the amendment process. The tactic allowed Reid to veto any issue that he did not want debated, stifling the process and deterring many Senators from fully participating in debate.

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/06/tyranny-in-the-united-states-senate
 
lol..........Post 17 must be way, way, way over the head of AssWipe....his retort shows he didn't understand anything about how Reid runs the Senate with an iron fist.....

Poor AssWipe...
 
Back
Top