«   |   »

Obama Calls Out The GOP For Their Obstructionism

by Ben Hoffman

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Saturday pinned blame on Republicans for making life harder for the unemployed and for those who could lose their jobs without new federal intervention. He did so even as he sought to distance himself from the “dreary and familiar politics” of Washington.

His main concern was the rejection of a bill in the Senate that would have provided more money for the long-term unemployed, aid for strapped state governments and the renewal of popular tax breaks for businesses and individuals.

“If this obstruction continues, unemployed Americans will see their benefits stop,” Obama said. “Teachers and firefighters will lose their jobs. Families will pay more for their first home. All we ask for is a simple up or down vote. That’s what the American people deserve.”

The broad economic bill failed Thursday when Democrats could not muster the 60 votes needed to end debate. The 56-40 vote fell four shy of the total required to break the GOP filibuster. Republicans support many of the policies in the legislation but are demanding changes to shrink its toll on the deficit.

“We have an obligation to care for the next generation,” Obama said. “So I hope that when Congress returns next week, they do so with a greater spirit of compromise and cooperation. America will be watching.”

And Obama also said Republicans are the ones at fault for preventing votes on his nominees to key positions in the government. Former President George W. Bush often had the same complaint about Democratic lawmakers.

Read more…

Democrats didn’t block Bush’s nominees just for the hell of it; they blocked the nominees because they were radical choices. Republicans are blocking Obama’s administration just because they can, and that’s anti-American.

Posted on June 19, 2010 at 1:34 PM in Economy, Education, On This Day, Opinion, Politics   |  RSS feed |   Reply   |   Trackback URL

10 Comments to “Obama Calls Out The GOP For Their Obstructionism”

    
  1. Alan Scott
    June 19, 2010 at 6:24 PM

    Mr. Hoffman,

    ” Democrats didn’t block Bush’s nominees just for the hell of it; they blocked the nominees because they were radical choices. Republicans are blocking Obama’s administration just because they can, and that’s anti-American. ”

    You know, that gets funnier every time I read it . 🙂

    Reply
    • The_Conservative_Lie
      June 19, 2010 at 9:02 PM

      Alan,
      The proof is in the records. In this session of congress alone, the republican caucus has set many records, none of them to be proud of, all of them obstructionist in nature.
      Democrats are, and have been in recent history, much more likely to act in a bi-partisan manner. Many (most) Republicans seem to act in the best interests of the party over that of the nation.
      Look at the reaction to Republican Mitch Daniels mere suggestion that a truce be called on some divisive social issues until we dig ourselves out of this hole we are in.
      So, when you say you find Ben’s remarks funnier every time you read them, I have to wonder if it is because you find it ludicrous and therefore amusing, or because you know it is true and poking a stick in the eye of Democrats (and thereby the public) is amusing to you, as it seems to be to so many on the right these days. (How’s that for a run-on sentence?)

      Reply
  2. Gracie
    June 19, 2010 at 8:44 PM

    It’s typical of the Republicans – they constantly vote against any legislation that might possibly help the people.

    Reply
  3. Alan Scott
    June 20, 2010 at 11:34 AM

    The Conservative Lie,

    You know just like you guys or rather your guys who condemned the Arizona law without reading it, I confess that I have not bothered to check the current record of what my party is doing to your party in Congress.

    As you and yours would say about us, I don’t have to . I know how much crap you guys pulled while Bush was in. To now have you and Obama The Great complain about Partisanship is way too comical. Besides, you have a strangle hold on the country, like we never had. Why beech about us? Just do your underhanded deals like you did to get Obamacare.

    But let me give you an example of what your guys did for the good of your party and screw the United States of America. You do realize that sometime soon, the greatest Ponzi Scheme in the history of civilization will collapse. Social Security.

    Now unlike Bernie Maddoff’s scheme, this is a surprise to no one. Unlike the Fannie and Freddie caused Banking collapse, you can see this locomotive bearing down to crush all of us, from a hundred miles away.

    You guys know that the easiest way to build power is to scare Grandma and Grandpa in to thinking Republicans are going to lose their SS checks in the evil stock market. That is what you guys did to kill Bush’s SS reforms.

    Now go ahead and prove me wrong. 😦

    Reply
    • The_Conservative_Lie
      June 21, 2010 at 12:27 PM

      Well, if you did check the record, you would see, that despite some opposition to Bush and Repub congress during his administration, the dems did NOT block nominations in an unprecidented or even uncommon amount. Nor did they block legislation in the manner the republicans have this session. Further, your point about a “stranglehold” further proves my point in that the dems were in a better position to effectively block legislation and nominations had they been of a mind to.

      Also, I’m sure glad my SS monies were not in the stock market during the last two years. Clinton left office with a surplus in the social security trust fund budgets (though having borrowed from it to balance the budget) had those funds been left alone and not raided the moment republicans took over congress in 96, and then to a much higher degree once they took the WH, then SS would be in no danger whatsoever. IN fact, when Bush the Lesser began trying to reform SS by scaring old folks, most economists disagreed with him and stated that SS was in no immenent danger, IF, and it’s a big IF, he and congress stopped raiding it. Now, it’s screwed. Thanks for that.

      Reply
  4. Alan Scott
    June 21, 2010 at 3:34 PM

    The Conservative Lie,

    ” Also, I’m sure glad my SS monies were not in the stock market during the last two years. ”

    I have no idea what age you are or were in 2001. First off, Son,,,,some facts. The old people could not invest in the Stock Market. It was for the young and even they could only control 5%, which did not have to go into equities. But believe it or not, Son if you have a 40 year horizon, the Stock Market, with it’s crashes is many times better than leaving your money in a PONZI scheme where Democrats have the key to Al Gore’s Lock Box.

    ” IN fact, when Bush the Lesser began trying to reform SS by scaring old folks, most economists disagreed with him and stated that SS was in no immenent danger, IF, and it’s a big IF, he and congress stopped raiding it. Now, it’s screwed. Thanks for that. ”

    Here’s a clue Son, those Economists, wherever you Spendocrats dug them up, were lying their a$$es off.

    Anyone who can walk and chew gum knows that the Demographics leave us with $Trillions (that’s with a T) in ” unfunded liabilities ” . Those are big words and scary words . Google them, you might learn something, Son. They also refer to State pension liabilities, which are also in the $Trillions thanks to “your” good buddies at SEIU.

    Reply
  5. Alan Scott
    June 21, 2010 at 7:14 PM

    Mr. Hoffman,

    ” Ha! Take the emotional content and lies out of your arguments and you have nothing left. ”

    You are right, I do get emotional when people get simple facts wrong. Like, not knowing that SS’s troubles are Demographic. Duh! That piling on debt on top of debt, and getting nothing for it, as your guy has done for a year and a half is imbecilic.

    As usual you do not dispute my points. You merely denigrate what I say. Then again, you never could keep up with me.

    🙂

    Reply
    • The_Conservative_Lie
      June 21, 2010 at 7:35 PM

      No, you don’t know how old I am, so you can quit wth the “Son” business.
      Further, my facts are not wrong. The information is available for you to read. The economists were, by and large, all of them not on the payroll of Faux news as analysts. SS was NOT in trouble when bush took over, plain and simple, despite what his administration tried to sell us.

      And as for getting nothing for the stimulus, all economic indicators are up. I suppose that is to Bush’s credit? I’d say Ben is right.

      Reply
  6. pino
    June 21, 2010 at 9:03 PM

    His main concern was the rejection of a bill in the Senate that would have provided more money for the long-term unemployed

    You understand he’s talking about people who haven’t worked in, like, TWO EFFIN YEARS right?

    aid for strapped state governments

    THAT’S what I wanna do! Reward California, New York, New Jersey and all the rest for their wasteful spending. Listen, if YOU wanna contribute to those States, cut a check to New York. Leave me out.

    “If this obstruction continues, unemployed Americans will see their benefits stop,”

    That’s a bad thing?

    “Teachers and firefighters will lose their jobs.

    Right. Cause that’s what I do too. When faced with my home budget lookin’ grim for the month, I list all the things I spend money on, rank them from most important to least important. Then, I cut out the MOST IMPORTANT THINGS? Serious?

    Who thinks like this?

    Families will pay more for their first home.

    Right. Cause the LAST time the Leftists in charge made housing affordable to people who couldn’t afford housing, it worked out really really well!

    Reply
    

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: