# When does the congressional obstructionism stop? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 23, 2011, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826 "2011-11-23T01:18:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2011, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/121 "2011-11-26T18:17:40Z")
> [@tim-n-va](#): > > The ironic part is that President Obama is leaving congress to do their constitutional duty and is being criticized by people who say they want to get back to the founding fathers’ intent. Yes, but remember these are the same people who agreed to the automatic cuts and then announced they will try to re-negotiate them after they’ve stopped the committee from doing its job. ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2011, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/122 "2011-11-26T18:45:27Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > It’s the CIA and trained military units that deserve the lions share of praise. His only role was to give it a thumbs up or down based on the information provided him so he get’s a pat on the back for making the decision since it was based on probability and not a signed autographed picture of OBL standing in front of the building. If I didn’t give props to that on this board I certainly did in discussion with other people. Kudos for that. IMHO, Obama deserves more credit than he is given. Obama changed the strategy from nation building to terrorist killing. He stepped up the use of drones to kill the leadership, even when it meant violating Pakistan’s sovereignty. Then he took the incredibly ballsy move to stage an attack well within Pakistan soil, spitting distance from a military compound, without notifying them first. Look at Obama’s view on Pakistan during a debate with McCain: > [@](#): > > we’ve got to deal with Pakistan, because al Qaeda and the Taliban have safe havens in Pakistan, across the border in the northwest regions, and although, you know, under George Bush, with the support of Senator McCain, we’ve been giving them $10 billion over the last seven years, they have not done what needs to be done to get rid of those safe havens. Contrast that with McCain: > [@](#): > > We’ve got to get the support of the people of – of Pakistan. He said that he would launch military strikes into Pakistan. > > Now, you don’t do that. You don’t say that out loud. If you have to do things, you have to do things, and you work with the Pakistani government. > [@](#): > > This whole topic is a derailment of the thread in an attempt to attach something that resembles leadership on Obama. He simply wasn’t there to facilitate a resolution regarding the super committees stalemate. This does have some merit. How could the Republicans know what to oppose until Obama said what he supported? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2011, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/123 "2011-11-26T18:45:29Z")
> [@Johnny\_L.A](#): > > Yes, but remember these are the same people who agreed to the automatic cuts and then announced they will try to re-negotiate them after they’ve stopped the committee from doing its job. I for one would like a job that pays $140,000 a year with no requirement to finish any projects or be accountable for money spent in the attempt. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2011, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/124 "2011-11-26T18:49:45Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > I for one would like a job that pays $140,000 a year with no requirement to finish any projects or be accountable for money spent in the attempt. Run for president as a Republican. They’ll take anyone at this point. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/aca169/32.png) [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inbred_Mm_domesticus)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2011, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/125 "2011-11-26T19:02:08Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > This whole topic is a derailment of the thread in an attempt to attach something that resembles leadership on Obama. He simply wasn’t there to facilitate a resolution regarding the super committees stalemate. How could he have facilitated a solution to the stalemate given the positions of all involved since the committee was formed? I promise to be convinced by any reasonable hypothetical. Also, could you specify where Obama stated that his goal as President is to make sure the committee came to an agreement? Could you also show where in the Constitution it is the generally accepted role of the President to tell Congress what to do? Could you also state a reasonably believable hypothetical scenario where Obama could convince the Republicans to follow his vision for the US? Could you also specify how Obama has failed to implement his vision for the US since he is such a weak leader? The facts are that the structure of Congress and the demands each side is making of the other make a resolution to the issue pretty much impossible without one side completely caving on their principles. In order to do that there must be benefits that outweigh that cost. So going back to your original post: What was the Republican plan that could do that? Please provide a cite. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2011, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/126 "2011-11-26T19:18:03Z")
> [@sh1bu1](#): > > IMHO, Obama deserves more credit than he is given. Obama changed the strategy from nation building to terrorist killing. He stepped up the use of drones to kill the leadership, even when it meant violating Pakistan’s sovereignty. Then he took the incredibly ballsy move to stage an attack well within Pakistan soil, spitting distance from a military compound, without notifying them first. Approving the attack on foreign soil wasn’t the ballsy move, that was a given after 9/11. It was a decision based on probability and satellite images of what might have been OBL. It wasn’t a sure thing that we had the right location so in that respect it was gutsy. I suppose it was possible that we could attack the wrong location without killing innocent people and mitigate the political fallout but the risk was certainly there. > [@sh1bu1](#): > > Look at Obama’s view on Pakistan during a debate with McCain: Contrast that with McCain: Obama [said the same thing](http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/08/01/us-usa-politics-obama-idUSN0132206420070801) about going into Pakistan. “If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will,” Obama said. > [@sh1bu1](#): > > This does have some merit. How could the Republicans know what to oppose until Obama said what he supported? Show the leadership of the President regarding the budget because that is relevant to the discussion. This is a really big deal because it’s going to cause massive changes if it isn’t straightened out. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2011, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/127 "2011-11-26T19:19:43Z")
> [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > How could he have facilitated a solution to the stalemate given the positions of all involved since the committee was formed? I promise to be convinced by any reasonable hypothetical. That would be the definition of leadership. Based on your logic, we’re already dead. but to give you an example of how it’s done, my last job was as an analyst. It involved convincing people above my pay grade what needed to be done. None of my projects ever failed. It’s a simple process to lay out financial goals and systematically go through alternate solutions until a plan is agreed upon. ---
**Author:** ![tim-n-va](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim-n-va/32/3001_2.png) [@tim-n-va](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tim-n-va)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2011, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/128 "2011-11-26T21:20:36Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > That would be the definition of leadership. Based on your logic, we’re already dead. > > but to give you an example of how it’s done, my last job was as an analyst. It involved convincing people above my pay grade what needed to be done. None of my projects ever failed. It’s a simple process to lay out financial goals and systematically go through alternate solutions until a plan is agreed upon. The problem with your approach would be that it is not an analysis problem. It was a debate as to whose economic viewpoint was morally superior. ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2011, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/129 "2011-11-26T21:35:30Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Obama said the same thing about going into Pakistan. No, he said the exact opposite. Do you even read your own links? > [@](#): > > Obama said if elected in November 2008 he would be willing to attack inside Pakistan with or without approval from the Pakistani government, a move that would likely cause anxiety in the already troubled region. He said it, he did it, and OBL is dead. How’s that for leadership? What did the Bush White House say? > [@](#): > > White House spokesman Tony Snow said Pakistan was working hard to fight al Qaeda and the Taliban, and Washington was doing what it could in support. > > “At the same time, we recognize the sovereignty of the Pakistani government and realize that they’re putting on a serious push … They’re taking the fight to al Qaeda,” Snow said. That’s why OBL was still alive when Obama took office. Far from “taking the fight to al Qaeda”, Pakistan was providing him sanctuary. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2011, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/130 "2011-11-26T21:40:17Z")
> [@tim-n-va](#): > > The problem with your approach would be that it is not an analysis problem. It was a debate as to whose economic viewpoint was morally superior. Of course it was. That can be translated into numbers. And when it’s all said and done can be re-translated into political soundbites to garner votes. Politicians don’t believe all the bullshit that comes out of their mouths. That’s for public consumption. All budgets are analytical problems and as such we have a system to grade the actual proposals put forth. So it’s really a matter of sitting down and hammering out a basis for which to make a decision. It doesn’t mean it’s a simple project but the process is the same regardless of the size of the project. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2011, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/131 "2011-11-26T21:43:09Z")
> [@sh1bu1](#): > > No, he said the exact opposite. Do you even read your own links? I posted the quote he made: “If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will,” That was made in 2007. this was in contrast to what was posted about Gingrich: We’ve got to get the support of the people of – of Pakistan. He said that he would launch military strikes into Pakistan. Now, you don’t do that. You don’t say that out loud. If you have to do things, you have to do things, and you work with the Pakistani government. ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2011, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/132 "2011-11-26T21:52:00Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > I posted the quote he made: “If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will,” > > That was made in 2007. > > this was in contrast to what was posted about Gingrich: We’ve got to get the support of the people of – of Pakistan. He said that he would launch military strikes into Pakistan. > > Now, you don’t do that. You don’t say that out loud. If you have to do things, you have to do things, and you work with the Pakistani government. And that is supposed to contradict what? He said that he would launch attacks in Pakistan if Musharraf would not act. Contrast that with McCain > [@](#): > > If you have to do things, you have to do things, and you work with the Pakistani government. who would not say that he would act unilaterally. You guys are insane. An American President approved of a mission to kill OBL who had remained at large for years. He did it by launching a unilateral military strike inside Pakistan, almost next door to a military compound. But that is not leadership. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2011, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/133 "2011-11-26T21:56:56Z")
> [@sh1bu1](#): > > And that is supposed to contradict what? He said that he would launch attacks in Pakistan if Musharraf would not act. > Contrast that with McCain > who would not say that he would act unilaterally. > > You guys are insane. An American President approved of a mission to kill OBL who had remained at large for years. He did it by launching a unilateral military strike inside Pakistan, almost next door to a military compound. But that is not leadership. If you don’t understand the conversation go back and read the thread. Obama didn’t do squat besides continue the same program[Bush initiated](http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/11/washington/11policy.html?pagewanted=all). The CIA and military elite commando’s did all the work. If you’re assigning success to Obama over other people’s work then you can assign him the blame for killing Pakistani soldiers and getting kicked off the Predator base. In reality, he’s a minor player especially given his non-existent background in either the military or the CIA. Oh, and OBL wasn’t at large for a number of years, he was hiding or he would have been dead the nano-second his head popped up regardless of who was President at the time. ---
**Author:** ![tim-n-va](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim-n-va/32/3001_2.png) [@tim-n-va](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tim-n-va)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2011, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/134 "2011-11-26T21:58:22Z")
I would be very interested in an example of how you would do this. To what number do you translate “I promised Grover I wouldn’t raise taxes”? How about “I won’t cut this critical social program”? These are not conflicting budget estimates, these are two sides in mutually exclusive, morally defined camps. ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2011, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/135 "2011-11-26T22:33:45Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Oh, and OBL wasn’t at large for a number of years, he was hiding or he would have been dead the nano-second his head popped up regardless of who was President at the time. Oh, he was hiding. No wonder Bush couldn’t get him. We were attacked by mostly Saudis trained by a Saudi in Afghanistan. Bush took his eye off the ball and committed more money and troops to Iraq than Afghanistan, a mistake that Obama has rectified. Obama stepped up attacks on terrorists by drones and other means, and changed the focus of our strategy away from nation building. You may not like what he did, but to say that he did not provide leadership is absurd. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2011, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/136 "2011-11-26T23:14:45Z")
> [@tim-n-va](#): > > I would be very interested in an example of how you would do this. To what number do you translate “I promised Grover I wouldn’t raise taxes”? How about “I won’t cut this critical social program”? > > These are not conflicting budget estimates, these are two sides in mutually exclusive, morally defined camps. First of all, anybody watching Europe implode understands that we are on the same set of tracks going over a cliff. Everybody takes a hit. That’s a given. It’s simply not going to happen any other way. The money is not there. What I would do first is to divorce businesses from the recent health care mandates and rework it so that we use government subsidies to close the gap on those having problems getting insurance. We need to close the unemployment gap which will put a lot of people back in the black and paying taxes. There is part of the budget deficit right there. I’d look at taxing internet purchases because we depend on sales taxes and the trend is an ever increasing amount of internet sales. Lost revenue in states translates into a larger federal burden. I would open up drilling in ANWAR and immediately go forward with the pipeline from Canada. There is no logical argument against this. we have to have the oil in the short term and it’s illogical and immoral to entrust the environmental responsibility to someone else and piss away the revenue streams and jobs in the process. I would absolutely kill any thought of raising energy taxes right now. The budget itself is basic math. Agree on what you want to fund and set aside items that can be funded at a later date. Eliminate every single bit of pork from the budget. If it has to be done on a childish tit for tat then that’s how it goes down. ---
**Author:** ![tim-n-va](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim-n-va/32/3001_2.png) [@tim-n-va](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tim-n-va)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2011, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/137 "2011-11-26T23:31:08Z")
If Obama had met with the super committee with that, do you think they would have agreed? ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2011, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/138 "2011-11-27T00:08:58Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > First of all, anybody watching Europe implode understands that we are on the same set of tracks going over a cliff. That’s not a given. > [@](#): > > Everybody takes a hit. That’s a given. It’s simply not going to happen any other way. The money is not there. The level of the hit is the issue. > [@](#): > > What I would do first is to divorce businesses from the recent health care mandates and rework it so that we use government subsidies to close the gap on those having problems getting insurance. We need to close the unemployment gap which will put a lot of people back in the black and paying taxes. There is part of the budget deficit right there. Your solution would cost more. People who can’t get insurance are costly to insure. It’s called adverse selection, look it up. > [@](#): > > I’d look at taxing internet purchases because we depend on sales taxes and the trend is an ever increasing amount of internet sales. Lost revenue in states translates into a larger federal burden. The Republicans will filibuster any attempt at new taxes. Because they are insane. > [@](#): > > I would open up drilling in ANWAR and immediately go forward with the pipeline from Canada. There is no logical argument against this. we have to have the oil in the short term and it’s illogical and immoral to entrust the environmental responsibility to someone else and piss away the revenue streams and jobs in the process. I would absolutely kill any thought of raising energy taxes right now. Drilling doesn’t help us aside from the jobs created pulling it from the ground. Are you assuming that we’re going to nationalize the oil? That probably would be a good idea. If we don’t, you’re just handing profit to already profitable corporations. America doesn’t have enough oil to lower the price on the open market. > [@](#): > > The budget itself is basic math. Agree on what you want to fund and set aside items that can be funded at a later date. Eliminate every single bit of pork from the budget. If it has to be done on a childish tit for tat then that’s how it goes down. We can fix the budget simply by stopping the wars and ending the Bush tax cuts. But the Republicans are insane and will filibuster any attempt at raising taxes. ---
**Author:** ![Mighty\_Mouse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mighty_mouse/32/7776_2.png) [@Mighty\_Mouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Mouse)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2011, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/139 "2011-11-27T01:37:19Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > We can fix the budget simply by stopping the wars and ending the Bush tax cuts. Can we see the math that led you to this conclusion? ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2011, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826/140 "2011-11-27T02:12:12Z")
> [@Mighty\_Mouse](#): > > Can we see the math that led you to this conclusion? The math is here: [http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/chart-of-the-day-if-congress-does-nothing-the-deficit-will-disappear.php](http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/chart-of-the-day-if-congress-does-nothing-the-deficit-will-disappear.php) If congress voted \*present \*for the next five years the budget would balance itself. You’d still have to chip away at the debt though. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-the-congressional-obstructionism-stop/603826.md?page=8)