You may wish to rethink the donation aspect. The right has spent the entire first term trying to discredit and obstruct Obama. Should a Republican get into office in 2012, the same thing will happen in reverse. Do we really need eight years of stalemate and stagnation? If Obama stays in office, the right will still villify him (paybacks for Bush), but there is no real benefit to the continued logjam, since he will be out of office in 2016 and the pubbies will have to make their case for a GOP president by appearing reasonable and productive.
[hijack]
Then campaign for electoral reforms – not just campaign-finance reform but real systemic reforms: instant-runoff voting, electoral fusion, and proportional representation.
[/hijack]
:rolleyes: You are also on record as being this kind of “Democrat.” Yes, please stay away from the polls for the rest of your life.
I thought it was policy to not negotiate with terrorists.
And I want a pet unicorn. Unfortunately, neither one of us lives in the Magical Land of Make-Believe.
But but, he’s got an Obama bumper sticker on his Jeep, for realz! :rolleyes:
In other news, maybe “Double Rainbow Guy” might be able to mount a successful primary challenge. 
Time was you might have said that to the Suffragettes.
Well taking off that bumper sticker will show him! I’m thinking that if Romney gets the Republican nod and chooses a responsible VP that I might vote for him and support him. He is to the left of Obama.
Oh bullshit he is.
(Thank Og this got moved to the 'Pit where stupidity like this belongs.)
No, it won’t. The Democrats are spineless and unwilling to stand up to the Republicans. The Republicans shout “Boo” and the Democrats cower in terror.
So why are you blaming Obama for this? Blame your fellow citizens.
From what I can see, Obama is doing the best he can under the constraints he is under.
In the last election, the American public voted in a bunch of representatives whose mantra is reduce spending with no new taxes. Now they’re finding out what the consequences of that election was. Practically speaking, that means reduce entitlements (as these newly elected representatives seems to be just fine with funding the military).
This is clearly not Obama’s choice – you just have to listen to his speeches to know that. He’s taking enormous heat from both sides in these debt negotiations. But the people voted and this is what they asked for (although when the entitlement checks dwindle, they may find that’s not what they actually wanted).
In the meantime, the Dems have been taking every opportunity to make sure that the nation knows exactly why their entitlements are threatened. Obama has been hammering very heavily on the theme of wanting to distribute the sacrifices equally and has been very clear that the GOP members of the House refuse to do so.
From a public relations standpoint, the GOP is looking very, very bad. They may get what they want (mostly) in this round of deficit reduction negotiations, but the long-term consequences might be severe. It’s really hard to spin driving the nation to the verge of default based on ideological rigidity.
Why am I blaming Obama for this? Well, he took an oath to uphold the constitution, which includes honoring debts and pensions, which soc sec is in my opinion. He doesn’t say that he is going to pay those debts and pensions regardless of the debt limit, even though the constitution demands that they not be questioned. He is apparently talking about reducing those obligations. He is not talking about reducing military spending, ending any of the stupid and pointless and unwinnable wars we are fighting, nor is he making clear that legislators must reduce their salaries and their salaries and benefits should not be paid first. No trips home on the public dime, Congress to remain in session and unpaid until it is done.
The fact is that he is weak in dealing with these morons. The Republicans have taken the economy hostage, and you don’t negotiate with hostage takers. His treating them as equals while excluding the Democrats in Congress is just stupid.
WE gave the president utter MORONS, who don’t even understand how congress even works, to have to deal with, and you’re blaming him?
One presumes that the folks who voted for them want them there.
When 80% of Americans, regardless of party, WANT revenues increased to help solve the deficit problem, and these pricks won’t even consider it, one can safely presume that many of the folks who voted for these assholes had no idea what they’d be getting.
Can you give any citations for your opinion above? Was there a Constitutional amendment required to institute social security? Is one required to raise benefits?
As for honoring debts, the best you can say there is that there’s a conflict in the Constitution as only the House has the ability to raise revenues. And if they don’t want to, the President’s hands are pretty much tied.
Did anyone actually campaign on not raising the debt limit? They must have, its too stupid not to have been used.
Because he’s spent years sucking up and caving in to people who clearly never had any intention of compromising on anything whatsoever. And who have made it clear that they want his Administration to be a disaster regardless of what that does to the country. He threw away all his original political advantages and backstabbed the people who elected him in the name of trying to get along with people who have never shown any desire in getting along. And the result is that he’s now trying to negotiate with fanatics and idiots from a terribly weaker position.
Next time. You can be sure of it.
Good point. I voted for Obama and had no idea…but I digress. As many have posted, better than a Republican.
Maybe it’s a team thing. Perhaps they are so simple minded to think that if the Democrats want it and the Republicans don’t, it is a Good Thing. And too dumb at least in my state to write responses to surveys. 