Dream Act passage in a lame duck session? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 25, 2024, 08:16:36 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Dream Act passage in a lame duck session? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Dream Act passage in a lame duck session?  (Read 7243 times)
TheDeadFlagBlues
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,987
Canada
« on: November 19, 2010, 12:26:52 PM »

All Obama has done since taking office is reaching out towards Republicans. Remember the debates over the stimulus? It should have had bipartisan support. Republican leaders should have stood up in support of the bill so that the country could have a united fiscal response against the economic situation plaguing the nation. They could have made any further economic stimuli more in line with their ideology. Butterfiles, sugar and bunnies would spring forth from the earth and a new era of bi-partisanship would reign in Washington forever thanks to Moderate Hero Obama!

Oh wait, this would be an awful strategy for the Republican Party. Why would they endorse long term economic strategies when the economic strategies could ultimately be blamed for the state of the economy and they could have a tremendous rebirth of their party thanks to this without making difficult policy decisions or ideological reversals? This goes for all economic policy. Because they distanced themselves as far away as possible from anything coming from Obama's mouth, even if it was only tax cuts for small businesses, they reaped the benefits. The Obama administration should have seen this coming. These people have no scruples and never will...

Why is bi-partisanship even placed on a pedestal anymore? This is a serious question. As has been said before, the role of the opposition is to oppose. As much as I find this to be unconstructive, it's a truth that certain political leaders need to understand.
Logged
TheDeadFlagBlues
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,987
Canada
« Reply #1 on: November 19, 2010, 12:59:40 PM »

All Obama has done since taking office is reaching out towards Republicans. Remember the debates over the stimulus? It should have had bipartisan support. Republican leaders should have stood up in support of the bill so that the country could have a united fiscal response against the economic situation plaguing the nation. They could have made any further economic stimuli more in line with their ideology. Butterfiles, sugar and bunnies would spring forth from the earth and a new era of bi-partisanship would reign in Washington forever thanks to Moderate Hero Obama!

Oh wait, this would be an awful strategy for the Republican Party. Why would they endorse long term economic strategies when the economic strategies could ultimately be blamed for the state of the economy and they could have a tremendous rebirth of their party thanks to this without making difficult policy decisions or ideological reversals? This goes for all economic policy. Because they distanced themselves as far away as possible from anything coming from Obama's mouth, even if it was only tax cuts for small businesses, they reaped the benefits. The Obama administration should have seen this coming. These people have no scruples and never will...

Why is bi-partisanship even placed on a pedestal anymore? This is a serious question. As has been said before, the role of the opposition is to oppose. As much as I find this to be unconstructive, it's a truth that certain political leaders need to understand.

Well first off, the stimulus bill was never going to gain meaningful pub support, even though they spent like drunken sailors during the Bush time......

Bi-partisanship?  I agree......hogwash.  Was W bi-partisan when he rammed it up the Dems ass hard and heavy toward the end of his presidency?  He said all the right words but hell no.....

Reaching out isn't always reaching out......

Yeah the first paragraph was sarcasm. I don't actually believe that it would be a smart political strategy for the Republicans to back the stimulus. It might be better for the country but that's entirely different.
Logged
TheDeadFlagBlues
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,987
Canada
« Reply #2 on: November 19, 2010, 01:26:16 PM »

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

The majority of the stimulus that would have directly affected anyone was done through middle class tax credits. Supposedly lower taxes was once a part of the Republican's ideology, but I guess as you said partisan obstructionism is more important to their long term electoral success. I haven't read the bill in a while, but there was something like $300 Billion dollars worth of tax benefits in it.

There was a lot of pork in it as well.

Agreed. I still think that what happened after the stimulus was a fluke. The Democrats continued to try and push jobs bills that would win over their support. I guess Scott Brown is responsible because they could just filibuster anything that contained too much spending but if the Democrats actually had strategies that made sense, after the Republican unwillingness to respond to their outreach, their continued stimulus proposals should have been filled with infrastructure spending, urban improvements and new energy grid systems. Instead of realizing that continued bi-partisan outreach was futile they made the same mistake over and over and over again. It's sad.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 12 queries.