GOP Mutiny?

[anachro1]

From where I stand, the GOP's refusal to use the money as intended in Obama's plan amounts to an orchestrated mutiny against our elected president. I don't remember such hostility against past presidents. These people are willing to make everyone suffer just because they did not win the election.

This is mutiny. Can Obama just FIRE or arrest these pigs? Toss their fat pasty asses in some prison?

Just a thought...

[FrenchieCat]

1. This is a Democracy.

This too shall pass away.....this Republican Brain Fart.

[anachro1]

2. Yes, it is

But we are in dire times, and they simply REFUSE to cooperate.

[YOY]

5. Then the blame falls on their heads.

Democracy still is democracy. They were elected (one can only assume fairly). If they do nothing and their constituents actually notice (and they have been) then they will not be re-elected.

To remove them from power even in dire times would be betraying everything that we stand for...no matter how useless they are to their constituancy and the country as a whole.

Dire or not. The blame is on them.

[WinkyDink]

34. I think you've confused the United States with 1933 Germany.

[Posteritatis]

41. It's kinda sad how quickly folks decided it's okay if 'we' do it... (nt)

[monmouth]

3. Their unemployed and homseless or about-to-be foreclosed constituents

will take care of them...LOL.

[DireStrike]

4. Unfortunately they're just doing their jobs.

If they weren't so batshit insane I'd admire them a hell of a lot more than senate democrats.

[PretzelWarrior]

12. what the FUCK does that mean?

go worship at the altar of party inflexibility on some other board.

[stklurker]

14. doing their jobs

What it means is they are standing up for the principles they believe in, regardless of perceived pressure from the opposition... something that DireStrike wishes the Democratic leadership would have done in the not so distant past instead of folding like a house of cards.. and is a correct observation, why people expect the Republicans will immediately change philosophies because they lost the election is beyond me....

WHAT they believe in DireStrike refers to as 'batshit insane'. Try to comprehend before you flame..

[PretzelWarrior]

18. you're not smart. the reason Dems did what they did

was they had a fucking 9/11 to deal with and had a 1 vote majority for a brief period. They were able to hold up some confirmations, but ultimately they recognized they needed to work with a popular president. Now, a few years later the Dems have all the levers of power with significantly larger majority and a significantly more popular president.

So I guess you and your buddy don't know JACK SHIT about who was and was not doing their jobs.

Maybe when Dems are in the majority for a full decade you'll agree that perhaps the GOP SCUM aren't doing their jobs which is primarily delivering for their own states. Right now, they're being assholes and trying to deliver for their corporate sponsors.

[stklurker]

19. say what?

You can play the name calling game all day, it doesn't make you right, it just makes you look childish.. Why did they 'recognize' they needed to work with a popular president..?? so you are saying that going with the flow is more important than going the principles and beliefs that were the basis for them getting elected... is this correct?? one of the purposes of representative government is to make sure we don't just swing and sway with public sentiment.. so they were in fact NOT doing their jobs... and who is talking about 9/11, talk about leaning on a GOP talking point.. I am talking about the last 5 years.

[DireStrike]

23. Oh, it was a bad time then.

Sorry. Excuse me sir. Let me just get out of the way and stand in the corner here where us mean angry "confrontational" types go.

Bush hadn't been a popular president since 2006 or earlier and they still caved on issue after issue. Never filibustered. Never made the repubs filibuster. We can't do anything until we have 50 votes. Did I say 50? I meant 60.

Now that it's such a great time, let's see what gets done. The stimulus bill barely got passed. You think we're gonna pick up seats in 2 years? No way in hell. Not with the media the way it is and the dems still refusing to fight for anything. No, let's do it the gentlemanly way. It's ok, I'm sure the repubs are gonna play nice now.

[niceypoo]

31. Always follows the same pattern...

When GOP has power they are total jerks, completely shut the Dems out. When Dems have power the republicans scream to the rooftops about fairness and bipartisanship, and the Dems cave to it, then let the republicans steam roll them.

I hope Obama realizes that it takes two to tango, and if the republicans dont want to play then they should be left standing against the wall.

[DireStrike]

21. Yeah inflexibility.

Never making the repubs filibuster is good because its flexible. Never standing up for anything that looks remotely left is great flexibility.

Things that are truly flexible go in both directions. Not always the same way (rightward).

[northernlights]

24. no they are not doing their jobs

They were elected to serve their constituents, not their party.

[DireStrike]

27. Good point.

You're right. My mistake.

Well. They are doing what they're paid for.

[stklurker]

29. jobs

In some cases, sadly...I think they are doing the will of their constituents, just as areas that were represented by a Democrat in the last 6 years would expect their representative to fight for their beliefs. They were elected to represent the platform they ran on, regardless of party, and in my opinion only when they DONT do that are they 'not doing their jobs'.

[ecstatic]

25. You have a tiny point only because I wish our guys had stood up to Bush

more. But we were always correct in our stances. Whereas, the rethugs are dead wrong.

[Two Americas]

28. nonsense

"Being right" means almost nothing in politics.

The Republicans represent and advance the needs and desires of the wealthy and powerful few, the upper 1%, and have been exceptionally effective and successful at that.

Democrats obsess over "being right" and brag about that in lieu of actually doing their job - protecting the interests of the other 99% of the people.

Politics is a brutal and relentless struggle over power and resources. Those who fight the hardest win. It is not a game show where you get points for being right.

I think we have settled for the consolation prize in politics - being right - for far too long. It is a cowardly and delusional excuse for compromising, cowering, caving and groveling.

[Richardo]

6. Yes, there is a little known Section 5 in Article II of the Constitution ...

...that gives the President, at "his sole discretion" the power to "remove, or cause to be removed, whether or not duly-elected, the Governors and various Senators and Representatives of the several States."

Good call! :thumbsup:

[kwenu]

16. This is a joke in case some of you don't realize it. There is no Section 5.

[Richardo]

20. Isn't it sad that you actually have to point that out to some of these people?

I refuse to use the 'sarcasm' smilie - I leave it as an exercise for the reader as to whether I'm serious or not.

But the fact that you and WinkyDink felt it was necessary to point out to the readership that this 'Section 5' was fictional says volumes about many DUers' lack of the most elementary grasp of the fundamentals of our government. It's sad.

[WinkyDink]

17. Yeah, REALLY "little known". Infinitesimally so.

[EstimatedProphet]

30. Plus, there's Article II, Section 7(b)

which states "the office of the President, at any time of his own free will, may seize the property of any citizen of the United States, and have that citizen executed, upon showing no grievance or evidence of a crime."

It's always been that way. That's what we fought the British Crown to win!

[Richardo]

32. Not many people know that what is commonly considered 'The Constitution' is no more than a draft

The version ratified in 1788 contains Sections 5-8 in Article II (Enumerating the Powers of the Office of the President).

Section 5: Removal of Elected Officers and Representatives of the Several States
Section 6: Dissolution of the Congress of the United States
Section 7: Securement, through Forfeiture, of the Property and Livelihood of the Citizens of the United States
Section 8: Line-Item Veto

Well done, EP - you are a gentleman and a Constitutional scholar! :patriot:

[Zuni]

36. man, someone should point out Section 8 to the Supreme Court

they must have mistakenly ruled against that.

I can't believe that we let this kind of riff-raff sit on the high court

[Richardo]

37. I know, right?

...and they call themselves 'strict constructionists'. :eyes: Oh no you di'int!

[Pyrzqxgl]

7. Make them walk the plank.

Or maybe put them all on a reality show with Donald Trump where they have to explain their actions
every week and the one with the worst explanation gets fired.

[11 Bravo]

8. Mutiny? You're kidding, right?

[anachro1]

9. Not at all.

No Kidding.

[rvablue]

10. "Mutiny" implies somehow that they have taken control.

They have not.

They tried to disrupt. They failed.

They will continue to disrupt and they will continue to fail.

Jindal is already in trouble in LA. Palin missed the governor's conference in DC this weekend to try to save her ass. Some of these Governors and congresscritters will lose their seats due to their lack of cooperation with the President. Watch. It's going to happen.

The GOP has no leader, no plan, no ideas. Right now, they are twisting in the wind and clawing at the air.

It's not a "mutiny." It's called whining.

[11 Bravo]

39. Pity. It wasn't particularly funny, but if you actually meant it ...

well, that's just fucking stupid. The President of the United States should be able to remove from office congress critters from a state with whom he disagrees and who are trying to obstruct his agenda? Sorry, stupid is the only word that fits. Please, run, don't walk, to your nearest library and read the Constitution.

[Sherman A1]

13. Agreed

They would really have to improve what they are doing to get to the level of amateur screw ups. They are posturing and that is about it. Jindal is hoping that his legislature will take the money anyway so that he can have it both ways.

[elocs]

11. Dictatorships are great, as long as Bush told us, "As long as I'm the dictator".

I can remember reading here last year before the election the predictions of how Bush would never give up power, how we'd have marshal law. I guess that didn't happen. Of course if we, meaning Obama and the Democrats, were to take over it would all be benevolent sweetness and light and we would have heaven on earth. Then let's do away with free elections because evidently some people are stupid enough to actually vote for Republicans.

But, then again, I'll think I'll pass on the mutiny thing. That kind of sounds like something Republicans would think of doing. I think I'll just stick with the ups and downs of our democratic Republic.

[WinkyDink]

15. Are you DAFT??

[Harmonika]

22. A better question

Who are these people to debate the President's ideas?
Who are they to pick apart a plan because they don't agree with him?

Don't these republican f*ckers have to follow orders?

Arrest them all, or better yet, if they don't agree with the plan,
take away their portion of the money.

[Posteritatis]

42. Ignoring the blaring sockpuppet alarms for a moment...

No, they don't have to follow orders, because the President does not give orders to the legislative branch of government. By your "logic," anyone who questioned Bush's policies over the last eight years could be arrested or worse simply for the crime of disagreeing with the President. Last I checked the United States is not an absolute monarchy or whatever other form of dictatorship you (or you two, on the off chance that you aren't also the OP) want it to be.

[bridgit]

26. 'mutiny' implies action against abusive authority on the high seas...

this is treasonable GOP subterfuge on land

[WI_DEM]

33. They basically say they want to turn down $ for the unemployed

so they will have to explain that to the unemployed in there states.

[radfringe]

35. Don't give'em the money if they don't want it...then

run ads in their states explaining to the people why they don't have new roads, public projects, unemployment, jobs etc... because their GOVERNOR has put political interests over the people's interests and well-being

[Posteritatis]

38. Christ, and I thought us Canadians were ignorant of our constitution

The president "just firing" legislators? Imprisoning them on his say-so?

RTFM before you start spouting off that kind of insanity.

[Clio the Leo]

40. I hope they sit on their big fat butts all night tonight....

.... and not applaud. Further demonstrate their childish behaviour.

[Renew Deal]

43. You remind me of glass.