Originally Posted by JoshGirls Josh (Post 19882606)

Im mad mostly cause the dems shoulda done this on jan 21, 2009. Obamacare woulda been a much more progressive law, with a public option that woulda truly humbled the insurance companies. it was needing 60 votes that caused the law to get watered down to where nobody is happy.

Originally Posted by Axeman (Post 19882707)

You can blame a lot of things on filibusters slowing down laws in the Senate, but blaming it for the lack of a public option is not it. Your beloved Democrats bailed on it early to ensure that the insurance companies kept their election coffers full.

Originally Posted by Axeman (Post 19881431)

I don't like this at all for the simple reason that the courts will become even more activist in nature. Both to the Left and the Right depending who has control. The filibuster at the very least made the appointees more to the center of each side.

Originally Posted by tony286 (Post 19882980)

Obama appointee yep he is a big liberal lol
http://www.salon.com/2013/11/22/star...uclear_option/

Originally Posted by JoshGirls Josh (Post 19882945)

had there not been a 60 vote wall before obamacare, & it did not get out of committee, then you would be correct. but sadly, the filibuster was the cover needed for some dems, in conservative districts, the vote it down.

Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 19882516)

bronco67, that's why I said it should be tweaked. Not done away with. The Dems will rue the day when the tables are turned and they are the minority party and powerless.

And as for Obama...he has not shown the ability to reach across in the same way that Reagan, Clinton, and Bush did.

He's sort of like Bush Sr., floundering and ineffective.

The Dems have cut off their nose to spite their face by going "nuclear". Because eventually...they will be the minority party. And then Reid will be like McConnell is now...a minority leader with absolutely NO power at all.

That was never meant to be like that in our govt.

The Senate and Congress are not supposed to just rubber stamp what the President wants. They are supposed to threaten, cajole, and finally negotiate.

If you've followed the news and seen what the Obama admin has done over the past 5 years...they have not let the Republicans in on anything. No negotiating. No seat at the table, etc.

That's just bad leadership.

That is why Reagan, Clinton, and Bush DID get the other side to work with them.

Obama is just too aloof and arrogant and has no idea of how to be a leader.

And his faithful followers seem to just scream "racism" every time.
To me it's just amazing that they can't see the truth of the matter.

Obama has polarized Washington D.C.
Every vote now is a party line vote.
Bipartisanship is gone.

And the "left" blames the "right" for ALL of it.

I got news for you...I've been around a while. And my experience in life is:
It takes 2 to tango.

Obama has brought this on himself. Action and reaction.

He can scream "obstructionist" at Republicans all day long. But at the end of the day...HE is the President. HE is the one who is supposed to be the master negotiator and bring both parties together.

Instead he has pushed them further apart than any President in recent history.

Originally Posted by BFT3K (Post 19882565)

For the record, I am NOT pro-Democrat - I am simply VERY anti-Republican. I can't stand the party, or ANYTHING they stand for. They are the party of nothing, and I laugh at those of you who support them, as if they gave a SHIT about you in any way whatsoever.

The system is broken, and it will not likely get any better.

When the next election comes around, you will likely have a nut-job anti-government Koch Brother Tea Party agent on one side vs an adamantly pro-Israel idiot on the other side.

Either one will start a war with Iran, and NOTHING good will come of it.

Obama has kept us out of this upcoming war so far, while fighting for better US healthcare. That alone, makes him one of the best presidents in our lifetime, and in 2016, you will wish we had someone as "leaderless" as Obama, as opposed to an idiot that will spark WWIII.

If the Republitards can get one worthwhile thing done before the next election, it will be to stop Hillary in advance of 2016, as it will be a disaster if she runs... whether she wins or loses.

When the choice becomes Netanyahu's little bitch vs an anti-American government Tea Party nitwit, we will be royally fucked, and you will look back at the "leaderless" Obama days, as the good times.

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 19883386)

You guys can argue back and forth about this but the truth is in the numbers. Since the united state was created there have been only 168 presidential nominees filibustered. Of those 168, 82 have been Obama's whom were blocked by Republicans in the last 5 years. That is simply inexcusable and there is absolutely no excuse for what Republicans have been doing.

It doesn't matter if you support the right left or center ( if that's even possible anymore). The republicans have been acting like whiney spoiled brats and have ground the govt to a holt out of pure spite. Something had to be done, so now is done and Obama can get some people appointed. It's just fucking insane that anyone could even remotely support what the right has been doing, when it comes to blocking appointees.

Simply put if anyone bothered to educate themselves and are even halfway sensible, they would see what the right is doing regarding the appointees is inexcusable.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla (Post 19883406)

So the fact that the appointed head of the IRS took the fifth when asked about the targeting of conservative groups is ok with you?

The Regulatory Czar ? Cass Sunstein
Thinks hunting should be banned

Climate Czar ? Todd Stern
Stern behind the Cap and Trade proposal which, even an analysis by Obama?s own Treasury Department concluded, would cost American taxpayers up to $200 billion dollars?just what we need for today?s economy!

Science Czar ? John Holdren
In his book, Holdren advocates ?laws requiring compulsory abortion,? government confiscation of new born babies, the ?development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin,?

Chief Diversity Officer, Federal Communications Commission ? Mark Lloyd
?It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press.
This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind references
to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination
of other communications policies. ?[T]he purpose of free speech is warped to protect
global corporations and block rules that would promote democratic governance.?

Secretary, Department of Education ? Arne Duncan
Obama appointed Duncan due to his alleged success as CEO of Chicago?s public schools. However, in 2007, only 10% of black 4thgraders in Chicago reached the proficiency level in reading and for black 8th graders, only 9% reached reading proficiency. In math, only 8% of black students reached proficiency in 4th grade and just 6% reached proficiency in 8th grade. This was the disappointing outcome, despite spending $13-$14,000 per student and is among the highest of any major city.Even worse, a majority of Chicago public school students drop out or fail to graduate with their class.


there's more if you want

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 19883411)

I'm sure you can come up with foaming at the mouth excuses for all 82 that somehow are made legitimate in your narrow little mind. No need to waste your time copying and pasting 82 excuses, that you will blindly accept because your team is the best. I wouldn't expect you to think for yourself and actually question what you already know must be true, because it's posted on some website..

No I think your time is better spent saving birds from wind farms....

Originally Posted by Vendzilla (Post 19883429)

Wow, I bet as a kid you said, "No, you are" a lot!!

Because your reply reflects the same imagination!!

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 19883436)

Ok, so I'll give you your chance that you seem to want so much.. You are going to tell me that all 82 of Obama's appointees were such horrible choices that they required Republicans to use the filibuster to block them? You can't for just one second question the fact that perhaps the republicans have abused the filibuster at every possible point, creating a situation that the govt can't even work due to the abuse of filibustering. Thus forcing a situation where the power to filibuster has to be limited due to the abuse?

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 19883489)

Yea because Republicans were so forthcoming in working with Obama right from the beginning of Obama's presidency. It's not like they had special meetings in order to hash out plans on how to block and fight Obama on every single issue. Nope they welcomed the new President with open arms and Obama just gave them the snub...

Originally Posted by Vendzilla (Post 19883406)

So the fact that the appointed head of the IRS took the fifth when asked about the targeting of conservative groups is ok with you?

The Regulatory Czar ? Cass Sunstein
Thinks hunting should be banned

Climate Czar ? Todd Stern
Stern behind the Cap and Trade proposal which, even an analysis by Obama?s own Treasury Department concluded, would cost American taxpayers up to $200 billion dollars?just what we need for today?s economy!

Science Czar ? John Holdren
In his book, Holdren advocates ?laws requiring compulsory abortion,? government confiscation of new born babies, the ?development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin,?

Chief Diversity Officer, Federal Communications Commission ? Mark Lloyd
?It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press.
This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind references
to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination
of other communications policies. ?[T]he purpose of free speech is warped to protect
global corporations and block rules that would promote democratic governance.?

Secretary, Department of Education ? Arne Duncan
Obama appointed Duncan due to his alleged success as CEO of Chicago?s public schools. However, in 2007, only 10% of black 4thgraders in Chicago reached the proficiency level in reading and for black 8th graders, only 9% reached reading proficiency. In math, only 8% of black students reached proficiency in 4th grade and just 6% reached proficiency in 8th grade. This was the disappointing outcome, despite spending $13-$14,000 per student and is among the highest of any major city.Even worse, a majority of Chicago public school students drop out or fail to graduate with their class.


there's more if you want

Originally Posted by Axeman (Post 19883025)

I'm sorry, but I don't read anything on salon.com, the same as I won't read anything on csnews.com or wmd. Utter drivel written by complete ideologues of both sides.

The courts are going to get very activist with this rule change. They will now that Obama is President, and they will just as much to the right when a Conservative is President. You "might" see less extreme nominations from more centrist nominees such as Hillary Clinton, Chris Christie or Scott Walker. If you get nominees like Elizabeth Warren or Ted Cruz, then the nominees are going to very extreme.

Ultimately this rule change is a slippery slope to undoing it for all filibusters, such as for legislation and the Supreme Court. And if the rule gets changed for legislation, then its just going to be a see-saw of massive changes in direction of laws with each Presidential election.

The Senate was created to be the body that moves very slow, and acted with more thought and deliberation than that of the house. I'm worried that is no longer the case, and we will see a lot more reactionary laws put into and out of place with each election. Especially when you are seeing the death of the moderate Senators on both sides. The gap from the center is getting greater with each election.

Originally Posted by bronco67 (Post 19883274)

Ok Robbie...in the history of the United states, 168 presidential nominees for various positions in the government have been blocked.

Up until Obama, 86 have been blocked. So that's 82 under Obama. If you think that's just bad leadership, then you're bullshitting yourself and everyone else. Anyone who's half a dipshit could see there's an axe to grind on the Republican side.

This bad leadership thing you talk about is such an abstract concept anyway. There's a lot of people who would say the opposite. Hating Obama -- which you're entitled to -- is no reason to discount logic.

Can you say that the 86 vs 82 is a statistic that doesn't blow your mind? Were talking about 220 years vs 5 years.

Originally Posted by tony286 (Post 19883537)

Facts don't matter your wasting your breath.

Originally Posted by tony286 (Post 19883527)

Again u won't read it not because it drivel it's ithat t doesn't fit with your Obama is an extreme liberal picture. His nominee is a union buster not very liberal.

Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 19883493)

No, just like the Dems welcomed George W. with "open arms" Remember?

He "Stole the election from Gore" (which he did). The Democrats hated his fucking guts.
But W. is a leader (I don't agree at all with what he led us to). And in short order he was meeting with opposition leaders and working WITH them.

That is my point. Obama never has. It's his way or the highway. And it's failing.

It doesn't matter if the Republicans hated him at the start. That's the way it is with every President and opposing party. They all give lip service to "working together"

But then it is the PRESIDENT who has to make that happen. That's his job as executive.
He is simply a failure at bringing the moderate Republicans to his side. And we have gridlock.

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 19883635)

Honestly I just don't get what you expect out of Obama. You constantly claim he doesn't lead or work with Republicans.. Yet show me one thing that Republicans have supported in which they didn't throw tantrums.. It's been non stop.

Meanwhile I get it, Obama is not perfect, and you have buyers remorse for voting for him, but it's like you expect him to have a conversation with a brick wall and get the brick wall to talk back.

Meanwhile the economy was shit when Obama came to office.. It's much better now.
We had two wars going on when he came to office. We are now out of Iraq, we got Bin Ladden under Obamas go order and we are winding down Afghan,
We avoided a war with Syria something the right was pushing hard for... Not to mention they have dismantled their chem weapons production,
We are also actually getting somewhere with Iran,.


There are lots of things Obama has been able to do even with the right trying to stop him non stop, but no matter what, nothing is ever good enough and you always have some complaint to say it's his fault.. Do you notice a tend with most of the things list above? It's all things that Republicans couldn't block aside from the economy and they have done everything possible to drag their feet with that.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla (Post 19883408)

I think this is a move that the democrats will regret, I also believe that this will affect the numbers with the up coming elections to the disadvantage of the democrats, but we will see

Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 19883660)

crockett, I must not be communicating this correctly. I'll try one more time:

Gingrich said that Clinton talked to him almost daily on the phone and in person once a week. Reagan met with Tip O'Neill constantly. Bush reached out to the Dems and even signed and got Republicans to support VERY liberal spending measures (such as the prescription drug bill)

Obama has NEVER done those things. Even in the middle of the Govt. shutdown it was reported that he did not even pick up the phone and talk to the Republicans at all.

His JOB as the Executive branch of the govt. is to bring all factions together to get things done.
Instead of actually trying to do that, he ignores them. Not even a phone call.
The only time there is a face-to-face is when he makes a big press release out of it and has them come to a big meeting at the Whitehouse.

And the last time he did that? The Republicans came out and said the FIRST thing he told them was that he would NOT negotiate.

He's a failure at leadership. It's 100% on him if he doesn't even try to reach out.

If you've ever run a company and had partners in your company then you know that what I am saying is true.

Obama never ran anything until he became President. He's just not a leader and his Presidency reflects it and history will judge HIM.

The history books won't say: "Those evil Republicans wouldn't play nice"

It will say that Obama was weak and ineffectual. That's how history sees things. Obama is THE PRESIDENT. This is his legacy.

Of course the opposition party is more than happy to let him go down the road he has chosen since day one.
They can now say "no" to everything and he has given them the perfect excuse.

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 19883761)

Is there anything at all that Obama has done right in your eyes?

Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 19883547)

What? Insulting me again Tony? What the hell man?

Facts are all that matters. If you took the time to read my last post. But you didn't. Instead you personally insult me again by insinuating that I'm stupid because "facts don't matter"?

I don't get it. Maybe GFY is starting to get to you or something.

Originally Posted by tony286 (Post 19883860)

how am insulting you? Didnt call you any names, you know I have great respect for you in fact. But it seems like when it comes to obama you see only what you want to see. Im not fan of his, I sat out the election for president. But they are fucking with him on a level never seen before and he is moderate that leans right. Working with someone is not only doing it their way. 82 times blocked nominees including the head of the printing office. Almost as much all the presidents combined and its his fault? The man has had multiple gop nominees and cabinet members. Sounds like he is trying but when you get elected based on fuck the black guy, you cant work with him or you are done.

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 19883872)

This to be fucking honest.. I don't support everything Obama has done and I have spoken out about a few things that I will outright say he is fucking up with. I personally post quite often that I'm very much against his continued war started by Bush on our right to privacy. I'm very pissed about him continuing the whole NSA thing. I'm also very unhappy that he let the big banks off the hook while the people in this country continue to get fucked while not one banker has gone to jail.

However when dealing with many of the pro right wingers here on gfy, they are so freaking unreasonable and blame Obama because the sky is blue. It's like you have to defend like you are some left wing blow hard just to try and debate these guys.the right has just gone bat shit crazy, there is nothing at all Obama can do to please them.

Obama is way over on the right side of where Clinton was when he was president, yet these guys whine like he's some extreme leftist.. Obama is closer to what Reagan was than either of the Bushes and he has had several conservative nominees and continued many of Bush's policies.. Yet nothing is good enough because he won't give the right 100% what they want.

Originally Posted by Minte (Post 19884142)

He ran on a platform of raising taxes on people that are in the higher income levels. And with that he promised his voters they would get more from the government. And he has delivered. My taxes are much higher, and along with that he has ended rapid depreciation of capitalized investments, effective Dec 2014.

If that doesn't go a long way to destroy a slow economy nothing will. Companies that are on a growth curve will now do other things with their cash, rather than reinvesting in new equipment. What's going to make it worse is that next year I will invest every single cent I can,,,then 2015 nothing that isn't absolutely required. Do the math. You can figure out what 2015 is going to be like for the economy.

Originally Posted by BFT3K (Post 19884209)