Obama’s overriding point is that whatever else needs to be done, Congress has to do it. Even his absolute imperial dictatorial authority has its limits, this is all he can legally do, and even there he has some questioned assumptions.
But, heck, all the Republicans have to do is agree on their agenda, and enact it! Nothing to it! Easy-peasy…
Excellent post. I’m not sure how this Obamaism is substantially different than what the Obama administration and the Holder Just-Us department is currently doing.
As far as the timing of it’s release is concerned, I believe the DNC didn’t want to risk turning out an even larger number of anti-Democrat-policy voters.
The DNC seems to have lost the support of the so-called stupid voters who had previously supported ACA/Obamacare and now need even more support from the illegal aliens/undocumented workers organizations, plus their donations, to get the DNC message out.
What is obvious to me is that Obama has no intention of working with the elected Republican and Tea Party representatives. The loyal opposition can either do what Obama wants or Obama will trash any hope of a government based on compromise. IMHO, of course.
Just out of curiosity, do you honestly feel that the types of “cutesy” terms like the ones I bolded above actually help your argument any?
Shit, only thing he can do that they would approve of is to impeach himself, and then they would bitch about him acting alone!
And to add insult to injury, he could add: “I don’t want to do this, but congress is not doing their job - all they have to do is pass a law capping income tax at 10% of gross income and I’ll gladly rescind this executive order”.
Just out of curiousity, are you equally curious about this type of thing when it comes from the other direction? Because it’s not as if you lack opportunity to query that too …
Well, the “just us” line is a direct steal from Richard Pryor. Good taste, at least…
I am, yes. Thanks for asking.
I still like Ol’ Hillary’s Ol’ State Department better, as far as cutesiness goes.
I disagree. The precedent goes as far back as Jefferson refusing (rightly, IMO) to prosecute under the Alien and Sedition Act.
Well I doubt you’ll find time to post on anything else. Best of luck.
You are entitled to your doubts, and thanks for sharing with the group.
I’m sorry, I don’t understand. You asked if I’m curious, and I am. If you want to call me a hypocrite for not actively seeking out–and calling out–every instance of someone using silly partisan terminology in GD, then by all means do so. But please don’t be disingenuous about it.
I’m not concerned about you specifically and whether or not you’re a hypocrite. But it’s worth putting your comment directed at doorhinge in context - your question would otherwise suggest that this is some sort of departure from the norm on his part.
Oh gosh no. I do not actually believe it’s a departure from the norm on his part. I actually think it’s pretty common for him, which is why I asked about it.
Yes.
Exactly. What you attempted to do was pretend with your JAQ - as you’re continuing to do here - that it’s something peculiar to him. Which is why it was worth pointing out that it’s not.
I’m sorry it appeared that way. It was not intentional.
Thanks! In what way?
JOE BIDEN for President !
Because he couldn’t do any worse.
Has a nice ring to it, dontcha think?
If by “working with”, you mean “doing everything they demand”, you are probably correct, but that’s the only type of compromise they recognize.