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.
I see post after post blaming Obama for things that are the responsibility of the House and Senate.
Its almost like folks do not understand how our government works. The president does have some very specific powers, but by far those aren't the things being complained about, but rather everyone seems intent on blaming Obama for things that the Senate and House are responsible for.
And looking back, this was true for Bush, Reagen, and Clinton. Its like they scapegoat presidents for their lack of competence.
to a point you are right, congress is really the problem here, as the president can do only so much, legally. and you are also right that presidents get the blame for out of control government spending and taxation, when the true blame falls squarely on congress.
that said, remember that the president is essentially the CEO of the country, and he is the one the country looks to to lead congress and the executive branch down the road. reagan for instance got much of his agenda through congress despite the fact that congress was controlled by the democrats, reagan was a leader. clinton also managed to get his agenda through congress, despite having to deal with a republican controlled congress, again clinton was a leader. same with most presidents that we have had.
this particular president however is no leader. oh he talks big, but he doesnt do much. he also constantly tries to make end runs around congress, rather than go to congress and get them going on things he feels should be done. for instance, does he go to boehner and try to work a deal on anything? lets say immigration? does he try to get junior representatives from either party down to the white house and encourage them to get on the ball and try to get things going with his fellow representatives? does he sit reid down and say look harry we need this stuff, these bills you have stopped in the senate should be going to the floor for debate at least. can we get going on some of this stuff?
does obama get mitch mcconnell into the white house and try to get him to help with the harry reid problem? i think the answer is a big no. obama likes to make speeches alright, but he doesnt want to get his hands dirty and try to push things through.
I blame the idiot republicans in the house because they are to stupid to send a clean bill, one that does include defunding the ACA, to the Senate. That is why Reid sits on each bill. Maybe, just maybe if they sent a clean bill, it would get voted on and passed by noooo, they are too stupid to realize this. They would rather pander to their groupies that help this country.
Enough blame to go around. But he is single leader who can't lead with his third of power sharing. He certainly thru around blaming others especially Bush.
I blame the idiot republicans in the house because they are to stupid to send a clean bill, one that does include defunding the ACA, to the Senate. That is why Reid sits on each bill. Maybe, just maybe if they sent a clean bill, it would get voted on and passed by noooo, they are too stupid to realize this. They would rather pander to their groupies that help this country.
as long as certain bills originate in the house, the senate can modify the bills through debate, vote on it, then send it back to the house so they can then vote on the modified bill. if the house then votes down the modified bill, BOTH bills then go to a combined committee where they then debate the bill, make changes, and then send the approved bill to both house for another vote. if both houses pass it, then it goes to the president for his signature or veto. but harry reid wont even let THAT happen. he just tables the bills. so until reid gets off his duff and actually starts working, things are going to continue to turn to crap.
I blame the idiot republicans in the house because they are to stupid to send a clean bill, one that does include defunding the ACA, to the Senate. That is why Reid sits on each bill. Maybe, just maybe if they sent a clean bill, it would get voted on and passed by noooo, they are too stupid to realize this. They would rather pander to their groupies that help this country.
.
Stop drinking the koolaid, detox, then look for yourself to see that you are misguided. Sure the (R's) have tried multiple times to defund the ACA as you put it. However not every bill is related to ACA nor are they all filled with poison pills. The same is true of what the (D) controlled Senate sends to the House. The problem is that Reid wants to provide cover for Obama since it is party of country as far as he is concerned.
The presidency is not a dictatorship to where the POTUS decides and rules. If Obama wanted to get some things done, all he would need to do is see what he and the (R's) agreed on, and ask for Bills that specifically covered those issues.
For instance, securing our borders, which Obama said is important. The House and the majority of the country agrees with that, so offer to sign a Bill about comprehensive border security, and lead by telling Reid to not mess it up, but send it to him "clean". BOOM, there is something he accomplishes that the majority of the country wants. There are of course other examples of how "clean bills" can get through and be signed.
to a point you are right, congress is really the problem here, as the president can do only so much, legally. and you are also right that presidents get the blame for out of control government spending and taxation, when the true blame falls squarely on congress.
that said, remember that the president is essentially the CEO of the country, and he is the one the country looks to to lead congress and the executive branch down the road. reagan for instance got much of his agenda through congress despite the fact that congress was controlled by the democrats, reagan was a leader. clinton also managed to get his agenda through congress, despite having to deal with a republican controlled congress, again clinton was a leader. same with most presidents that we have had.
this particular president however is no leader. oh he talks big, but he doesnt do much. he also constantly tries to make end runs around congress, rather than go to congress and get them going on things he feels should be done. for instance, does he go to boehner and try to work a deal on anything? lets say immigration? does he try to get junior representatives from either party down to the white house and encourage them to get on the ball and try to get things going with his fellow representatives? does he sit reid down and say look harry we need this stuff, these bills you have stopped in the senate should be going to the floor for debate at least. can we get going on some of this stuff?
does obama get mitch mcconnell into the white house and try to get him to help with the harry reid problem? i think the answer is a big no. obama likes to make speeches alright, but he doesnt want to get his hands dirty and try to push things through.
I don't know about Obama's leadership ability, but I do have my own theories about why he doesn't look to lead congress and the executive branch down the road. It's because Obama does not want this congress to do anything really. As long as it was his party in the majority, he tried to get legislation passed, but since the House went to the Republicans he seems to be unable to get anything done.
Remember the Grand Bargain with John Boehner? Boehner wanted to make that deal and get some tax increases while getting some corporate taxes lowered. I think he wanted his name on that Grand Bargain, even to share with Obama. From what I've read, the deal was set and Boehner had the votes but at the last minute Obama called him asking for more tax cuts. They both knew that would lose a lot of the House votes, so Obama appears to have deliberately scuttled the deal, at least according to Bob Woodward's sources. I don't know if it was because he feared some of his own compromises would hurt him with his base in the upcoming election, or if he figured he had a better chance in the election running against a "do nothing Congress."
It proved very effective with his base, but it wasn't good for the country. I can't understand why Obama wants to leave a legacy of bitterness and extreme partisanship. He could have had his Grand Bargain and, if it worked to help grow the economy more, a great legacy and possibly looking at reclaiming the House in 2014.
The OP is exactly right that the Congress makes the laws (and passes them). The President does have certain powers but the current occupant is abusing them to the extreme. But I think that the congress blames the President because that takes the heat off of them and as mentioned, most people don't know how the government works.
If Harry Reid died tomorrow, I would celebrate profusely. Quite literally he is the biggest obstruction to progress in America. A rotten, despicable human being at his very core and a loud mouth little runt that needs a real ass beating pronto.
My husband said the same thing about Cheney. I told him to stop being a you know what and I will tell you the same. No ones death is worth celebrating because of political beliefs.
I don't know about Obama's leadership ability, but I do have my own theories about why he doesn't look to lead congress and the executive branch down the road. It's because Obama does not want this congress to do anything really. As long as it was his party in the majority, he tried to get legislation passed, but since the House went to the Republicans he seems to be unable to get anything done.
Remember the Grand Bargain with John Boehner? Boehner wanted to make that deal and get some tax increases while getting some corporate taxes lowered. I think he wanted his name on that Grand Bargain, even to share with Obama. From what I've read, the deal was set and Boehner had the votes but at the last minute Obama called him asking for more tax cuts. They both knew that would lose a lot of the House votes, so Obama appears to have deliberately scuttled the deal, at least according to Bob Woodward's sources. I don't know if it was because he feared some of his own compromises would hurt him with his base in the upcoming election, or if he figured he had a better chance in the election running against a "do nothing Congress."
It proved very effective with his base, but it wasn't good for the country. I can't understand why Obama wants to leave a legacy of bitterness and extreme partisanship. He could have had his Grand Bargain and, if it worked to help grow the economy more, a great legacy and possibly looking at reclaiming the House in 2014.
the problem is that obama has never led anything. even when he had a super majority on congress, he didnt lead, he let pelosi and reid do that.
and i dont remember obama wanting tax cuts, more like tax increases, since that is all that he has essentially called for since taking office in 2009.
Quote:
Originally Posted by natalie469
My husband said the same thing about Cheney. I told him to stop being a you know what and I will tell you the same. No ones death is worth celebrating because of political beliefs.
HEAR HEAR!!
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.
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.
