Poll: Obama worst president since WWII

RAMOSS · Jul 19, 2014

Carleen said:
First of all I don't believe in god. He has done plenty things I don't agree with just like any other president, but he not the worst since wwll. That is the joke imo

Obama makes a good 1990's republican. However, the entire country has match so far to the right, due to the influence of the opinion centered media and the unholy matrimony between the fiscal conservatives and the social conservatives that even Goldwater would be considered a 'RINO'.

Perotista · Jul 19, 2014

RAMOSS said:
Obama makes a good 1990's republican. However, the entire country has match so far to the right, due to the influence of the opinion centered media and the unholy matrimony between the fiscal conservatives and the social conservatives that even Goldwater would be considered a 'RINO'.

Bill Clinton would have made a good 1990's Republican, he was a conservative Democrat who founded the conservative DLC. He was definitely more conservative than either of the Bush's and more conservative than Nixon or Ford. In fact Nixon was the most Liberal president since FDR.

Now with Goldwater, I consider myself a Goldwater Conservative which as you note, is not to be confused with the neo-conservatives of today. In fact my first presidential vote went to Barry. But back in 1964 the religious right was not yet born, the moral majority or the christian coalition weren't even a figment in someone's eye. Goldwater thought religion had no place in politics. He was a constitutionist and before he would ever ask if a program was needed, he would first ask if that program was constitutional.

Unitedwestand13 · Jul 19, 2014

Perotista said:
Bill Clinton would have made a good 1990's Republican, he was a conservative Democrat who founded the conservative DLC. He was definitely more conservative than either of the Bush's and more conservative than Nixon or Ford. In fact Nixon was the most Liberal president since FDR.

Now with Goldwater, I consider myself a Goldwater Conservative which as you note, is not to be confused with the neo-conservatives of today. In fact my first presidential vote went to Barry. But back in 1964 the religious right was not yet born, the moral majority or the christian coalition weren't even a figment in someone's eye. Goldwater thought religion had no place in politics. He was a constitutionist and before he would ever ask if a program was needed, he would first ask if that program was constitutional.

yet he could not win against LBJ because most of the country thought he was too extreme.

hence the rejoinder used by democrats to counter Goldwater's campaign slogan "you know in your heart he is right" was "but in your gut you know he's nuts"

Perotista · Jul 19, 2014

Unitedwestand13 said:
yet he could not win against LBJ because most of the country thought he was too extreme.

hence the rejoinder used by democrats to counter Goldwater's campaign slogan "you know in your heart he is right" was "but in your gut you know he's nuts"

LOL, You know I hadn't heard that. But that was exactly how he was portrayed. Strange isn't it, back then gay marriage was never heard of, but gays in the military was. Goldwater either in 1963 or 64 said, "You do not have to be straight to shoot straight." Also he thought abortion should be strictly left to the woman. This back in the early 1960's. Either the Democrats have joined good old Barry in the nut house or he wasn't so nuts. Goldwater also told LBJ early on about Vietnam, "Either win that damn war or bring our boys home."

Unitedwestand13 · Jul 19, 2014

Perotista said:
LOL, You know I hadn't heard that. But that was exactly how he was portrayed. Strange isn't it, back then gay marriage was never heard of, but gays in the military was. Goldwater either in 1963 or 64 said, "You do not have to be straight to shoot straight." Also he thought abortion should be strictly left to the woman. This back in the early 1960's. Either the Democrats have joined good old Barry in the nut house or he wasn't so nuts. Goldwater also told LBJ early on about Vietnam, "Either win that damn war or bring our boys home."

if LBJ left vietnam he would have been eviscerated by the far right.

Perotista · Jul 19, 2014

Unitedwestand13 said:
if LBJ left vietnam he would have been eviscerated by the far right.

LBJ seen how the Republicans tarred Truman for losing China. LBJ vowed he would never be the president who lost Vietnam. So as to pulling out the troops from Vietnam he would have never done that. Now there really wasn't a far right back in the early 60's. If you are talking war hawks, there were many more war hawks than in the Republican Party. Remember back then a lot of Republicans were isolationist. One reason Eisenhower ran for president in 1952 was that he was afraid if Senator Taft from Ohio won the nomination and the presidency, Taft would lead the nation back into isolationism and withdraw from the UN and NATO.

One can't compare the two parties back then with the parties of today. For one thing both parties had their conservative wings and liberal wings. Remember the Democrats had the conservative south and the Republicans the liberal northeast, remember the Rockefeller Republicans. Also back then the Republicans believed basically in the same things the Democrats did, but they only wanted a little bit less.

donsutherland1 · Jul 26, 2014

Earlier in this thread (#69), I noted that one of the keys to the Reagan and Clinton successes were their ability to build relationships with the legislative branch and then leverage them toward strategic ends.

Today, MSN posted an article showing that President Obama did very little to consult either Democrats or Republicans in the Senate and House prior to introducing his request for $3.7 billion in funds to deal with the ongoing border situation.

Lawmakers complain Obama too aloof with Congress

That lack of consultation may well prove pivotal in the request's ultimately not being realized despite what appears to be a real and mounting problem.

Unitedwestand13 · Jul 26, 2014

donsutherland1 said:
Earlier in this thread (#69), I noted that one of the keys to the Reagan and Clinton successes were their ability to build relationships with the legislative branch and then leverage them toward strategic ends.

Today, MSN posted an article showing that President Obama did very little to consult either Democrats or Republicans in the Senate and House prior to introducing his request for $3.7 billion in funds to deal with the ongoing border situation.

Lawmakers complain Obama too aloof with Congress

That lack of consultation may well prove pivotal in the request's ultimately not being realized despite what appears to be a real and mounting problem.

maybe his aloofness is a direct consequence of giving up trying to negotiate with people who refuse to compromise or even come to the negotiating table.

APACHERAT · Jul 26, 2014

Unitedwestand13 said:
maybe his aloofness is a direct consequence of giving up trying to negotiate with people who refuse to compromise or even come to the negotiating table.

It's Obama who refuses to compromise.

Obama want's it his way or no way at all and that's when he resorts to abusing Executive Order privileges.

Obama care (ACA) was written behind closed doors by outsiders like the SEIU and Republicans were locked out.

Only Congress can set immigration policies, not the President. It's the executive branch of government that by law is responsible to enforce those policies and laws passed by Congress.

Someone has been derelict on carrying out their duties that they took an oath to follow.

code1211 · Jul 26, 2014

RAMOSS said:
Obama makes a good 1990's republican. However, the entire country has match so far to the right, due to the influence of the opinion centered media and the unholy matrimony between the fiscal conservatives and the social conservatives that even Goldwater would be considered a 'RINO'.

Do you have examples of the programs or proposals put forth by Obama that validate your statement that he would make a good 1990's republican?

Maybe compare and contrast him with Newt.

code1211 · Jul 26, 2014

Perotista said:
LOL, You know I hadn't heard that. But that was exactly how he was portrayed. Strange isn't it, back then gay marriage was never heard of, but gays in the military was. Goldwater either in 1963 or 64 said, "You do not have to be straight to shoot straight." Also he thought abortion should be strictly left to the woman. This back in the early 1960's. Either the Democrats have joined good old Barry in the nut house or he wasn't so nuts. Goldwater also told LBJ early on about Vietnam, "Either win that damn war or bring our boys home."

Actually, if you are a true conservative, making laws about sexual orientation is just out of bounds.

This should be the conclusion anyone would take from the Tenth Amendment.

code1211 · Jul 26, 2014

donsutherland1 said:
Earlier in this thread (#69), I noted that one of the keys to the Reagan and Clinton successes were their ability to build relationships with the legislative branch and then leverage them toward strategic ends.

Today, MSN posted an article showing that President Obama did very little to consult either Democrats or Republicans in the Senate and House prior to introducing his request for $3.7 billion in funds to deal with the ongoing border situation.

Lawmakers complain Obama too aloof with Congress

That lack of consultation may well prove pivotal in the request's ultimately not being realized despite what appears to be a real and mounting problem.

Working with anyone is the main, but not only, inability that obama makes us suffer under.

His only real strength is dividing and he does this at all times in all things with all people.

code1211 · Jul 26, 2014

Unitedwestand13 said:
maybe his aloofness is a direct consequence of giving up trying to negotiate with people who refuse to compromise or even come to the negotiating table.

What flavor Kool Aide have you been drinking?

donsutherland1 · Jul 26, 2014

Unitedwestand13 said:
maybe his aloofness is a direct consequence of giving up trying to negotiate with people who refuse to compromise or even come to the negotiating table.

The article is more about a lack of consultations than negotiations. Moreover, the problem with that hypothesis is that Democrats are also complaining about the matter.

RAMOSS · Jul 26, 2014

code1211 said:
Do you have examples of the programs or proposals put forth by Obama that validate your statement that he would make a good 1990's republican?

Maybe compare and contrast him with Newt.

Newt would not make a good 1990's republican at all.

However,
w
Rather than single payer, Obama's health plan mirrored what was proposed by the Heritage foundation in 1992. Heritage foundation was a conservative think tank.

The tax proposals Obama made were also made and done by Reagan and Bush the first.

Kobie · Jul 26, 2014

code1211 said:
What flavor Kool Aide have you been drinking?

This is not an argument, nor is it a refutation.

Perotista · Jul 26, 2014

code1211 said:
Actually, if you are a true conservative, making laws about sexual orientation is just out of bounds.

This should be the conclusion anyone would take from the Tenth Amendment.

I agree. Some how trying force one religious views on others has hijacked the name of conservatism.

haymarket · Jul 26, 2014

Unitedwestand13 said:
maybe his aloofness is a direct consequence of giving up trying to negotiate with people who refuse to compromise or even come to the negotiating table.

I would agree that it is part of it. I also would say it is his own personality flaw and a complete lack of willingness to get into the big fight.

I worked to get the man elected hoping he was the second coming of Franklin Roosevelt. Sadly, we got the second coming of Jimmy Carter.

Navy Pride · Jul 26, 2014

RAMOSS said:
Newt would not make a good 1990's republican at all.

However,
w
Rather than single payer, Obama's health plan mirrored what was proposed by the Heritage foundation in 1992. Heritage foundation was a conservative think tank.

The tax proposals Obama made were also made and done by Reagan and Bush the first.

I get a kicck out of you lefties saying what would make a good Republican......:lamo

RAMOSS · Jul 26, 2014

Navy Pride said:
I get a kicck out of you lefties saying what would make a good Republican......:lamo

That is because you are looking at the republicans in a "post bush 2" era, where they have gone far to the right, and would consider 95% of the republicans from the 1990's as 'Rino's

Perotista · Jul 26, 2014

RAMOSS said:
That is because you are looking at the republicans in a "post bush 2" era, where they have gone far to the right, and would consider 95% of the republicans from the 1990's as 'Rino's

It is not just the Republicans who have taken a very hard turn to the right, the Democrats have done the same, only taken a left hard turn. The gulf between the Republican hard right house and the democratic hard left senate is at its biggest or largest spread in history.Never has the gulf ever been so large.

polgara · Jul 26, 2014

Perotista said:
It is not just the Republicans who have taken a very hard turn to the right, the Democrats have done the same, only taken a left hard turn. The gulf between the Republican hard right house and the democratic hard left senate is at its biggest or largest spread in history.Never has the gulf ever been so large.

I read somewhere recently that Dems from the House are questioning Reid on why even their bills haven't been brought to the floor for a vote. Most of them were quoted as saying their bills were not controversial at all, but they're being ignored too. What the heck is happening in DC?

Greetings, Pero. :2wave:

Unitedwestand13 · Jul 26, 2014

code1211 said:
What flavor Kool Aide have you been drinking?

none.

Perotista · Jul 26, 2014

polgara said:
I read somewhere recently that Dems from the House are questioning Reid on why even their bills haven't been brought to the floor for a vote. Most of them were quoted as saying their bills were not controversial at all, but they're being ignored too. What the heck is happening in DC?

Greetings, Pero. :2wave:

you heard correct Pol. There have been 200 or a bit over bills passed by the Republican House and sent over to the Senate where Reid had tabled them. He just stuffs them in his top right drawer. Out of that 200 plus, were at least 30 bills sponsored by House Democrats and as you stated, not controversial at all. In other words they were Democratic bills that passed the house.

here:

WASHINGTON (AP) — A fear of voting has gripped Democratic leaders in the Senate, slowing the chamber's modest productivity this election season to a near halt.

Related Stories

Hope fades in Congress for drama-free funding of U.S. agencies Reuters
Senate bill targets companies that move overseas Associated Press
Top Senate Democrat blocks votes on gun proposals Associated Press
Senate GOP blocks bill on contraception coverage Associated Press
House panel clears way for vote on Obama lawsuit Associated Press
With control of the Senate at risk in November, leaders are going to remarkable lengths to protect endangered Democrats from casting tough votes and to deny Republicans legislative victories in the midst of the campaign. The phobia means even bipartisan legislation to boost energy efficiency, manufacturing, sportsmen's rights and more could be scuttled.

The Senate's masters of process are finding a variety of ways to shut down debate.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., now is requiring an elusive 60-vote supermajority to deal with amendments to spending bills, instead of the usual simple majority, a step that makes it much more difficult to put politically sensitive matters into contention. This was a flip from his approach to Obama administration nominees, when he decided most could be moved ahead with a straight majority instead of the 60 votes needed before.

The rest of it

Election year a drag on productivity in Senate

Unitedwestand13 · Jul 26, 2014

Perotista said:
you heard correct Pol. There have been 200 or a bit over bills passed by the Republican House and sent over to the Senate where Reid had tabled them. He just stuffs them in his top right drawer. Out of that 200 plus, were at least 30 bills sponsored by House Democrats and as you stated, not controversial at all. In other words they were Democratic bills that passed the house.

here:

WASHINGTON (AP) — A fear of voting has gripped Democratic leaders in the Senate, slowing the chamber's modest productivity this election season to a near halt.

Related Stories

Hope fades in Congress for drama-free funding of U.S. agencies Reuters
Senate bill targets companies that move overseas Associated Press
Top Senate Democrat blocks votes on gun proposals Associated Press
Senate GOP blocks bill on contraception coverage Associated Press
House panel clears way for vote on Obama lawsuit Associated Press
With control of the Senate at risk in November, leaders are going to remarkable lengths to protect endangered Democrats from casting tough votes and to deny Republicans legislative victories in the midst of the campaign. The phobia means even bipartisan legislation to boost energy efficiency, manufacturing, sportsmen's rights and more could be scuttled.

The Senate's masters of process are finding a variety of ways to shut down debate.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., now is requiring an elusive 60-vote supermajority to deal with amendments to spending bills, instead of the usual simple majority, a step that makes it much more difficult to put politically sensitive matters into contention. This was a flip from his approach to Obama administration nominees, when he decided most could be moved ahead with a straight majority instead of the 60 votes needed before.

The rest of it

Election year a drag on productivity in Senate

there is another way to pass bills between the house and senate.

Reconciliation (United States Congress) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia