Obama schedules joint session job speech at same time as GOP Debate.

[Franzl]

I am amazed this is actually an issue.

America...

[Bacon King]

This reminds me of this.

[Reaganfan]

Classless

I love the GOP.  Lying about WMDs is okay, but a scheduling conflict is where you have to draw the line.

A lie isn't a lie if you can't prove it was a lie. It's not like Bush said, "I told the American people blah blah blah....I lied....indeed they didn't have weapons."

Now Clinton on the other hand straightly admitted to a lie. Whether personal or not, that is a confirmed lie, not allegations of trickery into going to war.

I'm just so glad Obama is President...can you imagine how democrats would be slicing up President McCain at this point?

[J. J.]

Haha, I love it (aside from it interrupting Football)! The President makes a really classless move, gets called out and told to reverse the decision and does just that! Can we just tell him not to run for re-election while we're at it? Wait. Scratch that. He's making it easy for us.

To use TR's words about William McKinley, this guy has the backbone of a chocolate eclair (no pun intended).

It isn't backbone; it is separation of powers.

The President, any president, does not get to call joint sessions.  He can request them, but it is up to each body to invite the President and schedule the session.  The President does not get to order the other branches of government around.

This is something where someone in the White House screwed up and didn't follow protocol or think about constitutional principles before sending out a press release.  Obama retreated, but he was right to retreat, because he was in an indefensible position.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

[J. J.]

I'm just so glad Obama is President...can you imagine how democrats would be slicing up President McCain at this point?

If it was a President McCain, I'd be saying the same thing.  Hopefully, a President McCain, who was in Congress longer than Obama, would not have made such a mistake.

[Torie]

Boehner's office should tape every conversation with the White House. Now the WH says that they pre-cleared the Wednesday date with this office, and his office denies it. Somebody is "spinning." This has happened before, including inter alia just who it was that caused negotiations over the grand compromise to collapse. The truth on that is probably neither man had enough control over his party's caucus, and both had to pull back. But no, no, we can't admit that can we?

In other news, all's well that ends well. The publicity will bump up the audience for the GOP debate, and I don't watch football much anyway.

[Paul Kemp]

Boehner's office should tape every conversation with the White House. Now the WH says that they pre-cleared the Wednesday date with this office, and his office denies it. Somebody is "spinning."

What makes you so sure it's not the other side that's doing the spinning?

[Torie]

Boehner's office should tape every conversation with the White House. Now the WH says that they pre-cleared the Wednesday date with this office, and his office denies it. Somebody is "spinning."

What makes you so sure it's not the other side that's doing the spinning?

I don't know who is spinning. Maybe both sides are. What I do know is that these disparate stories about this and that seem to be getting habitual, and it just feeds the fire that DC is dysfunctional.

[Bull Moose Base]

There's no known precedent for a president's request to put a speech on the calendar to be denied and Boehner's camp didn't initially raise any objections to the timing (until heckled into it by Rush Limbaugh).  The only reason for Obama to think it was an open question is that he's dealing with the most obstructionist opposition to a president in history, which arguably he should have factored in before going to the press.  Anyway, the GOP debate would have had a bigger audience if they followed Obama.  Not that Boehner actually cares about GOP debates.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2011/05/06/boehner_skipped_gop_debate.html

[Torie]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That is the WH side of the story.  Boehner's office says no, the WH just set the date unilaterally without advance discussion. Dems are annoyed about the lack of notice too actually. Fun, fun.

[J. J.]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That is the WH side of the story.  Boehner's office says no, the WH just set the date unilaterally without advance discussion. Dems are annoyed about the lack of notice too actually. Fun, fun.

Generally, the invitation comes first, then the White House speaks.  That didn't happen.

[Bull Moose Base]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That is the WH side of the story.  Boehner's office says no, the WH just set the date unilaterally without advance discussion. Dems are annoyed about the lack of notice too actually. Fun, fun.

Generally, the invitation comes first, then the White House speaks.  That didn't happen.

Like engraved "Mr. and Mrs. John Boehner Sr request your presence" invitations?  You're saying there's no precedent for the president saying "I want to address congress on this date."?  I haven't heard anyone besides Boehner say what Obama did was unusual while House and Senate historians have called Boehner's rejection unprecedented.  Boehner's camp isn't even denying that they raised no objections when called about the date.

I think the new timing is better for Obama than his requested one anyway.

[Torie]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sigh.

From Politico:

WH claim: Before Obama backed down Wednesday night, each side accused the other of bad faith, bad taste and bad command of the facts.

Senior White House officials, responding to Boehner’s letter under cloak of anonymity, told POLITICO the speaker had essentially signed off on the 8 p.m., Sept. 7 slot before they went public.

“[The] date and time were cleared with the speaker’s office this morning, before the letter went out,” an Obama aide said.

Boehner office denial: A Boehner spokesman went on the record to deny the claim. “No one in the Speaker’s office — not the Speaker, not any staff — signed off on the date the White House announced today,” Boehner press secretary Brendan Buck wrote in an email. “Unfortunately we weren’t even asked if that date worked for the House. Shortly before it arrived this morning, we were simply informed that a letter was coming. It’s unfortunate the White House ignored decades — if not centuries — of the protocol of working out a mutually agreeable date and time before making any public announcement."

[J. J.]

Like engraved "Mr. and Mrs. John Boehner Sr request your presence" invitations?  You're saying there's no precedent for the president saying "I want to address congress on this date."?  I haven't heard anyone besides Boehner say what Obama did was unusual while House and Senate historians have called Boehner's rejection unprecedented.  Boehner's camp isn't even denying that they raised no objections when called about the date.

I think the new timing is better for Obama than his requested one anyway.

As far as I know, there is an invitation, by letter, send by the House and Senate for anyone to address a joint session.  I actually posted the link stating that, and there is an invitation sent, even for the SOTU.  There were some question on if one should have been sent to Clinton in 1999.

Congress passes a joint resolution first, and then invites the person delivering the address:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_session_of_the_United_States_Congress

While I'll stop short of complaining that the Obama thinks of himself as a monarch, and that this emperor has no clothes, at the least someone at the White House screwed up.

It was like Al Haig saying, "I'm in charge, here, at the White House," and quickly getting a call from Tip O'Neil saying, "No, you're not."

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Boehner office denial: A Boehner spokesman went on the record to deny the claim. “No one in the Speaker’s office — not the Speaker, not any staff — signed off on the date the White House announced today,” Boehner press secretary Brendan Buck wrote in an email. “Unfortunately we weren’t even asked if that date worked for the House. Shortly before it arrived this morning, we were simply informed that a letter was coming...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4kxlY2_nqo

[Paul Kemp]

I've always felt that joint sessions of congress should be saved for SotU and monumental occasions, like Pearl Harbor or 9/11. I'd rather policy speeches be given from the Oval Office.

[DrScholl]

At some point he needs to tell the Republican Party where they should go.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

At some point he needs to tell the Republican Party where the should go.

in front of and modifying a noun?

[J. J.]

At some point he needs to tell the Republican Party where the should go.

Well, he doesn't have to let them into the Oval Office, at least for the next 14 months.

[krazen1211]

This is what's most baffling to me. Just do an address from the Oval and avoid the whole damn controversy.

That would have been much smarter for sure. Nobody cares when a blabbermouth blabs too much when he's blabbing on his own time.

[DrScholl]

At some point he needs to tell the Republican Party where the should go.

in front of and modifying a noun?

I'll spell it out for you. They can go straight to hell.

Well, he doesn't have to let them into the Oval Office, at least for the next 14 months.

Don't count your chickens. The election is a year away, we all know measuring drapes too early can end up making you look stupid.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

I've always felt that joint sessions of congress should be saved for SotU and monumental occasions, like Pearl Harbor or 9/11. I'd rather policy speeches be given from the Oval Office.

The lack of jobs and the economy in general is a monumental problem.......I think it counts.

[J. J.]

At some point he needs to tell the Republican Party where the should go.

in front of and modifying a noun?

I'll spell it out for you. They can go straight to hell.

Well, he doesn't have to let them into the Oval Office, at least for the next 14 months.

Don't count your chickens. The election is a year away, we all know measuring drapes too early can end up making you look stupid.

What part of "at least" don't you understand?  Or do you think Obama will be both President for life and immortal? 

[DrScholl]

What part of "at least" don't you understand?  Or do you think Obama will be both President for life and immortal?  

Talk about twisting words, I never said that. Around here, you can never tell who is overconfident about Republican chances, they seem to think things are guaranteed sometimes.