A Tale of Two Cities

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Boy, what a contrast between President Obama and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell's speeches after Tuesday's midterm election. Dumping President Obama is McConnell's highest priority (his words, not mine). So this is what America has to look forward to: gridlock. Despite voters saying in poll after poll they want Congress and the President to work together, the message just doesn't sink in.

Comments

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

Or maybe instead they should've given a full mandate/domination to the Democrats so they could practically say "fuck you GOP we're gonna do this alone", which again means no working together. (But in that case that wouldn't matter that much, would it?)

[udoswald.livejournal.com]

At least when the Democrats were supposedly ignoring the Republicans, it was in the service of getting things done. They were forced to ignore the Republicans because the GOP strategy was to block everything. Obama tried his best to reach out to them, he gutted most of the good parts of the healthcare bill to try to hook any Republican votes. Now that the Republicans are in power in the House they're not suggesting ignoring the Democrats because the Dems are standing in the way of progress, they're doing it because they have no interest in compromise. I guarantee you there will be no watering down of Republican bills to gain Democratic support, they'll just play chicken with the economy and peoples' lives (by shutting down the government and refusing to pass needed funding bills) until the Dems give in.

"fuck you GOP we're gonna do this alone"

It was more "fuck you GOP, if you're going to stand in the corner and throw a temper tantrum every time we try to get something done we're gonna have to do this alone." It's impossible to work with a group of people whose entire strategy is to make sure nothing gets done, that's not the Dems fault.

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

'At least when the Democrats were supposedly ignoring the Republicans, it was in the service of getting things done.'

Well at least when the Republicans were ignoring the Democrats it was because the Democrats were pushing cockamamie half-brained schemes that were simply bad.

[udoswald.livejournal.com]

Thank you for your biased, uninformed opinion.

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

I always respond in kind.

[telemann.livejournal.com]

No you do pretty good on your own, sweetie.

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

Oh, they do like getting stuff done, it's just not the stuff you might want. ;-)

[udoswald.livejournal.com]

Like what? Wanting to roll back everything to 3 years ago doesn't count as an agenda. They haven't outlined a single piece of their agenda beyond repealing everything Congress did in the past 2 years and blocking everything Obama wants to do. They've talked about wanting to cut the deficit but the only thing they've suggested they'd do so far (making the tax cuts for the rich permanent) adds to the deficit. They haven't suggested which programs they will cut in order to accomplish their budget cutting goals.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

They had it for a while, frankly I can think of no reason for them (the dems) to have made some of the compromises they did, other than all of their people weren't that happy with the different proposals.

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

Or it might be because they're not some homogeneous lump of brainless dudes with big mouths who all think alike and vote in line.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Ya think.....:D


(altho being honest..."some homogeneous lump of brainless dudes with big mouths" fits a large plurality....but then I guess it does of republicans too)

[ironhawke.livejournal.com]

At least if the Dems kept control, we'd have glacial level movement rather than complete lack of progress in any direction.

(P.s. I'm not a fan of having a trifecta of control, Democrat or Republican.)