His stated goal in 2008 after candidate Obama won a huge landslide election?
"Making Obama a one term president".
He had no interest in working with the new administration or the Democrats to craft bipartisan legislation. None. At. All.
This despite a victory much greater than any presidential election since GHW Bush in 1996.
Instead he decided it would be better for the GOP if they worked to stop every judicial nominee, every proposed initiative, literally everything the Dems proposed, no matter if it benefitted the American people or not.
All that mattered to Mitch, was Mitch, his personal party and his power.
His legacy is sitting in the White House today. Whether you believe it or not does not matter. Without McConnell's intransigence, his thumb on the scale and his lust for power, the SCOTUS would not look as it does today.
And it was that SCOTUS which has enabled Trump every step of the way.
America did not want the SCOTUS, or the views of the Constitution they currently hold. Yet McConnell hijacked the "normal" to ensure GOP power that could not be won in a fair marketplace with decent men, or women.
Did he do anything illegal? None that I know, but make no mistake, McConnell is guilty of murder. Of the American democracy, all for his personal pride, power and profit.
"Trump is president in ‘most dangerous period’ since second world war, Mitch McConnell says
Former Senate leader likens administration’s fixation with tariffs to isolationist policies of the US in the 1930s"
It's a bit late for McConnell to have anything to say about what Trump is doing, isn't it.
McConnell's entire legacy is going to be how he enabled a convicted felon and sexual assaulter, who was close friends for years with child rapists, to recapture the presidency.
That's all he'll be remembered for. A damnable, unholy legacy if there ever was one.
What is truly disheartening is that a very large segment of the voting population agrees with the Grim Reaper of the republican party. Now the motivated destroyer of democracy and the rule of law.
That a nation founded on enlightened viewsenlighened for the time of its founding for sure) has turned its back on the founding principals in its movement towards authoritarian rule is difficult to get ones head around.
But thinking a bit deeper the question is, why would anyone desire to wrap their head around delusion or ignorance.
David, Your statement "Making Obama a one term president". It is disgusting that the opposite party wouldn't support their competition winning more than one turn. I remember the opposing party supporting W in his run for another term. They showed their support by developing lies about his military experience and trashing him at every opportunity.
Here's the deal Skud... of course a politician from one party wants to beat the opposing party. But that should not be the goal above working for the American people. in the Bush Admin, Dems worked across the aisle and across party lines, often at electoral peril, to help improve Medicare Part D, the bail outs to keep our economy afloat after the crash and more.
Then when Obama was elected by huge margins, a real mandate as opposed to the fake Trump one we hear about, the GOP, led by McConnell stiffed him. Then effectively stole a SCOTUS seat.
All of this was unseen in recent American politics and set the stage for how Trump would govern. Totally devoid of any desire or even attempt to work together.
Working across the isle stopped with Obama. He took his win as a sign that he doesn’t need to consider the other side and he didn’t. His pupil did the same and so has trump. Sad state of affairs. We are now the government of the party and to hell with the people.
skud, your memory of the Obama presidency is a wee bit different than mine.
I remember Obama offering concessions to the GOP like party favors. He wasn't nearly as forceful as his campaign speeches to the disgruntlement of many. His lack of doing what you accuse him of doing is why the Democratic party lost the midterms. Don't get me wrong, I loved his ideas but nowhere did he ever not consider the other side.
That's your side who does that skud but I know you can't accept a horrible fact about your team without smearing everyone else with your crap. And now I need to shower.
Back on topic: Mitch will go down in my memory as the man who denied Merrick Garland a position as a Supreme Court judge. He wasn't the Dem's ideal pick but he ticked off all the boxes for the Repubs so he was the candidate until McConnell said it was too close to the election (it was 11 months). Democrats said ok, the rules are the rules and then Ruth Bader Ginsberg wasn't even buried, people were already voting in the presidential election when Mitch the Bitch and his cabal of democracy burners slammed Amy Coney Barrett into a position as a Supreme.
His double standards will the the yoke which will weigh him down for the rest of his miserable days.
When WeThePeople take power, and make no mistake we will because the kids and many veterans are rabid about the topic right now, there is no plan to return anything to the status quo. Half of why so many didn't vote in the last election is because while Harris was an awesome candidate she represented for too many the same old, same old so they said no.
The changes are coming, however they manifest. And word on the street is it's going to get worse before it gets better. Something about authoritarians and paths and letting a fever run it's course.
skud: "Working across the isle[sic] stopped with Obama."
That is another one of your OPINIONS backed by not a shred of evidence. Other less gracious people would call it a lie. Because what you posted is NOT TRUE. Also, skud, we here at PE know you have a low opinion of former President Obama, but that's all it is, an opinion based on your bias against any Democrat. The people who actually KNOW about how presidents rank -- presidential scholars -- place Mr. Obama at #10 or #12 overall. Trump, a Republican, usually comes in dead last.
"Notable attempts at cooperation by former President Barack Obama:
Despite the resistance, Obama's administration initiated several bipartisan engagements, both formal and informal:
Healthcare reform: For the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the White House held a summit to hear Republican ideas and incorporated some compromises, such as avoiding a single-payer system. The final bill drew from a model initially developed in Republican-led Massachusetts. However, no Republicans ultimately voted for the legislation.
Budget and debt ceiling negotiations: Obama engaged in complex budget negotiations with Republican congressional leaders, such as House Speaker John Boehner.
One result was the Budget Control Act of 2011, which raised the debt ceiling but led to the "sequestration" of automatic spending cuts after a bipartisan "supercommittee" failed to reach a broader deal.
In 2013 and 2015, Obama signed budget deals with Congress that rolled back some of the spending cuts.
Outreach events: Obama hosted Republican lawmakers for meetings at the White House and attended their retreats to engage in dialogue, such as his appearance at a House Republican retreat in 2010. He also used social events, like Super Bowl parties and golf games, to foster relationships with Republican leaders.
Cabinet appointments: To project a post-partisan tone, Obama initially appointed some Republicans to his cabinet, including keeping George W. Bush's Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.
Factors limiting bipartisan success
Obama's outreach efforts did not always result in legislative victories and were often hampered by intense partisan polarization:
Political strategy of obstruction: For many Republicans, their goal was to oppose Obama's legislative priorities, rather than to help him pass them. Some saw political gain in forcing the president to rely on executive actions instead of bipartisan legislation.
Budget and shutdown crises: Congressional Republicans often used fiscal deadlines, including votes to raise the debt ceiling, to leverage policy demands related to government spending and the ACA. These standoffs led to multiple government shutdown threats and actual shutdowns.
Differing priorities: On key issues, fundamental policy differences made compromise extremely difficult. For instance, Republican leaders repeatedly expressed their goal to repeal the ACA, even after its passage, which directly clashed with the administration's goals."
skud's edited version of truth to fit the narative of the Ghoul if the senate Mitch McConnell and his lying parties narative telks much about skud's true alignment.
Here's more on how former President Obama reached across the aisle to gain cooperation with the Republicans, only to be scorned and ignored. Again, skud, next time you should do a little research before you impugn the reputation of former President Obama. I'm sure you wouldn't want to be known as someone who spreads lies:
"On major legislation, Republicans rejected proposals even when they included conservative ideas.
Healthcare: When drafting the Affordable Care Act, Obama and Democrats included an individual mandate, a concept originally championed by conservatives and previously implemented in Massachusetts by Republican governor Mitt Romney. Republicans largely ignored this and unanimously opposed the final bill in the House."
Shaw, let's remember that much of the ACA was modeled along the lines of Gov Romney's R-MA plan.
Hmmm...
Skud, there's plenty of evidence of Obama going to and asking the GOP to join the process for the good of America. A lot of that work was around the edges of big policies, but it happen.
Even your I don't want to bother doing too much work so I'll just ask AI, agrees.
There is no precedent however for a political party that just got whipped, and that is what happened in 2008 to the GOP, getting together during the first week of the new admin for the express purpose of figuring out how to oppose, at all costs, a new president.
None, Skud.
I get it, you have to maintain your hate for Obama and Biden, who also worked in a bi partisan fashion, [see the infrastructure bill] along with your bothsiderism. Because without it you would have to admit the political party you've supported all your life is killing the American dream.
"I get it, you have to maintain your hate for Obama and Biden, who also worked in a bi partisan fashion, [see the infrastructure bill] along with your bothsiderism. Because without it you would have to admit the political party you've supported all your life is killing the American dream."
DING! DING! DING!
You hit the proverbial nail on the head, Dave. I truly believe skud works at NOT learning the truth. We've presented evidence to him that shows that former President Obama tried to work with the Republicans, and that the Republicans, led by McConnell, thwarted him AT EVERYTHING, even allowing his Constitutional right to nominate someone for the Supreme Court.
It is apparent to all of us here that you, like a lot of die-hard Republicans, will never admit that former President Obama was a good president. Not the best, but certainly a good president. That's according to scholars who actually study what presidents do in office. Not my opinion.
Look America, at this point the change in our country is evident to everyone who is keeping their eyes open. Sure the Dems are cratering in public opinion, even worse now than the GOP. But look at the partisans and see what they are writing and screaming about. See what animates them.
It's like when you were a kid and read the Goofus and Gallant feature in Highlights magazineat the doctor or dentist's office, except here the GOP is Goofus and the Dems are Gallant...
Goofus believes a president gets to enact his policies on the basis of being elected. Gallant believes a president should follow the Constitution, respect and follow our courts.
Goofus believes it's okay to commit war crimes. Gallant believes committing war crimes are bad and hurt American respect and prestige in the world.
Goofus believes tariffs are paid for by the country sending goods to the US. Gallant knows US taxpayers pay those tariffs and are bad for the economy cause inflation and the American consumer.
Goofus believes beating up police officers is fine, not a crime and should not be punished. Gallant believes people who beat up and harm police officers should be arrested, tried and if found guilty go to prison.
I'm sure you could add more.
The Dems are not perfect by any measure and they're likely at any moment to believe their own press clippings and go too far on policy. But even with all their shortcomings, they are light years better for average Americans than anyone currently leading the GOP or who was part of McConnell's leadership team.
Goofus, in this case known as the Racist Mustang, says stuff like "It has been a long time since we last had a white-on-brown bruhaha in this country, and I think we are long overdue."
Gallant just shakes his head, knowing the best friends of Goofus will all agree and not see a problem with the idea that we're overdue for a race riot in America.
I won and Elections have consequences. Vote for a massive bill before you can see it and now he is competent and sharp as a tack. We will nominate a candidate who did not get one vote and had to drop out of presidential race because she was so disliked. Hard to take the lying party seriously.
We have a president who did not get the majority of the vote. The reason for that is the other party nominated a candidate who was not capable of winning but was controllable, like her boss. It will take trump four years to overcome the miserable performance of his predecessor and it will take the next crook four years to overcome the damage the current one is causing. Will we ever get ahead.
Everyone has opinions about presidents. Those that are experts and spend years studying our history, put out the results of their findings. The most recent has Lincoln 1, FDR 2, JFK 10, Obama 7, Biden 14, Reagan 16, Bush 32, Nixon 39 and Trump 47 - based on scoring across a dozen important criteria. I encourage skud to contact them with his insurmountable evidence.
The definition of a cynic is someone who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
You refer to whomever wins the presidency after Trump "...the next crook...," when in fact the Republican Party nominated and is responsible for putting AN ACTUAL CONVICTED CRIMINAL in the WH! Former Presidents Biden and Obama were never indicted nor convicted of any crime. Trump was. And he is a product of the Republican Party.
The blame for the mess America is in lies squarely and incontrovertibly with the Republican Party and the Convicted Criminal they placed in the WH.
Not all Republicans are responsible for the calamity that is the Trump presidency; some of them actually chose country and Constitution over party, and for that they will be remembered as heroes.
No.
You don't get to blame the Democrats or Kamala Harris, or Joe Biden for the rot and degradation that has enveloped our government. That lies solely with the Republican Party for their cowardice, cupidity, and lunacy in placing a convicted felon/sexual assaulter, and close, close friend of child sex traffickers and rapists back in power.
"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves, that we[Republicans] are underlings.*"
Can anyone explain what Skud means by this? "We have a president who did not get the majority of the vote. The reason for that is the other party nominated a candidate who was not capable of winning but was controllable, like her boss."
Skud dismisses facts. The fact is that Kamala Harris came very close to beating Trump. She was MOST CERTAINLY CAPABLE OF WINNING. She had a little over THREE MONTHS to mount a presidential campaign! Trump had been campaigning with his rallies across the country FOR FOUR YEARS! And Trump had the richest man on the planet sink over a quarter of a BILLION DOLLARS into his campaign!
Trump did NOT win in a landslide as he stupidly continues to claim. More people voted for someone else than voted for Trump. He won a plurality of the popular vote, not a majority.
Does skud actually believe Trump is in charge of his administration? Has he never heard of The Heritage Foundation and Project 2025? Has he never heard of Russell Vought:
Russell Vought is a former vice president of Heritage's sister organization, Heritage Action for America, according to The Heritage Foundation. He is a co-author of Project 2025, a conservative plan from The Heritage Foundation aimed at reshaping the federal government.
"Mr Vought calls himself a Christian nationalist. In 2021 he founded the Centre for Renewing America, an organisation whose mission is to “renew a consensus of America as a nation under God”.
America is a SECULAR nation. Mr. Vought is a threat to America.
John Adams: "The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."
Thomas Jefferson: He drafted the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, a law protecting the right of people to worship as they choose without penalty or state support of an established church.
Anti-Clericalism: Jefferson harbored a strong anti-clerical sentiment, viewing many religious leaders as corrupt and as imposing tyranny over the minds of individuals, a stance that fueled his commitment to religious freedom."
Thomas Paine: "Paine rejected organized religion and revealed theology in favor of reason and individual conscience. He viewed religious institutions as human inventions for control and profit, particularly attacking Christianity and advocating for a separation of church and state."
RUSSELL VOUGHT is an anti-American religious zealot who seeks to turn our country into a theocracy. He is presently the head of the Office of Management and Budget.
Who was the last honest politician you can name who didn't enrich his own fortune at the expense of the American Taxpayer. We have the best politicians money can buy which is our biggest problem. Unfortunately there is ongoing evidence that biden was senile and not in charge but a face of those who controlled him and his autopen. Will we ever know the truth, probably not.
"She was MOST CERTAINLY CAPABLE OF WINNING" But didn't. The democratic party needs to deal with facts instead of excusing everything they did wrong. "Trump had the richest man on the planet sink over a quarter of a BILLION DOLLARS into his campaign!" is that versus 1.2 BILLION spent to lose. I am not familiar with project 2025 but I assume it is not something you support.
Barack Obama did NOT enrich himself from the presidency. If you have proof that he did, please leave a link that gives the evidence. Just saying so isn't proof, it's just your cynical opinion, which is NOT a fact.
Before and after his presidency, Mr. Obama wrote million dollar best selling books/memoirs, and he developed a production company that makes money, none of which was at the expense of the American taxpayer.
So, you admit you're not "familiar" with Project 2025, but you never the less have opinions on everything BUT the most consequential and impactful project ever to be thrust upon the American people?
Sometimes it doesn't pay to get up in the morning. This is one of those days!
Of course you are not familiar Skud with Project 2025. Because you'd actually have to, you know, pay attention to some news not from FOX, OAN, NewsMax or the Epoch Times, which the Mothership highlighted last week on their Anti-Vax cruise.
Something about slimy strings coming out of cadavers.
I return to my previous theory... Skud is willfully ignorant of facts because it would hurt his brain too much to work, read and learn anything that would challenge his actual existence.
Heck, at this point, I'm almost to the point of believing Skud is just another one of the myriad of personalities Mr Split himself, -FJ, exhibits daily. All concocted to drive sane people wild as he laughs devilishly from his basement.
David, You are correct I don't pay any attention to the news you mentioned. I do watch CNBC though but they don't mention project 2025.
Ms. Shaw, The president who said you didn't build your business turns around and makes 70 million with books he didn't write. It may not have cost the taxpayer for that but he spent millions on he and his wife's trips. Your statements about the billion dollar baby and her chance of winning is beyond comprehension. She had all the media, all the celebrities and 1.2 billion dollars so the only thing missing was being trusted which she was not. The country wanted change from the biden special interest presidency and you got it. Three more years will bring change just not what you want and not what anyone expected.
"Ms. Shaw, The president who said you didn't build your business turns around and makes 70 million with books he didn't write."
First, if you're speaking about former President Obama, you are incorrect in what you're implying because this is what Pres. Obama meant and said:
"President Obama stated that successful individuals don't achieve success solely on their own, acknowledging the existence of many smart and hardworking people. He followed this by saying, "If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen," referencing things like the internet, which he noted was created by government research. Obama's point was that success comes from both individual initiative and collective action.
Republicans, including Mitt Romney's campaign, used a shortened version of the quote to suggest Obama meant business owners weren't responsible for their success. However, the full context indicates he was emphasizing the importance of public investments in enabling private businesses to succeed."
But you, of course, would take it out of context to make your Hatred-of -anything-Obama point, which, is WRONG. Mr. Obama will always be a better human being and POTUS than the Republican Trump, who is now and forever linked with a child sex trafficker/rapist. That's the Republican Party's legacy for now and forever.
PS. You're wrong again if you actually think Mr. Obama didn't write his own books and memoirs. You've mixed him up with the charlatan, Trump, who's most famous book, "The Art of the Deal," was actually written by someone else.
The only thing Trump will be famous for writing is love notes to a child sex trafficker and rapist, Jeffrey Epstein!
America was doing just great with the Biden/Harris administration. Now it's in the toilet with the, um, well, you-know-what, Trump.
This is what happens when you put a convicted criminal, liar, cheat, fraud, and friend of child rapists in charge of a country.
If obama wrote his entire books that would be against the norm even for professional writers. Of course we will never know the truth.
You even quoted what I said that obama said so how am I incorrect. "If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen,"
Anyone is a better human being than trump but he is an elected president and will remain there for three more years. As to the country doing well under biden/harris is open to great interpretation as to what well is. Millions of illegals invited in, providing funding to iran for nuclear research, hamstringing Ukrain in their attempt to protect their country, giving china free rein to steal from our businesses. As to if he was in charge is questionable because everything he did was it joe or autopen.
skud: "If obama wrote his entire books that would be against the norm even for professional writers. Of course we will never know the truth."
I don't know where you went to school or where you got your college degree, but wherever those institutions are, they failed you.
It is NOT the "norm" for novelists and other professional writers to have someone else write their books. Your statement forces me to ask if you even read books or know anything about great literature and the world's great writers, because NO ONE who does would write what you wrote.
And yes, we WILL know the truth about former President Obama's authorship of his own writings, because the truth is that he and he alone wrote them. You have zero evidence to prove otherwise or to even imply otherwise.
What you're doing is trying to besmirch Mr. Obama's talent because either you are consumed by hatred for him, or you know nothing about writing, or probably both, because ANYONE WHO'S BEEN A LIFELONG READER KNOWS THAT WHAT YOU WROTE IS B.S.
I checked out what presidential scholars had to say about Joe Biden's presidency, and their informed and scholarly opinion is that he deserves to be in the top 20 for consequential presidencies. IOW, he was damn good for what the country needed at the time he swore his oath of office.
I tend to believe people who have made a lifetime of studying presidencies and not someone who has a "thing" against Mr. Biden.
PS. Those scholars all place Trump at the bottom or the next to the last, Buchanan being at the very bottom.
Again, your opinion of Biden's presidency and Obama's authorship of his books are based on you prejudices, not fact.
You can have your own opinions; you can't have your own facts.
"Yes, Michelle Obama used a ghostwriter, or at least a team of people, to assist with her memoir Becoming, as she and her husband, Barack Obama, acknowledged the role of a ghostwriter and a team in the book's acknowledgments"
In case you're confused, skud, Michelle Obama IS NOT THE SAME AS BARACK OBAMA.
Former President Obama wrote his own books. His wife, who is not a novelist, but a former First Lady who wrote a few books, had a ghost writer help her, as did all the other FLOTUSes who wrote books, and that is because THEY WERE NOT PROFESSIFONAL NOVELISTS nor had innate writing talent! But they had compelling stories to tell, and a ghost writer was employed to help them tell it.
Mr. Obama was the head of the Harvard Law Review.
"Being the head, or President, of the Harvard Law Review means overseeing the publication of one of the world's most prestigious legal journals, which is run entirely by students. The President is responsible for managing the day-to-day operations and policies of the Review, working with the student editorial board to publish scholarly legal articles, essays, and book reviews written by professors, judges, and practitioners. This leadership role involves substantial organizational and editorial responsibilities during the 3L year, providing a unique and demanding educational experience."
Mr. Obama, BEFORE BECOMING POTUS, wrote and published two best-selling books on his own. And then after his presidency, he published his best-selling memoirs, which he also wrote on his own.
Your bringing up the fact that Mrs. Obama used a ghost-writer does not mean her husband did. Mrs. Obama is not a novelist/non-fiction writer by profession, nor does she have innate writing talent like her husband.
The great writers of literature through the ages did not use ghost writers for their books.
Some politicians, First Ladies, business people, etc., who are not professional writers/novelists/biographers/etc., OR DO NOT HAVE THE TALENT TO WRITE BOOKS ON THEIR OWN, so they use ghost writers.
Michelle Obama used a ghost-writer because she knew she didn't have innate writing talent like her husband has. Mr. Obama didn't need a ghost writer for his books because he is a talented writer.
32 comments:
For once we are in agreement. The turtle is a turd.
His stated goal in 2008 after candidate Obama won a huge landslide election?
"Making Obama a one term president".
He had no interest in working with the new administration or the Democrats to craft bipartisan legislation. None. At. All.
This despite a victory much greater than any presidential election since GHW Bush in 1996.
Instead he decided it would be better for the GOP if they worked to stop every judicial nominee, every proposed initiative, literally everything the Dems proposed, no matter if it benefitted the American people or not.
All that mattered to Mitch, was Mitch, his personal party and his power.
His legacy is sitting in the White House today. Whether you believe it or not does not matter. Without McConnell's intransigence, his thumb on the scale and his lust for power, the SCOTUS would not look as it does today.
And it was that SCOTUS which has enabled Trump every step of the way.
America did not want the SCOTUS, or the views of the Constitution they currently hold. Yet McConnell hijacked the "normal" to ensure GOP power that could not be won in a fair marketplace with decent men, or women.
Did he do anything illegal? None that I know, but make no mistake, McConnell is guilty of murder. Of the American democracy, all for his personal pride, power and profit.
"Trump is president in ‘most dangerous period’ since second world war, Mitch McConnell says
Former Senate leader likens administration’s fixation with tariffs to isolationist policies of the US in the 1930s"
It's a bit late for McConnell to have anything to say about what Trump is doing, isn't it.
McConnell's entire legacy is going to be how he enabled a convicted felon and sexual assaulter, who was close friends for years with child rapists, to recapture the presidency.
That's all he'll be remembered for. A damnable, unholy legacy if there ever was one.
What is truly disheartening is that a very large segment of the voting population agrees with the Grim Reaper of the republican party. Now the motivated destroyer of democracy and the rule of law.
That a nation founded on enlightened viewsenlighened for the time of its founding for sure) has turned its back on the founding principals in its movement towards authoritarian rule is difficult to get ones head around.
But thinking a bit deeper the question is, why would anyone desire to wrap their head around delusion or ignorance.
David, Your statement "Making Obama a one term president". It is disgusting that the opposite party wouldn't support their competition winning more than one turn. I remember the opposing party supporting W in his run for another term. They showed their support by developing lies about his military experience and trashing him at every opportunity.
Here's the deal Skud... of course a politician from one party wants to beat the opposing party. But that should not be the goal above working for the American people. in the Bush Admin, Dems worked across the aisle and across party lines, often at electoral peril, to help improve Medicare Part D, the bail outs to keep our economy afloat after the crash and more.
Then when Obama was elected by huge margins, a real mandate as opposed to the fake Trump one we hear about, the GOP, led by McConnell stiffed him. Then effectively stole a SCOTUS seat.
All of this was unseen in recent American politics and set the stage for how Trump would govern. Totally devoid of any desire or even attempt to work together.
Working across the isle stopped with Obama. He took his win as a sign that he doesn’t need to consider the other side and he didn’t. His pupil did the same and so has trump. Sad state of affairs.
We are now the government of the party and to hell with the people.
skud, your memory of the Obama presidency is a wee bit different than mine.
I remember Obama offering concessions to the GOP like party favors. He wasn't nearly as forceful as his campaign speeches to the disgruntlement of many. His lack of doing what you accuse him of doing is why the Democratic party lost the midterms. Don't get me wrong, I loved his ideas but nowhere did he ever not consider the other side.
That's your side who does that skud but I know you can't accept a horrible fact about your team without smearing everyone else with your crap. And now I need to shower.
Back on topic: Mitch will go down in my memory as the man who denied Merrick Garland a position as a Supreme Court judge. He wasn't the Dem's ideal pick but he ticked off all the boxes for the Repubs so he was the candidate until McConnell said it was too close to the election (it was 11 months). Democrats said ok, the rules are the rules and then Ruth Bader Ginsberg wasn't even buried, people were already voting in the presidential election when Mitch the Bitch and his cabal of democracy burners slammed Amy Coney Barrett into a position as a Supreme.
His double standards will the the yoke which will weigh him down for the rest of his miserable days.
When WeThePeople take power, and make no mistake we will because the kids and many veterans are rabid about the topic right now, there is no plan to return anything to the status quo. Half of why so many didn't vote in the last election is because while Harris was an awesome candidate she represented for too many the same old, same old so they said no.
The changes are coming, however they manifest. And word on the street is it's going to get worse before it gets better. Something about authoritarians and paths and letting a fever run it's course.
skud: "Working across the isle[sic] stopped with Obama."
That is another one of your OPINIONS backed by not a shred of evidence. Other less gracious people would call it a lie. Because what you posted is NOT TRUE. Also, skud, we here at PE know you have a low opinion of former President Obama, but that's all it is, an opinion based on your bias against any Democrat. The people who actually KNOW about how presidents rank -- presidential scholars -- place Mr. Obama at #10 or #12 overall. Trump, a Republican, usually comes in dead last.
"Notable attempts at cooperation by former President Barack Obama:
Despite the resistance, Obama's administration initiated several bipartisan engagements, both formal and informal:
Healthcare reform: For the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the White House held a summit to hear Republican ideas and incorporated some compromises, such as avoiding a single-payer system. The final bill drew from a model initially developed in Republican-led Massachusetts. However, no Republicans ultimately voted for the legislation.
Budget and debt ceiling negotiations: Obama engaged in complex budget negotiations with Republican congressional leaders, such as House Speaker John Boehner.
One result was the Budget Control Act of 2011, which raised the debt ceiling but led to the "sequestration" of automatic spending cuts after a bipartisan "supercommittee" failed to reach a broader deal.
In 2013 and 2015, Obama signed budget deals with Congress that rolled back some of the spending cuts.
Outreach events: Obama hosted Republican lawmakers for meetings at the White House and attended their retreats to engage in dialogue, such as his appearance at a House Republican retreat in 2010. He also used social events, like Super Bowl parties and golf games, to foster relationships with Republican leaders.
Cabinet appointments: To project a post-partisan tone, Obama initially appointed some Republicans to his cabinet, including keeping George W. Bush's Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.
Factors limiting bipartisan success
Obama's outreach efforts did not always result in legislative victories and were often hampered by intense partisan polarization:
Political strategy of obstruction: For many Republicans, their goal was to oppose Obama's legislative priorities, rather than to help him pass them. Some saw political gain in forcing the president to rely on executive actions instead of bipartisan legislation.
Budget and shutdown crises: Congressional Republicans often used fiscal deadlines, including votes to raise the debt ceiling, to leverage policy demands related to government spending and the ACA. These standoffs led to multiple government shutdown threats and actual shutdowns.
Differing priorities: On key issues, fundamental policy differences made compromise extremely difficult. For instance, Republican leaders repeatedly expressed their goal to repeal the ACA, even after its passage, which directly clashed with the administration's goals."
skud's edited version of truth to fit the narative of the Ghoul if the senate Mitch McConnell and his lying parties narative telks much about skud's true alignment.
Here's more on how former President Obama reached across the aisle to gain cooperation with the Republicans, only to be scorned and ignored. Again, skud, next time you should do a little research before you impugn the reputation of former President Obama. I'm sure you wouldn't want to be known as someone who spreads lies:
"On major legislation, Republicans rejected proposals even when they included conservative ideas.
Healthcare: When drafting the Affordable Care Act, Obama and Democrats included an individual mandate, a concept originally championed by conservatives and previously implemented in Massachusetts by Republican governor Mitt Romney. Republicans largely ignored this and unanimously opposed the final bill in the House."
Shaw, let's remember that much of the ACA was modeled along the lines of Gov Romney's R-MA plan.
Hmmm...
Skud, there's plenty of evidence of Obama going to and asking the GOP to join the process for the good of America. A lot of that work was around the edges of big policies, but it happen.
Even your I don't want to bother doing too much work so I'll just ask AI, agrees.
There is no precedent however for a political party that just got whipped, and that is what happened in 2008 to the GOP, getting together during the first week of the new admin for the express purpose of figuring out how to oppose, at all costs, a new president.
None, Skud.
I get it, you have to maintain your hate for Obama and Biden, who also worked in a bi partisan fashion, [see the infrastructure bill] along with your bothsiderism. Because without it you would have to admit the political party you've supported all your life is killing the American dream.
"I get it, you have to maintain your hate for Obama and Biden, who also worked in a bi partisan fashion, [see the infrastructure bill] along with your bothsiderism. Because without it you would have to admit the political party you've supported all your life is killing the American dream."
DING! DING! DING!
You hit the proverbial nail on the head, Dave. I truly believe skud works at NOT learning the truth. We've presented evidence to him that shows that former President Obama tried to work with the Republicans, and that the Republicans, led by McConnell, thwarted him AT EVERYTHING, even allowing his Constitutional right to nominate someone for the Supreme Court.
It is apparent to all of us here that you, like a lot of die-hard Republicans, will never admit that former President Obama was a good president. Not the best, but certainly a good president. That's according to scholars who actually study what presidents do in office. Not my opinion.
Look America, at this point the change in our country is evident to everyone who is keeping their eyes open. Sure the Dems are cratering in public opinion, even worse now than the GOP. But look at the partisans and see what they are writing and screaming about. See what animates them.
It's like when you were a kid and read the Goofus and Gallant feature in Highlights magazineat the doctor or dentist's office, except here the GOP is Goofus and the Dems are Gallant...
Goofus believes a president gets to enact his policies on the basis of being elected.
Gallant believes a president should follow the Constitution, respect and follow our courts.
Goofus believes it's okay to commit war crimes.
Gallant believes committing war crimes are bad and hurt American respect and prestige in the world.
Goofus believes tariffs are paid for by the country sending goods to the US.
Gallant knows US taxpayers pay those tariffs and are bad for the economy cause inflation and the American consumer.
Goofus believes beating up police officers is fine, not a crime and should not be punished.
Gallant believes people who beat up and harm police officers should be arrested, tried and if found guilty go to prison.
I'm sure you could add more.
The Dems are not perfect by any measure and they're likely at any moment to believe their own press clippings and go too far on policy. But even with all their shortcomings, they are light years better for average Americans than anyone currently leading the GOP or who was part of McConnell's leadership team.
Goofus, in this case known as the Racist Mustang, says stuff like "It has been a long time since we last had a white-on-brown bruhaha in this country, and I think we are long overdue."
Gallant just shakes his head, knowing the best friends of Goofus will all agree and not see a problem with the idea that we're overdue for a race riot in America.
I won and Elections have consequences. Vote for a massive bill before you can see it and now he is competent and sharp as a tack. We will nominate a candidate who did not get one vote and had to drop out of presidential race because she was so disliked. Hard to take the lying party seriously.
We have a president who did not get the majority of the vote. The reason for that is the other party nominated a candidate who was not capable of winning but was controllable, like her boss. It will take trump four years to overcome the miserable performance of his predecessor and it will take the next crook four years to overcome the damage the current one is causing. Will we ever get ahead.
Everyone has opinions about presidents. Those that are experts and spend years studying our history, put out the results of their findings. The most recent has Lincoln 1, FDR 2, JFK 10, Obama 7, Biden 14, Reagan 16, Bush 32, Nixon 39 and Trump 47 - based on scoring across a dozen important criteria.
I encourage skud to contact them with his insurmountable evidence.
The definition of a cynic is someone who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
You refer to whomever wins the presidency after Trump "...the next crook...," when in fact the Republican Party nominated and is responsible for putting AN ACTUAL CONVICTED CRIMINAL in the WH! Former Presidents Biden and Obama were never indicted nor convicted of any crime. Trump was. And he is a product of the Republican Party.
The blame for the mess America is in lies squarely and incontrovertibly with the Republican Party and the Convicted Criminal they placed in the WH.
Not all Republicans are responsible for the calamity that is the Trump presidency; some of them actually chose country and Constitution over party, and for that they will be remembered as heroes.
No.
You don't get to blame the Democrats or Kamala Harris, or Joe Biden for the rot and degradation that has enveloped our government. That lies solely with the Republican Party for their cowardice, cupidity, and lunacy in placing a convicted felon/sexual assaulter, and close, close friend of child sex traffickers and rapists back in power.
"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves, that we[Republicans] are underlings.*"
*Idiots!
Can anyone explain what Skud means by this? "We have a president who did not get the majority of the vote. The reason for that is the other party nominated a candidate who was not capable of winning but was controllable, like her boss."
Skud believes ALL politicians are crooks. Skud is a cynic. There's no getting through to one like that.
Skud dismisses facts. The fact is that Kamala Harris came very close to beating Trump. She was MOST CERTAINLY CAPABLE OF WINNING. She had a little over THREE MONTHS to mount a presidential campaign! Trump had been campaigning with his rallies across the country FOR FOUR YEARS! And Trump had the richest man on the planet sink over a quarter of a BILLION DOLLARS into his campaign!
Trump did NOT win in a landslide as he stupidly continues to claim. More people voted for someone else than voted for Trump. He won a plurality of the popular vote, not a majority.
Does skud actually believe Trump is in charge of his administration? Has he never heard of The Heritage Foundation and Project 2025? Has he never heard of Russell Vought:
Russell Vought is a former vice president of Heritage's sister organization, Heritage Action for America, according to The Heritage Foundation.
He is a co-author of Project 2025, a conservative plan from The Heritage Foundation aimed at reshaping the federal government.
"Mr Vought calls himself a Christian nationalist. In 2021 he founded the Centre for Renewing America, an organisation whose mission is to “renew a consensus of America as a nation under God”.
America is a SECULAR nation. Mr. Vought is a threat to America.
John Adams: "The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."
Thomas Jefferson:
He drafted the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, a law protecting the right of people to worship as they choose without penalty or state support of an established church.
Anti-Clericalism:
Jefferson harbored a strong anti-clerical sentiment, viewing many religious leaders as corrupt and as imposing tyranny over the minds of individuals, a stance that fueled his commitment to religious freedom."
Thomas Paine:
"Paine rejected organized religion and revealed theology in favor of reason and individual conscience. He viewed religious institutions as human inventions for control and profit, particularly attacking Christianity and advocating for a separation of church and state."
RUSSELL VOUGHT is an anti-American religious zealot who seeks to turn our country into a theocracy. He is presently the head of the Office of Management and Budget.
Who was the last honest politician you can name who didn't enrich his own fortune at the expense of the American Taxpayer. We have the best politicians money can buy which is our biggest problem. Unfortunately there is ongoing evidence that biden was senile and not in charge but a face of those who controlled him and his autopen. Will we ever know the truth, probably not.
"She was MOST CERTAINLY CAPABLE OF WINNING" But didn't. The democratic party needs to deal with facts instead of excusing everything they did wrong.
"Trump had the richest man on the planet sink over a quarter of a BILLION DOLLARS into his campaign!" is that versus 1.2 BILLION spent to lose.
I am not familiar with project 2025 but I assume it is not something you support.
Barack Obama did NOT enrich himself from the presidency. If you have proof that he did, please leave a link that gives the evidence. Just saying so isn't proof, it's just your cynical opinion, which is NOT a fact.
Before and after his presidency, Mr. Obama wrote million dollar best selling books/memoirs, and he developed a production company that makes money, none of which was at the expense of the American taxpayer.
So, you admit you're not "familiar" with Project 2025, but you never the less have opinions on everything BUT the most consequential and impactful project ever to be thrust upon the American people?
Sometimes it doesn't pay to get up in the morning. This is one of those days!
Of course you are not familiar Skud with Project 2025. Because you'd actually have to, you know, pay attention to some news not from FOX, OAN, NewsMax or the Epoch Times, which the Mothership highlighted last week on their Anti-Vax cruise.
Something about slimy strings coming out of cadavers.
I return to my previous theory... Skud is willfully ignorant of facts because it would hurt his brain too much to work, read and learn anything that would challenge his actual existence.
Heck, at this point, I'm almost to the point of believing Skud is just another one of the myriad of personalities Mr Split himself, -FJ, exhibits daily. All concocted to drive sane people wild as he laughs devilishly from his basement.
David, You are correct I don't pay any attention to the news you mentioned. I do watch CNBC though but they don't mention project 2025.
Ms. Shaw, The president who said you didn't build your business turns around and makes 70 million with books he didn't write. It may not have cost the taxpayer for that but he spent millions on he and his wife's trips. Your statements about the billion dollar baby and her chance of winning is beyond comprehension. She had all the media, all the celebrities and 1.2 billion dollars so the only thing missing was being trusted which she was not. The country wanted change from the biden special interest presidency and you got it. Three more years will bring change just not what you want and not what anyone expected.
"Ms. Shaw, The president who said you didn't build your business turns around and makes 70 million with books he didn't write."
First, if you're speaking about former President Obama, you are incorrect in what you're implying because this is what Pres. Obama meant and said:
"President Obama stated that successful individuals don't achieve success solely on their own, acknowledging the existence of many smart and hardworking people. He followed this by saying, "If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen," referencing things like the internet, which he noted was created by government research. Obama's point was that success comes from both individual initiative and collective action.
Republicans, including Mitt Romney's campaign, used a shortened version of the quote to suggest Obama meant business owners weren't responsible for their success. However, the full context indicates he was emphasizing the importance of public investments in enabling private businesses to succeed."
But you, of course, would take it out of context to make your Hatred-of -anything-Obama point, which, is WRONG. Mr. Obama will always be a better human being and POTUS than the Republican Trump, who is now and forever linked with a child sex trafficker/rapist. That's the Republican Party's legacy for now and forever.
PS. You're wrong again if you actually think Mr. Obama didn't write his own books and memoirs. You've mixed him up with the charlatan, Trump, who's most famous book, "The Art of the Deal," was actually written by someone else.
The only thing Trump will be famous for writing is love notes to a child sex trafficker and rapist, Jeffrey Epstein!
America was doing just great with the Biden/Harris administration. Now it's in the toilet with the, um, well, you-know-what, Trump.
This is what happens when you put a convicted criminal, liar, cheat, fraud, and friend of child rapists in charge of a country.
If obama wrote his entire books that would be against the norm even for professional writers. Of course we will never know the truth.
You even quoted what I said that obama said so how am I incorrect. "If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen,"
Anyone is a better human being than trump but he is an elected president and will remain there for three more years. As to the country doing well under biden/harris is open to great interpretation as to what well is. Millions of illegals invited in, providing funding to iran for nuclear research, hamstringing Ukrain in their attempt to protect their country, giving china free rein to steal from our businesses. As to if he was in charge is questionable because everything he did was it joe or autopen.
skud: "If obama wrote his entire books that would be against the norm even for professional writers. Of course we will never know the truth."
I don't know where you went to school or where you got your college degree, but wherever those institutions are, they failed you.
It is NOT the "norm" for novelists and other professional writers to have someone else write their books. Your statement forces me to ask if you even read books or know anything about great literature and the world's great writers, because NO ONE who does would write what you wrote.
And yes, we WILL know the truth about former President Obama's authorship of his own writings, because the truth is that he and he alone wrote them. You have zero evidence to prove otherwise or to even imply otherwise.
What you're doing is trying to besmirch Mr. Obama's talent because either you are consumed by hatred for him, or you know nothing about writing, or probably both, because ANYONE WHO'S BEEN A LIFELONG READER KNOWS THAT WHAT YOU WROTE IS B.S.
I checked out what presidential scholars had to say about Joe Biden's presidency, and their informed and scholarly opinion is that he deserves to be in the top 20 for consequential presidencies. IOW, he was damn good for what the country needed at the time he swore his oath of office.
I tend to believe people who have made a lifetime of studying presidencies and not someone who has a "thing" against Mr. Biden.
PS. Those scholars all place Trump at the bottom or the next to the last, Buchanan being at the very bottom.
Again, your opinion of Biden's presidency and Obama's authorship of his books are based on you prejudices, not fact.
You can have your own opinions; you can't have your own facts.
"Yes, Michelle Obama used a ghostwriter, or at least a team of people, to assist with her memoir Becoming, as she and her husband, Barack Obama, acknowledged the role of a ghostwriter and a team in the book's acknowledgments"
In case you're confused, skud, Michelle Obama IS NOT THE SAME AS BARACK OBAMA.
Former President Obama wrote his own books. His wife, who is not a novelist, but a former First Lady who wrote a few books, had a ghost writer help her, as did all the other FLOTUSes who wrote books, and that is because THEY WERE NOT PROFESSIFONAL NOVELISTS nor had innate writing talent! But they had compelling stories to tell, and a ghost writer was employed to help them tell it.
Mr. Obama was the head of the Harvard Law Review.
"Being the head, or President, of the Harvard Law Review means overseeing the publication of one of the world's most prestigious legal journals, which is run entirely by students. The President is responsible for managing the day-to-day operations and policies of the Review, working with the student editorial board to publish scholarly legal articles, essays, and book reviews written by professors, judges, and practitioners. This leadership role involves substantial organizational and editorial responsibilities during the 3L year, providing a unique and demanding educational experience."
Mr. Obama, BEFORE BECOMING POTUS, wrote and published two best-selling books on his own. And then after his presidency, he published his best-selling memoirs, which he also wrote on his own.
Your bringing up the fact that Mrs. Obama used a ghost-writer does not mean her husband did. Mrs. Obama is not a novelist/non-fiction writer by profession, nor does she have innate writing talent like her husband.
The great writers of literature through the ages did not use ghost writers for their books.
Some politicians, First Ladies, business people, etc., who are not professional writers/novelists/biographers/etc., OR DO NOT HAVE THE TALENT TO WRITE BOOKS ON THEIR OWN, so they use ghost writers.
Michelle Obama used a ghost-writer because she knew she didn't have innate writing talent like her husband has. Mr. Obama didn't need a ghost writer for his books because he is a talented writer.
Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.
If that's what the internet says then who am I to doubt it. I ust have been mistaken,
Remember skud, one should never assume... you now why ; I think.
Post a Comment