




The fact the repub's got the house might actually require Obama to do some working with both sides. His term could end well, even if it isn't because of Conk policy and is only because the Donks can't push any shit out of their ass that they want.GannonFan wrote: I actually like the fact that Obama is actually thinking about talking with the Republican leadership in the next few weeks. There might be a little bi-partisan in him after all. Heck, I'd just settle for a guy who actually wants to lead as opposed to the guy who was letting Congress dictate his policies over the past 2 years. Good times are ahead, Cappy, never fear!

I agree - I think the worst thing to happen for Obama was the Dems winning the super majority - it gave way too much power to entrenched Washington types like Pelosi and Reid and I think they overwhelmed a really unprepared Obama in the first few years. They just assumed the economy would turn around and they could meanwhile tackle a lot of pet causes in the meantime. I wonder what Obama would've been like had he not had the supermajority in that first year. We may have actually focused on the economy. Hopefully we get to see that now.clenz wrote:The fact the repub's got the house might actually require Obama to do some working with both sides. His term could end well, even if it isn't because of Conk policy and is only because the Donks can't push any **** out of their ass that they want.GannonFan wrote: I actually like the fact that Obama is actually thinking about talking with the Republican leadership in the next few weeks. There might be a little bi-partisan in him after all. Heck, I'd just settle for a guy who actually wants to lead as opposed to the guy who was letting Congress dictate his policies over the past 2 years. Good times are ahead, Cappy, never fear!

GannonFan wrote:Seriously, Cappy, that's just a weak effort. Only one of the photos you provided has a person who is or will be in elected office. Dick Cheyney is lining up for his 30th heart bypass surgery so he's not in power doing anything. Palin's going to keep getting airtime because people click on those stories, but she's not wielding any real power today (she may in the runup to the 2012 election), and the Nazis have been out of power for a good 70 years now and counting.
I actually like the fact that Obama is actually thinking about talking with the Republican leadership in the next few weeks. There might be a little bi-partisan in him after all. Heck, I'd just settle for a guy who actually wants to lead as opposed to the guy who was letting Congress dictate his policies over the past 2 years. Good times are ahead, Cappy, never fear!
Yes, checks and balances suck. Let's scrap Congress and the Supreme Court and let Obamessiah lead with an iron fist.Cap'n Cat wrote:GannonFan wrote:Seriously, Cappy, that's just a weak effort. Only one of the photos you provided has a person who is or will be in elected office. Dick Cheyney is lining up for his 30th heart bypass surgery so he's not in power doing anything. Palin's going to keep getting airtime because people click on those stories, but she's not wielding any real power today (she may in the runup to the 2012 election), and the Nazis have been out of power for a good 70 years now and counting.
I actually like the fact that Obama is actually thinking about talking with the Republican leadership in the next few weeks. There might be a little bi-partisan in him after all. Heck, I'd just settle for a guy who actually wants to lead as opposed to the guy who was letting Congress dictate his policies over the past 2 years. Good times are ahead, Cappy, never fear!
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
I love my country. Just hate gridlock.


ToTheLeft wrote:Yes, checks and balances suck. Let's scrap Congress and the Supreme Court and let Obamessiah lead with an iron fist.Cap'n Cat wrote:
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
I love my country. Just hate gridlock.

Don't fear the gridlock - this country has had plenty of times when parties have shared power so this isn't anything new. And plenty of good things have been done in times when parties share power. Heck, without looking, I'd wager it's better than when a single party controls everything, especially a super majority - I think both parties tend to get too giddy with power and are victims of their own devices. Depending on Obama's skill to lead and the ideas out there, this could be a good gridlock period.Cap'n Cat wrote:GannonFan wrote:Seriously, Cappy, that's just a weak effort. Only one of the photos you provided has a person who is or will be in elected office. Dick Cheyney is lining up for his 30th heart bypass surgery so he's not in power doing anything. Palin's going to keep getting airtime because people click on those stories, but she's not wielding any real power today (she may in the runup to the 2012 election), and the Nazis have been out of power for a good 70 years now and counting.
I actually like the fact that Obama is actually thinking about talking with the Republican leadership in the next few weeks. There might be a little bi-partisan in him after all. Heck, I'd just settle for a guy who actually wants to lead as opposed to the guy who was letting Congress dictate his policies over the past 2 years. Good times are ahead, Cappy, never fear!
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
I love my country. Just hate gridlock.

The first 2 years (actually, the first 21 months).GannonFan wrote:I agree - I think the worst thing to happen for Obama was the Dems winning the super majority - it gave way too much power to entrenched Washington types like Pelosi and Reid and I think they overwhelmed a really unprepared Obama in the first few years.

We need "doing", not gridlock. This isn't your father's/grandfather's world.GannonFan wrote:Don't fear the gridlock - this country has had plenty of times when parties have shared power so this isn't anything new. And plenty of good things have been done in times when parties share power. Heck, without looking, I'd wager it's better than when a single party controls everything, especially a super majority - I think both parties tend to get too giddy with power and are victims of their own devices. Depending on Obama's skill to lead and the ideas out there, this could be a good gridlock period.Cap'n Cat wrote:
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
I love my country. Just hate gridlock.

Doing for doing sake didn't get it done in the first 21 months - doing the right thing, as Spike Lee coined, is really the preference. Gridlock doesn't mean nothing gets done, it can mean that things get done after both parties have compromised enough to let something get done. I'll take that almost any day over either party's unobstructed attempts to implement their hearts desire.mainejeff wrote:We need "doing", not gridlock. This isn't your father's/grandfather's world.GannonFan wrote:
Don't fear the gridlock - this country has had plenty of times when parties have shared power so this isn't anything new. And plenty of good things have been done in times when parties share power. Heck, without looking, I'd wager it's better than when a single party controls everything, especially a super majority - I think both parties tend to get too giddy with power and are victims of their own devices. Depending on Obama's skill to lead and the ideas out there, this could be a good gridlock period.



I think the country runs better when both parties have a say, so I think the big winner on Tuesday was the nation.Cap'n Cat wrote:GannonFan wrote:Seriously, Cappy, that's just a weak effort. Only one of the photos you provided has a person who is or will be in elected office. Dick Cheyney is lining up for his 30th heart bypass surgery so he's not in power doing anything. Palin's going to keep getting airtime because people click on those stories, but she's not wielding any real power today (she may in the runup to the 2012 election), and the Nazis have been out of power for a good 70 years now and counting.
I actually like the fact that Obama is actually thinking about talking with the Republican leadership in the next few weeks. There might be a little bi-partisan in him after all. Heck, I'd just settle for a guy who actually wants to lead as opposed to the guy who was letting Congress dictate his policies over the past 2 years. Good times are ahead, Cappy, never fear!
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
I love my country. Just hate gridlock.

Compromising for the sake of compromising is as bad as doing for the sake of doing.GannonFan wrote:Doing for doing sake didn't get it done in the first 21 months - doing the right thing, as Spike Lee coined, is really the preference. Gridlock doesn't mean nothing gets done, it can mean that things get done after both parties have compromised enough to let something get done. I'll take that almost any day over either party's unobstructed attempts to implement their hearts desire.mainejeff wrote:
We need "doing", not gridlock. This isn't your father's/grandfather's world.

That's just nonsense. I'd almost always take a bipartisan plan that is stripped of the bad elements from both sides rather than take a single party solution that is unfiltered and still has a bunch of crap in it. Sure, we could end up with bipartisan garbage like we had with so much of the Bush years, and that may not be any better than the Dem garbage we had for the last two years, but at least with the compromise option there's a chance that the garbage can be removed. No chance of the garbage being removed when only one party runs the show.mainejeff wrote:Compromising for the sake of compromising is as bad as doing for the sake of doing.GannonFan wrote:
Doing for doing sake didn't get it done in the first 21 months - doing the right thing, as Spike Lee coined, is really the preference. Gridlock doesn't mean nothing gets done, it can mean that things get done after both parties have compromised enough to let something get done. I'll take that almost any day over either party's unobstructed attempts to implement their hearts desire.



89Hen wrote:Jeff, let the grown ups handle this. Don't you have a Chucky Cheese to go picket?
![]()
![]()

STFU breeder.89Hen wrote:Jeff, let the grown ups handle this. Don't you have a Chucky Cheese to go picket?
![]()
![]()

Both of us are filling our roles nicely. Me bringing children into the world and teaching them to be valuable members of our society, and you not bringing anything into this world and keeping your grumpy, bigoted, black heart to yourself. Keep up the good work.mainejeff wrote:STFU breeder.


89Hen wrote:Both of us are filling our roles nicely. Me bringing children into the world and teaching them to be valuable members of our society, and you not bringing anything into this world and keeping your grumpy, bigoted, black heart to yourself. Keep up the good work.mainejeff wrote:STFU breeder.

Yes, we are both doing our jobs.........You adding to our tax burden and me supporting your rug rats without adding to our tax burden.89Hen wrote:Both of us are filling our roles nicely. Me bringing children into the world and teaching them to be valuable members of our society, and you not bringing anything into this world and keeping your grumpy, bigoted, black heart to yourself. Keep up the good work.mainejeff wrote:STFU breeder.

Cap'n Cat wrote:This, from a deep, dark, racist Catholic, too!!
How fvcking rich!


The problem is, my post was 100% correct. Your's is only 33% correct. It is true that you aren't adding to our tax burden, but that's where the truth ends.mainejeff wrote:Yes, we are both doing our jobs.........You adding to our tax burden and me supporting your rug rats without adding to our tax burden.![]()


89Hen wrote:Cap'n Cat wrote:This, from a deep, dark, racist Catholic, too!!
How fvcking rich!
It really pains you that Catholics are probably the LEAST racist group on the planet.