Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-03-2013, 06:45 PM
 
Location: San Francisco, CA
15,088 posts, read 13,447,778 times
Reputation: 14266

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
The most partisan, Divider-In-Chief to ever grace the White House apparently finds it necessary to compromise with a Communist foe while ignoring the demands of one half of the very constituency that he represents.

Could this President be anymore worthless??
Why would he negotiate with terrorists? Putin is more respectable and reasonable than tea party Republicans.

How would you feel if a minority of Democratic lunatics stalled out the government and threatened national default unless a Republican president and Senate majority passed universal background checks on gun purchases?

News flash: if a law passed fair and square through the House, Senate, White House, AND Supreme Court review, then you as the minority don't get to "negotiate" with the winners and demand that they "compromise" by dismantling it. Win your own damn elections and then pass a bill to repeal it once you have sufficient support, you sore losers.

Judging how the vast majority of people HATE what the Republicans are doing now - even more than they hate Obama and the Democrats - we can safely conclude that Republicans DO NOT represent the "will of the people."

Could these Republican knaves be any more thuggish and hostile to our Constitutional principles?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-03-2013, 08:42 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Western Massachusetts
45,983 posts, read 53,467,780 times
Reputation: 15184
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
The most partisan, Divider-In-Chief to ever grace the White House apparently finds it necessary to compromise with a Communist foe while ignoring the demands of one half of the very constituency that he represents.
A coummunist foe?! How'd you come up with that? You're nearly 20 years too late. As to why he's ignoring those demands, demands are not negotiation. Saying: pass what we want [and not justification has been for it to have any connection with the budget] or we'll shutdown the government is just blackmail. There's little possible to negotiate with that, and responding only reward that tactic —*which will would otherwise happen again and again every year.

One half? It's far less that. Only one-quarter approve of shutting down the government for the Affordable Health Care act.

Poll: Americans not happy about shutdown; more blame GOP - CBS News


The GOP asks why Obama will negotiate with Putin and not with them. Here’s why.

Imagine that Putin stepped forward tomorrow morning and announced that Russia had developed a computer virus that would shut down the market for U.S. Treasuries and that he would release that virus unless Obama agreed to a list of Russian demands.

No one would say Russia was asking for negotiations with Obama. They would say Russia was holding the U.S. economy hostage and demanding that Obama pay a ransom. No Republican -- and no Democrat -- would advice Obama to take that meeting. The sole question would be prevention and, if necessary, reprisal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2013, 08:52 PM
 
1,111 posts, read 1,324,354 times
Reputation: 833
As for the idea that Obama will negotiate with Putin or anyone else BUT the GOP, I think the right wing's favorite comic Jon Stewart summed it up best:

“If it turns out that president Barack Obama can make a deal with the most intransigent, hard-line, unreasonable, totalitarian Mullahs in the world, but not with Republicans, maybe he’s not the problem.”
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2013, 12:19 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
14,317 posts, read 22,381,429 times
Reputation: 18436
Default You Pubs don't matter

Republicans in Congress aren't worth negotiating with. They have stupid demands. You Pubs don't want to recognize this. Pubs don't smell the stench they represent because they're sitting in it.

At least negotiating with Putin might yield some positive results.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2013, 07:30 AM
 
Location: The Lone Star State
8,030 posts, read 9,050,957 times
Reputation: 5050
It seems the left has become unhinged with not getting near 100% their way. The asinine name-calling directed at conservatives such as terrorists, jihad, etc. is totally uncalled for, and shows their true colors IMO.
In the same breath, many of these so-called leaders and leftist websites will still call the Islamic mass murder at Fort Hood "workplace violence" and apologize in the name of "tolerance" to our enemies overseas who want to blow us up and destroy us.

Makes you wonder where their real priorities are.

As for Obama... no doubt his rhetoric has done a 180 from five years ago; hope and working together has become blame, inspiration has become fear-mongering and nastiness for the "enemy" which are fellow Americans. It's very sad. He seems like a rather poor leader compared to many past presidents.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2013, 07:51 AM
 
Location: Florida
76,975 posts, read 47,615,131 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
The most partisan, Divider-In-Chief to ever grace the White House apparently finds it necessary to compromise with a Communist foe while ignoring the demands of one half of the very constituency that he represents. Could this President be anymore worthless??
I would assume he would not comply to unacceptable to demands from anyone, be the demands domestic or foreign.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2013, 07:55 AM
 
592 posts, read 502,286 times
Reputation: 314
This is there latest talking point. I am happy he is talking to Putin, and even better he does not believe he sees Putin's soul
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2013, 08:04 AM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,119,311 times
Reputation: 9409
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient View Post
Why would he negotiate with terrorists? Putin is more respectable and reasonable than tea party Republicans.

How would you feel if a minority of Democratic lunatics stalled out the government and threatened national default unless a Republican president and Senate majority passed universal background checks on gun purchases?

News flash: if a law passed fair and square through the House, Senate, White House, AND Supreme Court review, then you as the minority don't get to "negotiate" with the winners and demand that they "compromise" by dismantling it. Win your own damn elections and then pass a bill to repeal it once you have sufficient support, you sore losers.

Judging how the vast majority of people HATE what the Republicans are doing now - even more than they hate Obama and the Democrats - we can safely conclude that Republicans DO NOT represent the "will of the people."

Could these Republican knaves be any more thuggish and hostile to our Constitutional principles?
Republicans are not a minority. Because you got that part wrong, I chose not to read the rest of your post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2013, 08:07 AM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,119,311 times
Reputation: 9409
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
A coummunist foe?! How'd you come up with that? You're nearly 20 years too late. As to why he's ignoring those demands, demands are not negotiation. Saying: pass what we want [and not justification has been for it to have any connection with the budget] or we'll shutdown the government is just blackmail. There's little possible to negotiate with that, and responding only reward that tactic —*which will would otherwise happen again and again every year.

One half? It's far less that. Only one-quarter approve of shutting down the government for the Affordable Health Care act.

Poll: Americans not happy about shutdown; more blame GOP - CBS News


The GOP asks why Obama will negotiate with Putin and not with them. Here’s why.

Imagine that Putin stepped forward tomorrow morning and announced that Russia had developed a computer virus that would shut down the market for U.S. Treasuries and that he would release that virus unless Obama agreed to a list of Russian demands.

No one would say Russia was asking for negotiations with Obama. They would say Russia was holding the U.S. economy hostage and demanding that Obama pay a ransom. No Republican -- and no Democrat -- would advice Obama to take that meeting. The sole question would be prevention and, if necessary, reprisal.
Government is not a function of polls. Government is a function of the ballot box. 1/2 of the Legislature is Republican. That means that 1/2 of the voting bloc have handed conservatives a voice with which the President must consider, just as 1/2 of the voting bloc have handed Democrats a voice for which the President must consider.

I'm tired of liberals and other uninformed idiots trying to paint House Republican's as the "minority." They are NO MORE a minority than Senate Democrats are.

What part of that do you not understand?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2013, 08:12 AM
 
4,412 posts, read 3,958,335 times
Reputation: 2326
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
Government is not a function of polls. Government is a function of the ballot box. 1/2 of the Legislature is Republican. That means that 1/2 of the voting bloc have handed conservatives a voice with which the President must consider, just as 1/2 of the voting bloc have handed Democrats a voice for which the President must consider.

What part of that do you not understand?
The President doesn't have to consider squat. A party, or faction of a party, or multiparty coalition, or whatever, just needs enough votes to override a Presidential veto. We have a system for that set up in the Constitution.

Policy is decided by those who win elections; not through hostage negotiations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:33 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top