Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Who was naive enough to think the repubs would work with Obama?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 08:53 PM
Original message
Who was naive enough to think the repubs would work with Obama?
Edited on Wed Feb-04-09 08:58 PM by Blue_Roses
:hide: Yep. I guess I was in the "hope" category, but I see that they don't want to work on bi-partisanship. Nope. They want Obama to fail, just like their fat-ass buddy, Rush. Well, here's some news for those who are dead set on this flawed thinking... there is indeed a new sheriff in town and he's only touched the tip of the iceburg with all the shit he has to wipe off his shoes---and for the doubters--make no mistake, he will do it.

For those who doubt the competence of our new President, read his book, Dreams From My Father It shows the awesome talent and restraint this man has when he is under pressure. In this age of "give-it-to-me-now-or-I-will-cry", I don't know many who could do it.

With change there is always conflict. There is no way it can be any other way and Obama knows this. He tried the "let's play nice" approach, but I think now, we will begin to see a whole new side.

You cannot solve a problem from the same level of thinking that created it--Albert Einstein

:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BlueJac Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 08:54 PM
Response to Original message
1. Obama
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. He wasn't naive --
he was hopeful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SharonAnn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 11:26 PM
Response to Reply #6
25. And he has the moral high ground. They don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PurityOfEssence Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-05-09 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #6
30. "hope" is a pathetic, passive, cringing bit of optimism
The political realm is one of harsh reality.

The overuse of the word "hope" has been beyond grating to me for well over a year now. It's passive and powerless, waiting for something to save you. It's the same kind of subservient pining that promulgates religion: pleading and praying for untold horrors to end.

He was naive.

Bill Clinton never got it either: he was firmly convinced that if he just accommodated a little bit more, the Republicans would finally love him, a love he needed so deeply, and stand with him. All the while, they bent every fiber of their evil, selfish beings to the task of destroying him by any means possible. The end result was that he dragged the Democratic Party to the right, marginalized the left, and continued the march of Reaganite atavism in it's glorious crusade back to the dark ages of a fine neo-feudalism.

The labor and science moves of Obama's administration have been reassuring, but none of the rest have been. The Republicans didn't even give him ONE single vote, and Obama didn't exert enough discipline on the House to send on a non-controversial (or less controversial) bill. He made a pointed accommodation to the right by throwing out the contraception issue, and they took this and STILL fucked them. All this showed was amateurishness and willingness to throw over policy that strayed a bit into the religious realm, as if it wasn't obvious that sucking up to religion is going to be job one in this administration.

"Hope" is a partial virtue, but it is clouded with its passivity and wistfulness. That's not leadership, that's wishful thinking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 08:55 PM
Response to Original message
2. No one... not even Obama
He had to give them a chance. I'm not quite sure how people don't get this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I think it's that we did hope...
I know I did, but a leopard spots don't change. These idiots STILL think they can do the same shit and it work:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. Yep
I think Obama is king of nuance... I expect his motives are in line with his actions, and he's setting the GOP up for being squashed as he runs roughshod over them, after telling them he tried to play nice, and fair, but they don't get nice and they don't get fair. All they know is me, me, me, greed, greed, greed! I'm sort of glad a couple of Dems have been caught up in the bad biz too! Everyone could use a dose of straighten the hell up if you ask me!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peace13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. What you said. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJCher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:09 PM
Response to Reply #2
12. yes, in the communication psychology biz
It's called "process." Obama has to go through the process of asking them to participate. I happen to think he was sincere and that he wasn't just playing lip service, but the truth of the matter is that Republicans just make themselves look recalcitrant.



Cher
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. I'm sure he was sincere, no question really
I'm sure he hoped for the best, but prepared for the worst.

Yes, process would be the correct term. Later, whilst running roughshod, it will be framing. He will show us how it all looks from his perspective.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalmuse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 08:56 PM
Response to Original message
4. Not me, but...
the very reason I was hesitant about supporting Obama in the primaries was because of his penchant, while noble, of reaching out to these pieces of shit. I hope he stops that soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 08:59 PM
Response to Original message
7. They had an Op.....and showed their colors true to form...greedy assholes, they hate
giving up their Power...the power they lost by losing the TRUST of the People...and they still don't get it....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:01 PM
Response to Original message
8. Oh, only about 1/2 of GDP
Edited on Wed Feb-04-09 09:02 PM by depakid
These folks are ideologues and fundamentalists- you cannot appease them- and they'll stab you in the back whenever it suits their purposes.

Moreover, they'd tear the entire country apart at the seams before they'd help Obama's economic programs (weak as they already are from unilateral concessions) succeed.

Here's a the deal in a nutshell for those growing weary of Kumabya:



You see, this isn’t a brainstorming session — it’s a collision of fundamentally incompatible world views. If one thing is clear from the stimulus debate, it’s that the two parties have utterly different economic doctrines. Democrats believe in something more or less like standard textbook macroeconomics; Republicans believe in a doctrine under which tax cuts are the universal elixir, and government spending is almost always bad.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nevergiveup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:02 PM
Response to Original message
9. This has more to do with
Universal Health Care than it does the stimulus package. He is laying the groundwork. He will need a few Republican senators and he will get them. In the final vote he will also win some Republicans in both houses on the stimulus package. Do not underestimate this man.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigbadwolf Donating Member (21 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:05 PM
Response to Original message
11. What if he needs their votes for some things?
Might be best not to burn all bridges.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #11
18. worried much?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigbadwolf Donating Member (21 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-05-09 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #18
26. It could happen
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadMaddie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:09 PM
Response to Original message
13. I never did think they would work for the best of the country.
Obama is playing them...he is making it obvious that he has reached out and the Repugs keeping trying to grandstand.....Obama is giving them a long dog leash and they are wrapping themselves around a pole.

It's just a matter of time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:10 PM
Response to Original message
14. Not even the fraudulent "moderate" Republicans are. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sarah Ibarruri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:14 PM
Response to Original message
16. Not me. I kept whining about why Obama would lower himself to work with dog crap nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rocktivity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:19 PM
Response to Original message
17. Who thinks Obama is naieve enough to the Rethugs would work with HIM?
Edited on Wed Feb-04-09 09:21 PM by rocktivity
I don't believe for ten seconds that he thought his "new bipartisanship" would work. Surely his time in Congress has taught him that the Rethugs translate bipartisanship into "my way or the highway." I think he has an ulterior motive--I think he's going to give them enough rope to hang themselves, then sighed, "Well, I tried, but the country's in so much trouble, I can't waste time on sucking to them anymore."

:headbang:
rocktivity
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thrill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:21 PM
Response to Original message
19. Obama just made the attempt. Which is what he promised he would
Now the People see he lived up to his end of the bargain
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:27 PM
Response to Original message
20. Republican governors want Obama to succeed - so there are republicans we can work with
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. I read that just a minute ago...
that makes me :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demo dutch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. FL Gov Crist has been pushing the stim bill so has Schwarzenegger see link
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glowing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 10:32 PM
Response to Original message
23. I didn't, but I think Obama had to prove them to be the obstructionists
to the American people. Its the pubbies who got all kinds of tax cuts, and then rejected the bill. Made people even more mad at puggies.. and then the Steele guy becoming head of Pubbies.. well, they just look like assholes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pipi_k Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 10:43 PM
Response to Original message
24. Like others said...
I wasn't naive enough to think they would, but it didn't hurt to be hopeful.

Doing what Obama did...giving them a chance to have input and come to some kind of win/win situation, I think was very smart.

If they keep rejecting proposals along party lines, it'll only make them look like assholes in the end.

I think it's a really good strategy, actually.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backscatter712 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-05-09 01:29 PM
Response to Original message
27. Nobody. Obama's strategy is to entice the Rethugs into acting like assholes.
And the Rethugs are playing into that strategy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Life Long Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-05-09 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
28. Why? Were they at one time the party for a government?
:bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DevonRex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-05-09 01:37 PM
Response to Original message
29. I think he'll try to get their cooperation on every important bill. And every time they refuse
to play nice, they'll look like the assholes they are. Eventually it might make for some changed behavior on the republics' part. It's either that or they will suffer the consequences of their actions at the voting booth. I see Obama's tactic as a win/win for us. They change or they lose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 12:20 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC