https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...83bf_blog.html
"We are going to make him a one term President".
They couldnt and still cant deal with the fact their boss is a negro.
That says nothing about the color of his skin. I'm not aware of anyone in congress who has openly said they're not working with him because of the fact that he's black. Although there are probably some reps from down south that could openly say it without any repercussions.
Read between the lines. If my goal is to get you fired from day one, there is an underlying agenda beyond politics.
This whole supreme court thing is another example. But the real divider is the one with the Klan showing up at his rallies because of the birther movement. Voting No on every single thing Obama proposes, is pretty unprecedented. What other President has had to face that level of opposition? They are getting what they deserve with Trump.
And then came Barack Obama. Once more delays ed. Even after the rules were changed, delays have stayed high, averaging about 80 days. This is far higher than it was under Bush or Clinton.*Bernstein comments:
I believe that Senate rules requiring super-majority cloture for judicial nominations are an excellent idea, provided the minority observes the Senate norm of using filibusters rarely. Unfortunately, Republicans simply haven’t abided by longstanding Senate norms. After Obama's election,*they suddenly insisted that every nomination required 60 votes*— an unprecedented hurdle.*They blockaded multiple nominations to the DC Circuit Court. They have, before and after filibuster reform, used Senate rules to delay even nominations that they have intended ultimately to support. Since reform, they have imposed the maximum delay on every single judicial nominee.
Ideally, I'd like to see a compromise that restores the minority's ability to block selected judicial nominees.*But right now, the more pressing concern is that if Republicans win a Senate majority in November, they may simply shut down all nominations for two full years.*That would be absolutely outrageous. Yet it seems entirely plausible.
That final comment is what makes these numbers even more outrageous. It's fairly normal for a minority party to start delaying nominees in the final year or two of an administration. Obviously they're hoping to win the presidency soon and they want to leave as many seats open as possible for their guy to fill. This tends to inflate the average numbers for an administration.
But that hasn't happened yet for Obama. His numbers*for his first five years*are far, far higher than Bush's even though Bush's are inflated by delays during his final year in office. It's just another example of the fact that, no, both parties aren't equally at fault for the current level of government dysfunction. Republicans greeted Obama's inauguration with an active plan of maximal obstruction of everything he did, regardless of what it was or how necessary it might be in the face of an epic economic collapse. No other party in recent history has done that. It's a new thing under the sun.
didn't read
Not unprecedented, tbh
You are making up.
"Read between the lines" is not equal to "openly says they will not work with you basically because of your color." Please show where any current elected politician has said this - that's political and social suicide.
Of course you didnt read, because it says this level of obstuctionism IS unprecedented.
THey aren't high profile because no one made them high profile. And what about all the murdered cops?
Oh yes it is. If your top priority as congress is to make the President a one term president instead of passing legislation from the day he is inaugurated, thats pretty ing clear why they said it.
what about em?
The President isn't in charge of deciding which deaths are high profile. When he makes remarks on a death/murder, it's because it's already gained significant national attention and merits and address.
Sounds like your beef is with the media.
And it also sounds like you've been getting your talking points from news pundits like I said earlier. As it's been pointed out exhaustively in this forum, the rate of cop murders has not gone up in the last few years. What do you want him to comment on?And what about all the murdered cops?
If only white people had a voice in this society!Each death is tragic, but overall, being a cop is safer than it has been in decades. Apparently that news was not high profile enough for you to have seen.And what about all the murdered cops?
Kansas would most likely be worse off without the tax cuts.
And Dorothy would most likely be in Oregon without the magic shoes.
Idiot.
In what way?
i dont need to read between the lines. according to you they "openly said it"
I want him not to feed the BLM narrative and ignore all the cops that are being killed by black guys.
how many is that? are black guys disproportionately deadly for cops?
Your stupidity is eternally reliable
most of the people killing cops are white men
proportionally?
So because cops are killed (a job THEY signed up for knowing how dangerous it is), makes it okay to disproportionally kill unarmed Blacks, etc?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote