Is the Republican party just Anti-Obama no matter any bipartisanship?

[colourwheel]

President Obamas administration drafted legislation this month that could give undocumented immigrants a pathway to citizenship in eight years, require employers to check workers immigration status and increase penalties for those who break immigration law.

The legislative purposal closely resemble many of the reforms advanced in 2011 by Obama and, more recently, by Republican Florida Senator Marco Rubio.

As an example both Rubio and Obama support special pathways to residency for those students and soldiers who were brought illegally to this country as children.

President Obamas immigration proposal was leaked to the press and now Marco Rubio reacted with this to say, "President Obamas leaked immigration proposal is disappointing to those of us working on a serious solution." and he goes on saying that the porposal will be dead on arrival if brought to the senate or house.

Further more recently on the other side of the Republican party (since the party is very divided), karl rove was asked a question at a conference if he thought Hillary Clinton would have been a better president than Obama. In his responce he went on to paising Hillary as a good public servant all the way back to being the 1st lady!?!? avoiding any high praising to her current accomplishments in the Obama administration as Secretary of State and very little note for her service as a democratic senator.

Further more The recent Secretary of Defense appointment of Chuck Hage (a Republican). His confirmation was Bombshelled and filibustered by the Republican senate based only on personal grudges and clashing policy views for a non-political job!?!?! Would hate to be the senator to go down in history for filibustering a cabnet appointment for non-credible reasons...

It can be argued the Republican party is just very ill tempered towards Obama no matter any bipartisanship as well as Anti-Obama anything from the republican side being an underlining racial disapproval to satisfy radical republican caucus and constituents.

It can also be argued it's a larger plan on the Obama administrations part as political statagy to systematically and internally destroy the GOP's chance of gaining any more seats in the house in next cycle by making their party seem in a state of disarray to exactly show how foolish being the party of "no" can be. As it was very evident in Obama's 1st term the GOP's main goal was to throw Obama out of office no matter their own party's political cost by going against their own policies that they originally supported when known Obama agrees with them.

I guess I am just very confused... Obama is basically a lame duck now and has no worry for re-election. Even if Obama gets nothing done in his last term He will still go down in history as one of the greatest pressidents in modern history as well as putting the mark in history as the 1st African American President.

My question is why do you think the republican party still so defiant towards anything Obama puts his hands on, no matter how bipartisan the ideas are still? The only real thing this can accomplish is to energizer the partys' base but turn the heads of voters and support the republican party desperately needs to win future election cycles.

Edited February 19, 2013 by colourwheel

[Tamujiin]

Quite frankly, he is right, and trying to make a change for the better in this country. Republicans are the decay of western society now. They cry and moan about ANYTHING and everything. I would like to see them get on bored with the program for a change, and start thinking about the country and not lining they're pockets with money.

 

The dealio here is, if say "this republican" senator, has his money invested in say, a company that employs, illegal aliens, if they create an avenue for them to get a REAL job, and/or advance to citizenship, it creates 2 problems.

 

1. We are gonna get an influx of illegal aliens, exspecially if all they need to do is apply for legal status, that means less jobs for citizens. No matter the security measures put on this. There is always loop holes for people to exploit. Here is where i agree with conservative thinking. Our jobs within our borders should, by all means go to legal citizens.

 

2. Undoubtfully true, and mind my spelling its early in the morning and i just woke up.... These politicians have there money tied up somewhere, whether democratic, or republican, in an operation, that can somewhere be tied to illegal aliens. So your gonna get

A. The guy that wants them to become legal citizens...

B. They Guy that doesnt want it, because he fears he loses money, due to the fact he needs to increase his workerss wage, at least from 1.00 an hour, to minimum wage.

 

There is always an underlying context, politicians will not divuldge. I think this is the one in this case, where the argument begins with this type of reform. So basically what i am saying is, Obama is trying to do the right thing "maybe". And his opposition to this is trying to not lose a bunch of money.

[colourwheel]

Tamujiin, on 19 Feb 2013 - 05:30, said:

Quite frankly, he is right, and trying to make a change for the better in this country. Republicans are the decay of western society now. They cry and moan about ANYTHING and everything. I would like to see them get on bored with the program for a change, and start thinking about the country and not lining they're pockets with money.

 

The dealio here is, if say "this republican" senator, has his money invested in say, a company that employs, illegal aliens, if they create an avenue for them to get a REAL job, and/or advance to citizenship, it creates 2 problems.

 

1. We are gonna get an influx of illegal aliens, exspecially if all they need to do is apply for legal status, that means less jobs for citizens. No matter the security measures put on this. There is always loop holes for people to exploit. Here is where i agree with conservative thinking. Our jobs within our borders should, by all means go to legal citizens.

 

2. Undoubtfully true, and mind my spelling its early in the morning and i just woke up.... These politicians have there money tied up somewhere, whether democratic, or republican, in an operation, that can somewhere be tied to illegal aliens. So your gonna get

A. The guy that wants them to become legal citizens...

B. They Guy that doesnt want it, because he fears he loses money, due to the fact he needs to increase his workerss wage, at least from 1.00 an hour, to minimum wage.

 

There is always an underlying context, politicians will not divuldge. I think this is the one in this case, where the argument begins with this type of reform. So basically what i am saying is, Obama is trying to do the right thing "maybe". And his opposition to this is trying to not lose a bunch of money.

I understand what you think on the issue of immigration, but what exactly does this point out about republicans always saying "no" to anything and everything Obama still puts his hands on?

 

Trying to denying a cabnet member which shouldn't be a political issue to begin with and filibustering for non-credible reasons....

 

Karl Rove Praising Hillary Clinton as probably being a better president than Obama mainly based on just her experience being the 1st lady in the 90's....

 

I could go on with more examples and I agree with you on the iimmigration issue but your post really doesnt address the full topic issue here...

Edited February 19, 2013 by colourwheel

[Tamujiin]

Well to address the entire issue why republicans do what they do, its because they... just do. Trying to explain that is the fricken key to evrything. If we could literally EXPLAIN that. We would not have politicians anymore. ( jk ) :biggrin:

Basically what i said, is its all about money, and 2 different ways of looking at it. In any two party system, your always going to have opposition. Karl Rove is an idiot. Then you get these "personal grudges" going on. Trying to explain why someone says no to everything the president does, is basically simple i guess. Its all about the money. [/size]

The thing you have to remember about this country is, a majority of the "politicians" are the ones in control of the money.

 

When it comes to this:

 

"It can also be argued it's a larger plan on the Obama administrations part as political statagy to systematically and internally destroy the GOP's chance of gaining any more seats in the house in next cycle by making their party seem in a state of disarray to exactly show how foolish being the party of "no" can be. As it was very evident in Obama's 1st term the GOP's main goal was to throw Obama out of office no matter their own party's political cost by going against their own policies that they originally supported when known Obama agrees with them."

 

Your probably right on the button. And i personal would see the reason WHY he is doing this.

 

Historically, republicans are WAR MONGERS. All i should need to say here is George W. bush, IRAQ, WMD. North Korea, Syria, Iran..... Maybe Obama is trying to buy us time before the REAL crapola hits the fan blades. ( thats just my special paranoid way of thinking there :D )

 

You said this colour.... " I guess i am just very confused". Well that makes you, and about the rest of the world. :P

[JimboUK]

I doubt the people who voted Republican did so in the hope they'd support Obama, as for them being partisan, pot and kettles spring to mind.

[colourwheel]

I doubt the people who voted Republican did so in the hope they'd support Obama, as for them being partisan, pot and kettles spring to mind.

 

Even on republican policies that Obama supports? What I see happening in washington right now seems more like a political trap for the GOP. Obama is not stupid, he knows what the republican party tried to do to him last term. Just saying seem what the republicans are doing right now does not seem like its helping their party out at all. If the republicans in office keep being anti-obama no matter what I see the next election cycle leading to more house seats lost in the GOP... The saying goes "losing national elections have a political cost" and the republican party is trying to use political capital they never had to begin with even after a huge defeat last election...

 

The birther and truther movement has no point anymore... The republican base is shrinking, the republican party is internally divided, and the Tea party is almost dead. What purpose does the Republican party have if all they plan to do is debunk anything and everything Obama has planned for the good of the "country" when he does not have to worry anymore for his legacy to live on because he is now a lame duck?

Edited February 19, 2013 by colourwheel

[JimboUK]

The Democrats didn't get a mandate to govern alone, the American people didn't grant them that. If the Republicans want to play silly buggers then that's their business, if the American people aren't impressed they'll pay a price for that. As a Democrat you should be happy the opposition are busy shooting themselves in the foot, we have a government who do it on a daily basis and they will ultimately suffer for it.

 

 

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake. -Napoleon Bonaparte

:-)

[colourwheel]

The Democrats didn't get a mandate to govern alone, the American people didn't grant them that. If the Republicans want to play silly buggers then that's their business, if the American people aren't impressed they'll pay a price for that. As a Democrat you should be happy the opposition are busy shooting themselves in the foot, we have a government who do it on a daily basis and they will ultimately suffer for it.

 

 

 

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake. -Napoleon Bonaparte

:-)

I see your point yet was never suggesting Democrats get a mandate to govern alone. But this does not give The republicans a mandate to stop government either.

 

I believe in a two party system yet fail to see why the Republican are still up to the same plans of putting government at a stand still.

 

I am glad the Democrates are unified as a party. But even being a democrate I wish the Republican party was unified too but wish they were more like the party post 2000.

Edited February 19, 2013 by colourwheel

[HeyYou]

I am not so sure it is so much "anti-Obama", as it is "anti-democrat" policy. If a dem suggests it, republicans hate it. Even when it is a suggestion that was originally brought up by a republican at some point in the past. They are still pissed about getting seriously spanked in the 2012 elections.... and are taking it out on anyone is sight. Trouble is, its the american people that pay the final price. The politicians will still be rich, sitting in the cat-bird seat when they lose their next election, but, we the people, get stuck with a non-functional government. (although, one could easily argue it has been non-functional for far longer than Obama's terms.....)

[kvnchrist]

Personal, I get very tired of the partisan politics, the political wrangling and above all those people who simply refuse to give leaders of their own side the same scrutiny as those on the other side. Frankly, the lack of scrutiny of one's own leaders gives these people the room to slither around and do backdoor deals that most likely is the reason for half the legislation that gets opposed.

 

Do you guys really think that each and every bit and piece of legislation is all about what the name of the legislation describes? Please don't tell me that this and that senator doesn't add a few million dollars of pork onto these bills for this and that project, until it's too much even for it's sponsors to support. Politics has always been about perception. The spin meisters and the damage control specialists are all over the place, tweaking and sheering up anything that happens in Washington and there is the fact that that either side of this manure fight doesn't want anything that would make the other side look good.

 

President Obama is just as much of an ideologue as George Bush was an idiot. Both sides are so sure of their aims and ideals that they see any opposition to them as being Evil. I think the term the spin doctors are using these days is, "Out of step with The American People." which is ludicrous. These people have pollsters that actively search for ways of wording the polls they take so that they can say "The America Public" is behind them .

 

I don't really think that either side is entirely for the American people, since the interests of either party is to be re-elected and look as good in their mud wrestling clothes as humanly possible in the time between elections. Their policies are formulated to turn America in the direction they envision and to help those contributors who have been most financially supportive of their causes. This doesn't mean that these supporters are in it to aid the rest of the public and for either side not to add this calculation to the sum and total of their appraisal of either side is dangerous to the very ideal of democracy.

 

I would continue, but I have several cats that simply refuse to be ignored and are slow walking across the screen, my keyboard and my lap with that motor running at premium pur mode. I think they have a whim that want me to pander to and are passively resisting me doing anything further until I fulfill them. In fact I'm having to look around a jet black furry tail to type the remainder of this while it's owner lays across the keyboard of my laptop and attacks my fingers as they strik=e- -jnnmjkui567548u9it. See what I mean. I'll get back with you.