|
|
May 22, 2013
|
|
|
|
 Obama Calls Bipartisan Power MeetingPosted on Nov 4, 2010
Getting shellacked in the midterm elections has evidently motivated President Barack Obama to consider his strategy for the next two years, and he’s taking the bold new step of—wait for it—arranging a group huddle with eight big players from the two dominant parties. Sigh. —KA
Advertisement TAGS:
|
Does Anything Change in Los Angeles With Election of New Mayor?
Email 
Print
Share
Email to a friend
Newsletter 
Like Us
Follow Us
Get Our Feed
Tags|Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation | Google+
© 2013 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.
By Anna, November 10, 2010 at 1:30 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Is Bi-Partisanship possible in modern political America? Watch documentary SPLIT:
Report thisA DIVDED AMERICA http://bit.ly/SPliT
By rm, November 6, 2010 at 2:39 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Obama needs to learn two words to use in addressing the republicans—“fuck off.” This is as humiliating as Clinton’s sucking up to Newt Gingrich after the 94 elections. The media then was referring to Newt as the “co-president.” Why would any democrat do this? Don’t they know that the republicans have only one mission—that is to destroy the democrats and hand 100% of power in the nation to corporations and the pentagon. I’m not saying that democrats are a lot better, but they are somewhat better.
I was an Obama supporter. I was demoralized by his appointment of Bush-Clinton holdovers and his cowardice in facing the Pentagon. I did still want him to succeed. But now, there is no hope. He will suck the republians’ ass just like Clinton did. And they will try to impeach him in spite of all his hard sucking. There are some people in this world you just can’t deal with. Those people need to be told to fuck off. The republicans are those people.
Report thisBy felicity, November 5, 2010 at 11:54 am Link to this comment
I really can’t believe this is happening - ‘this’
being Obama’s seeming refusal to accept the fact that
‘compromise’ to a Republican (somebody should send
dictionaries to all of them) means my-way-or-the-
highway.
I think back to Lyndon Johnson’s presidency. He got
‘cooperation’ from the House and Senate because he
had just enough ‘dirt’ on key members that he
promised to reveal if they didn’t cooperate with him.
Obama’s got to ‘get’ what Johnson knew that he’s
Report thisdealing with sleazes, people with enough skeletons in
their closets to fill a graveyard, and using the
threat of opening the closet doors will do more to
get his agenda accomplished than his lame
‘compromise’ gimmick.
By kerryrose, November 5, 2010 at 9:24 am Link to this comment
rigor
Obama does not have to cooperate, and yet he does over and over again. He was elected by majority, and has a mandate while he is in office to enlist the cooperation of others to institute his policies.
The Repubs have control of ONE legislative branch. They should be the ones cooperating.
Report thisBy Rigor, November 5, 2010 at 9:16 am Link to this comment
I hear libs are all bent out of shape on this
Report thiscooperation pitch, but isn’t this what the repubs
were accused of not doing for so long?
Not that I think this will change a damn thing - it
won’t. Mr. Soetoro (aka mr. president) has been lost
to the power-trip of politics for quite some time
now. Whatever his social reform agenda may have
been, crafted by Bill Ayers & paid for by George
Soros, was a path of stepping stones now passed, and
it looks like the figure head known as Obama might
be straying from the pre-defined course. It won’t
take long for the smoke & mirrors, provided by
others, to be snatched away for this betrayal of the
cause revealing who knows what.
No matter the outcome, this all looks to be more
interesting than a hollywood crime drama, (which I’m
sure the fat-cats in HW are already sparring for the
rights to).
By Robespierre115, November 5, 2010 at 6:06 am Link to this comment
Why are people so shocked? Just goes to show what sheep we are. I knew Obama was a typical career politician when I heard his AIPAC speech during the 2008 election period. Seriously people, they sold you this guy the way the TV sells you penis enlargement pills.
Report thisBy Queenie, November 5, 2010 at 12:13 am Link to this comment
why does my comment say 3:16 am? it’s just past 12 am now. huh?
Report thisBy Queenie, November 4, 2010 at 11:16 pm Link to this comment
He’s not stupid, he’s a sellout. This “huddle” is just political theater to make the gullible think bi-partisanship is the way to go. You could also think of it as a gang-bang on we the people. Again.
Report thisBy doublestandards/glasshouses, November 4, 2010 at 7:20 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Michael Moore had it exactly right when he said on democracynow that, like a battered wife, Obama would seek another reconciliation. Maybe he can make the rethuglicans love him if he just tries harder.
Harry Reid, November, 2008: Just because we won the White House and both houses of congress doesn’t mean we’re going to do things in a partisan way around here. [It’s not nice to be partisan.]
John Boehner and Mitch McConnell, yesterday after the republicans won the house: There’s no room for compromise. The president must change course. He must move to the republicans. Our main goal is to make him a one term president.
Report thisBy kerryrose, November 4, 2010 at 6:52 pm Link to this comment
This stupid idiot will never learn. He will ‘bipartisan’ us to death. When will he ever learn? Maybe 2012.
Report this