The President of No

[OCinBuffalo]

I'm writing this now, not 2 days from now, because I've had thing thought hanging around in my head all weekend. Really, regardless of the outcome tomorrow, I don't see how any of what I've written below changes that much. So, I'm writing it now.

 

I can't help feeling like President of NO = the next 2 years. And, despite the blatant irony, the Democrats are actually going to try to make the case that having no ideas, no agenda, and saying no to every bill that is passed...is a reasonable position to take...after spending years calling Republicans the Party of No.

 

Why? Because I don't think Obama/Democrats are psychologically capable of dealing with what is coming. I see tons of denial and projection. I don't see introspection. I see petulance. I see a group of people who can't accept that "the one they were waiting for", and in some cases fainting over, who once stood in front of front of Greek columns...was merely a product of their own self-delusions.

 

I don't see Obama respecting the judgement of the American people delivered by this election, largely because I don't see him having much respect for any non-celebrity/wealthy American. He lives in a deluded state that says he can't possibly be to blame for anything that has gone wrong, he's too smart. And, he lives in a deluded state where everyone loves him....because he only interacts with those that do. He supposedly brought in "people that disagree with him"...but, it seems that was more about providing a sparring partner for his own intellectual entertainment, than it was about learning anything.

 

Look at the Middle East mess. Did he listen, or merely spar, and then go do his "red line" thing on his own?

 

But, this is the question I keep asking myself: can we really blame him? Who is responsible for creating the conditions of the delusion where Obama resides? My answer: Lots of people.

 

First, the mass of ignoramuses who can't be bothered to read and learn anything on their own, and get their "news" from outlets like Jon Stewart. Certainly these folks, who would rather tweet the word "racism", than read a book about the subject, are partly to blame. Every time Obama showed up, there they were, proving to him that he was the "messiah".

 

Next, the professional Democrats, They knew better, but were afraid of being called racist, or something. They enabled this mess from day 1. Now they write articles and go on TV lamenting the damage Obama has done to their precious "activist government". Yeah, like it was impossible for them to see that damage coming. This is what these people do for a living. They deserve some blame as well.

 

And, of course there's the people who voted for this clown because he was black. (These tend to be the same people who militantly support gay marriage). These folks don't care about anything other than: self-aggrandizement via demonstration of their moral "superiority". They couldn't be bothered to check out the man's qualifications. Not when there's self-congratulation to be had!

 

And finally: there's the pathetic media whores. These people who were once call girl-types, have now reduced themselves to road whores. They are to Obama what the $10 whore is to a truck stop/crack house. As long as they can keep hanging around, they'll do anything he wants. It's hilarious, because the most vociferous, and noticeable leftist media pundit right now is Bill Maher. Bill Maher is getting more attention than any other leftist media person: and all he is doing is telling the truth about Islam! Every other loud mouth leftist is hiding under their sheets with their blankey.

 

It's amazing how they've lost their "certitude", isn't it? We've gone from leftist "certitude" on so many issues, to them hiding out on every issue. It's amazing to see what this board looks like now, given the abundance of leftist "certitude" that was here in 2006. I wish I could go back to Center City Philly tomorrow night, just to walk around the bars, say nothing, observe, and smile. There's definitely a ton of blame to go around in that town.

 

Thus, if Obama is to be the President of No, given the 6 years enabling, and all the "certitude" that once surrounded him, I don't think it will be entirely his fault. There are plenty of clowns, here and elsewhere, that deserve some of the blame.

Edited November 3, 2014 by OCinBuffalo

[/dev/null]

I'm going to have to disagree with you on this. Obama won't be the President of No. He will be the President of "It's My Party and I'll Cry If I Want To"

 

He'll spend 2 years pissing and moaning about Republicans unwilling to work with him. Meanwhile he goes all We Can't Wait® / Forward!® with Executive Orders on Illegal Amnesty, Global Warming Cooling Climate Change You Can Believe In, Gun Control, and everything he couldn't even pass with a Democrat controlled legislature

[Tiberius]

What the hell will he say no to? What bills will this congress pass that Obama should sign? If you are so sure he will say no, what is he saying no to?

[DC Tom]

If you are so sure he will say no, what is he saying no to?

 

Anything that crosses his desk.

 

Can you honestly imagine Obama not pocket-vetoing every single damn thing coming out of a Republican-controlled Congress?

[Tiberius]

 

 

Anything that crosses his desk.

 

Can you honestly imagine Obama not pocket-vetoing every single damn thing coming out of a Republican-controlled Congress?

 

I'm not sure they will pass much of anything. What, a war on food stamps? And won't the Democrats just block everything in the senate anyway? The Republicans don't have 60 votes. Will they do the nuclear option to get to an Obama veto? That would be so stupid

[B-Man]

 

"We'll find out who really is the party of no."

 

On "Fox News Sunday" today, Chris Wallace said to Mitt Romney, "you keep talking about breaking the gridlock — yes, a Republican Congress, House and Senate, will pass bills, but will they pass bills that the president will sign?

 

And Romney said:

Well, that's, of course, the test. And the good news is in many cases the president will sign them, [with] regards to, for instance, the economy, the president has asked for trade promotion authority. Harry Reid won't give him that authority. Republicans want him to have that authority.... With regards to health care, for instance, when Reince Priebus talks about adjusting our health care system to make ObamaCare work better....

 

And so, these kinds of changes I think you'll actually see the president sign. I'm absolutely convinced that you're going to see with a Republican-led Senate, if we're lucky enough to get that, you're going to see bills get to the president's desk, he will sign some. Some, he won't sign. No question about that,

he'll veto some, but I think at that point, we'll find out who really is the party of no

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Edited November 4, 2014 by B-Man

[Tiberius]

Trade promotion authority!! Finally!!!

 

From the mouth of Mitt!

[DC Tom]

I'm not sure they will pass much of anything. What, a war on food stamps? And won't the Democrats just block everything in the senate anyway? The Republicans don't have 60 votes. Will they do the nuclear option to get to an Obama veto? That would be so stupid

 

No, stupid was the Democrats setting the precedent for using the nuclear option.

 

Used to be, the parties would work together to compromise on legislation, and the nuclear option wasn't necessary. It's people like you with the "us vs. them" mentality that !@#$ed things up.

[Tiberius]

 

 

No, stupid was the Democrats setting the precedent for using the nuclear option.

 

Used to be, the parties would work together to compromise on legislation, and the nuclear option wasn't necessary. It's people like you with the "us vs. them" mentality that !@#$ed things up.

Yes, I thought you would misunderstand that. I meant stupid in that they shouldn't do it under a Democratic president instead of waiting for a Republican one where they can actually get their anti-abortion, anti-health care, pro-pollution or anti-birth control legislation passed and signed into law

[OCinBuffalo]

I'm going to have to disagree with you on this. Obama won't be the President of No. He will be the President of "It's My Party and I'll Cry If I Want To"

 

He'll spend 2 years pissing and moaning about Republicans unwilling to work with him. Meanwhile he goes all We Can't Wait® / Forward!® with Executive Orders on Illegal Amnesty, Global Warming Cooling Climate Change You Can Believe In, Gun Control, and everything he couldn't even pass with a Democrat controlled legislature

Could be. However, I do have to correct one thing. The term now is:

 

Climate Chaos. Much more marketable, don't you think? This way, whether it's unseasonably warm, or cold....it's CHAOS!

 

 

Don't be scared. This is just candid shot of some EPA employees at work.

 

What the hell will he say no to? What bills will this congress pass that Obama should sign? If you are so sure he will say no, what is he saying no to?

I prefer to quantify my answer: of the 300+ bills the House has passed since 2010, and the 0 Harry Reid has allowed to come to floor for a vote? I would guess that Obama will "have" to veto 80% of them "to save the country", or some such nonsense....right after an election whose intended result was to literally save the country from Obama.

Yes, I thought you would misunderstand that. I meant stupid in that they shouldn't do it under a Democratic president instead of waiting for a Republican one where they can actually get their anti-abortion, anti-health care, pro-pollution or anti-birth control legislation passed and signed into law

How's about we set aside R/D for a second and look at this objectively?

 

Obama's 2 years of unfettered power from 2009-2010 produced horrific results. Example: The Solyndra Stimulus, which Paul Krugman was against because it was too small....because Keynesian Krugman knows a non-Keynesian, green energy, VC startup fiasco when he sees one, began this clown show. Krugman wanted more, because he wanted a real Keynesin stimulus: which was not what Obama asked for/got. Krugman wanted the real thing, in addition to the unicorns and rainbows. Of course the unicorns and rainbows failed, and of course Krugman got to say "I told you so"....to the idiots who don't understand economics.

 

Thus, job #1 for the Rs that were elected in 2010, was to stop the Obama clown show. He ignored that and continued the show. He delayed Obamacare, so that he wouldn't have to face evaluation of his "signature issue" until after the 2012 election(boy, that's leadership, accountability and transparency for you! ) So, in 2012 the country once again presented him with a R House, and what amounted to a 2nd chance...largely because a bunch of Rs didn't vote for anyone. Obama won by default.

 

With that 2nd chance, instead of attacking issues like the economy, which he could have easily gotten help on from Rs, and mended fences/began building a relationship with both parties in Congress, he immediately wasted our $/time on an uber-polarizing issue: gun control. Pure idiocy. If for no other reason than it made the red state Senate Ds, who will be defeated tomorrow, instantly vulnerable. (Agan, far left/done right/put them in charge of the opposite)

 

That was sheer leadership, political or not, incompetence. And it was Obama, nobody else, who made that decision, and it was made out of petulance. It's been leadership incompetence, and unaccountability for mistakes, or worse, covering for corruption, ever since.

 

This is about results, not Ds/Rs. Obama is now approaching Jimmy Carter status, if he hasn't already passed him. The Rs are being elected to STOP OBAMA AT ALL COSTS.

 

It's not a matter of a Democratic president. This has become a matter of an Obama president, and also a matter of punishing the Democratic party for allowing itself to be highjacked by extremists that are 10x worse than the TEA party.

 

Unfortunately, after tomorrow, the only elected Democrats that will remain so: are the extremists. That can go 2 ways. They'll either destroy the party, or they will wise up, and tell some of their wingnut campaign contributors that it's time for all of them to grow up, and put an end to the magical thinking.

 

I'm betting on destroy the party. A guy like Rahm Emanuel only comes along so often. The creator of the 2006 D Congressional Wave, which was based on MODERATE Ds running for office...is about to see everything he worked so hard to design and deploy, utterly destroyed.

 

And he was right: "That's F'ing retarded".

Edited November 4, 2014 by OCinBuffalo

[Tiberius]

[q

 

I'm betting on destroy the party. A guy like Rahm Emanuel only comes along so often. The creator of the 2006 D Congressional Wave, which was based on MODERATE Ds running for office...is about to see everything he worked so hard to design and deploy, utterly destroyed.

 

 

 

Didn't George W Bush create the 2006 Democratic wave?

[OCinBuffalo]

Didn't George W Bush create the 2006 Democratic wave?

George W Bush created the opportunity, the conditions, for the Democratic wave.

 

It was Rahm Emanuel who created both the strategy, recruit moderate, reasonable people and run them on winning issues, and then executed the tactics: Iraq War opposition, environment(back when Global Warming was taken seriously), and since the economy was doing wonderfully in 2006? We could afford to spend more on "the poor". All reasonable things to say, especially to independents, given the time.

 

Almost all of Rahm Emanuel's House candidates were wiped out in 2010. All but, I think 1-2, will be gone after today. The Senate people who are vulnerable today, are the ones who rode Obama's 2008 coat tails, and who also ran Emanuel's successful gameplan from 2006. Kay Hagan(NC) and Mark Pryor(AK) are prime examples

 

You act like all this happens by magic. No, it doesn't. It happens because elite political operatives-turned candidates, like Rahm Emanuel, make it happen. Paul Ryan is like Emanuel's opposite #.

 

You want me to predict something? Paul Ryan has been saying very little publicly, and spending tons of time in poor/urban areas. I'm not talking about campaign stops. I'm talking about hard work. I'm talking about developing a real understanding of the problems of the poor. He's meeting with rehab/prison transition people in many states: Michigan, Illinois, I know for sure, and apparently lots of places.

 

My prediction: Paul Ryan is going to bring properly functioning, business-oriented poverty/education/job training legislation to the House, it will breeze through the Senate, and Obama will be forced to sign it, or again, be the President of No.

 

IF Harry Reid were to retain control of the Senate: none of that hard work--> solution would ever be voted on.

 

Hopefully you've learned something.

[B-Man]

Some takeaways from Mr. Obama's ongoing post election press conference.

 

 

He clearly still thinks the election had nothing to do with him.

 

 

He is a graceless and tiresome individual.

 

 

Two areas Mr. Obama says he and the GOP can cooperate are liberal initiatives..............he remains clueless.

 

 

Mr. Obama drones on about continuing to push his agenda that was just repudiated. I'm trying to pay attention. I'm trying real hard.

 

 

 

Mr. Obama sees state ballot initiatives as rationale for federal intervention.

GOP sees them as rationale for state ballot initiatives.

 

 

 

.

[B-Man]

You know, a smile, even a hint of self-deprecating humor - Obama would help himself a lot if he could bring himself to offer those things.....................too bad he is incapable of this

 

 

The president promises to reverse his unilateral lawmaking if Congress does what he wants

 

Charles C.W. Cooke: Obama may be willing to stop robbing people at gunpoint if they give him their stuff by choice

 

 

You don’t get to act on your own if you don’t get what you want........................ For goodness sake man.

 

 

 

 

 

.

[IDBillzFan]

Now he's getting into it with Major Garrett, and Garrett holds him to the fire.

 

Dude is losing his mind. It's like he has no idea how badly he hurt his party.

[B-Man]

James Pethokoukis: - Obama realizes this presser is being televised, right?

 

 

 

 

Jonah Goldberg That's a great sign of a new bipartisan effort -- a jab at Mitt Romney

 

 

If he seamlessly started explaining how to change the toner cartridge on a xerox machine, would anyone notice?

 

 

 

 

Matt Viser "I don’t want to try and read the tea leaves on election results," says Obama, whose job it is understand the will of voters.

 

 

 

NOTE THE DIFFERENCE:

.

President Bush, the day after 2006 midterms: "I share a large part of the responsibility" http://www.president...6.html …

Edited November 5, 2014 by B-Man

[DC Tom]

Dude is losing his mind. It's like he has no idea how badly he hurt his party.

 

I'm sure he doesn't. Failure is never his responsibility, always someone else's. He's like Hitler in 1943.

[IDBillzFan]

NOTE THE DIFFERENCE:

.

President Bush, the day after 2006 midterms: "I share a large part of the responsibility" http://www.president...6.html …

 

This was great from that speech...

 

As the majority party in the House of Representatives, they recognize that in their new role they now have greater responsibilities.

 

And in my first act of bipartisan outreach since the election, I shared with her the names of some Republican interior decorators...

(LAUGHTER)

 

... who can help her pick out the new drapes in her new offices.

[Rob's House]

Yes, I thought you would misunderstand that. I meant stupid in that they shouldn't do it under a Democratic president instead of waiting for a Republican one where they can actually get their anti-abortion, anti-health care, pro-pollution or anti-birth control legislation passed and signed into law

 

What's funny is half your base actually believes this bull ****.

[keepthefaith]

Yes, I thought you would misunderstand that. I meant stupid in that they shouldn't do it under a Democratic president instead of waiting for a Republican one where they can actually get their anti-abortion, anti-health care, pro-pollution or anti-birth control legislation passed and signed into law

 

You realize that of the 300 bills already mentioned that have stopped at Reid's desk include a number of them with Democrat support in the house, right? Obama hasn't asked Harry to move on any of them which makes Obama = to Reid in terms of obstructing them.