Petty political posturingPosted Wednesday, September 7, 2011, at 8:35 AM
It was a perfect example of how petty our politics have become in this country.
The president wanted to address a joint session of Congress, normally a rare thing and therefore a big deal, to lay out his proposed jobs program for the country -- which potentially could be a very big deal (although we'll hold our judgement until we actually hear it). The Speaker of the House said, "No, not the night you want to do it." See, the president wanted to give his speech tonight, which would have overridden the Republican candidate forum. It was petty of him to ask for that night, which had been scheduled well in advance, and smelled of gamesmanship. Boehner's response appeared equally petty and smelled of gamesmanship every bit as much. He gave some vague excuse about being unable to arrange security that quickly (are you kidding us?!) but really it was equally about politics. He didn't want the Republican message being tainted by the president's response. So he suggested the president speak tomorrow night, putting him up against the opening of the NFL football season. Realistically, at this point in time, let's see a show of hands for how many people would rather watch football than listen to politicians jockeying for position next fall? We only wish there were a football game on tonight (heck, even ice dancing would be preferable to listening to a dozen candidates spouting spurious campaign promises). What's worse, is that neither of these events, tonight's GOP forum or Thursday's presidential speech, are likely to do anything for this country now. Because it's obvious that "now" isn't important to either political party. Both are playing for position for the general elections next fall. Neither side seems willing to compromise and both are hoping the other party will get hammered next fall, allowing one side or the other to run roughshod over the other. Before next fall, we'd be astonished to see either side make a move to break the deadlock. So until the next "new" Congress meets, 18 months from now, we can all expect much of what we've got now -- and nothing better. Because it's become clear, it's all about petty political positioning right now. Comments Showing comments in chronological order [Show most recent comments first] |
Meanderings of the Managing Editor  - Archives - Blog RSS feed ![[Feed icon]](http://www.mountainhomenews.com/images/icons/feed-icon-14x14.png){kind=icon} - Comments RSS feed - Login Hot topics Yet more jobs for robots(2 ~ 12:18 PM, Mar 21)
We're probably safe
Does GOP need *every* seat?
More funds for education needed
Beware of 'victory disease'
|
Email link
Read comments (59)
Blog archive
Football! And I don't watch football either
WOW Kelly you actually did a blog WITHOUT attempting to bash the Tea Party..... Are you sure you don't want to somehow tie in the Tea Party to this?
Those evil people must have done something wrong to cause all of this....
LOL!@!!
Yeah I am suprised. Very well put.
Speaking of Political Posturing that is petty. How about reporting what Maxine Waters and that Carson fellow said?
Or some of the remarks that Joe Biden has made or Mr. Obama that were completely out of line and petty?
I don't agree with what Boehner is doing, or anyone else that refuses to take the high road, but lets be fair and say that the pettiness starts at the top and works it way down
Listen...........Obama spends half his life running around the country campaigning and doing everything but what he SHOULD be doing.
The GOP debate was scheduled well ahead of this "magic speech", that promises just to be a "differently-worded stimulous speech.", according to the leaks.
There are 365 days in a calendar year, I wouldn't call this just a "coincidence"
That Obama agreed to set it back one day probably looks like "compromise" to HIS followers, but in reality, I think he was advised that MORE people are likely to watch the GOP debate.....and he would get better "audience attendance" if he did his speech on a different day,
If that ISN'T the case, it clearly shows "ineptness" of the people AROUND him, who never took the time to CHECK the road ahead before pulling out onto the freeway.
Yeah and just in case you missed the televised Republican forum In South Carolina on Monday you can watch the debate tonight and then again next Monday. Geeeeez give it a break will ya ! What the Republicans want everyone to watch every day of the week and please make sure to squeeeeeeeeeze out Obama........ Don't let Obama make a speech on the same night.... Oh and after his speech there usually is some Republican to critique it well tomorrow night after his speech there will be several critiquing, sounds to me like they fear Obama !!
Yeah.......his "approval ratings" have us in a blind panic.
"Squeezed out? You've got that just a bit confused, Msm.........the GOP debate was scheduled to air LONG before Obama decided to do HIS speech.
That that it ever mattered anyway......I'm sort of WITH you a little bit here....in that Boenner shouldn't have even raised the issue, and both events SHOULD have gone on the same night.
I don't think most people even CARE what Obama has to say anymore.....they pretty much KNOW already what rhetoric is coming. They've changed the "song title" several times over the last 3 years........but the music & lyrics are still the same.......and you still can't dance to it.
I think more people are wanting to hear OUR candidates right now and see for themselves what may be NEW, instead of the same old stale song & dance. The GOP debate would most likely have drawn the larger viewing audience, so having a night to HIMSELF will probably work in the President's favor.
There is a chance that Rick Perry might not show up for it. If not, you can count on the leftwing media to accuse him of purposely ducking the issues and questions...........but NOBODY on that side of the aisle will acknowledge that he is busy doing his JOB as a governor abd overseeing the FIRES going on down there.....which is smething SENATORS do not have to deal with.
I hope he CAN make it though, so we can hear them all.
Marylin.............when BUSH was President, there was ALWAYS a DEMOCRAT rebuttal that immediately followed HIS congressional speeches.
Do you think there is something "UNFAIR" going on all of a sudden?
Only ONE side is entitled to rebuke?
There are tools, and then there are TOOLS.
I'm watching the debate right now and enjoying it. I like John Huntsman, Ron Paul and Romney so far.
Zook I know when there' a Republican President the Demos give a rebuttal after a speech. I'm not saying its unfair what I was saying is according to the news there were going to be several giving rebuttals which I find a little odd.... Now I've heard some members of congress aren't even going to show up for Obama's speech which I find very childish and tacky
Ok bye I'm back to the debate
All politics is local...If I need a job, I'm gonna vote for the crook that gets me one. Neither what the cast of clowns says, nor how they part their hair or smooth their dress impresses me nearly as much as what they make me believe they can do for me. I'm fed up with folks asking me what I can do for my country...my contributions are already on the History Channel. What I want to know is what the candidates can do for me.
Let's keep it simple: If you're not helping to improve the lives of Americans, then don't put your ideologies on the ballot. I'm voting with my stomach, not my heart.
Well Marylin.....I'm glad somebody got to watch the debate............Ddn't happen for me tonight, had to go over some music for a funeral service Saturday. It went on a lot longer than it SHOULD have, and I got home just in time for the moderators to say "goodnight."
Couldn't have been LAST night or TOMORROW night.......had to be TONIGHT......6:PM our time.
Really ticked me off. Hoping SOMEBODY might re-broadcast it again later this evening.
You guys should be in pretty good shape for tomorrow night when Obama's on.
Pat will be there Saturday with the Honor Guard.
I'm sure it will be repeated . Some think Romney did better then Perry. They all agreed Bachmann didn't do very well and I agree with that.
How did Cain do, in your opinion?
I enjoyed Cain. He should have been given a little more air time.
The moderators were clearly wanting this to be the Mitt and Perry show. Michele didn't look as comfortable as she has been in the past.
However, I am enjoying these debates, It helps me sort out things a little better. There were some tart remarks from Gingrich and Huntsman was somewhat out there with his comments.
The Governors got the most air time. Gingrich was asked stupid questions so that he could be grumpy. Huntsman was just plain weird at times.
Herman Cain is a man who could get things done. But they won't like him. He will make people be accountable and that won't go over too well with those who don't want to work, but want to look as though they are working.
I think it was a good debate more sharp words on what a dismal record Mr. Obama has so far. It will be interesting to see if Congress gets scolded or if he will have a real job plan to present.
Maybe the GOP can run on hope and change?
Well, as it turned out, NBC re-aired the debate a little later on, so I DID end up getting to see it. I too, thought they didn't give equal air time to all of them.....it was mostly about Romney and Perry. By contrast, Cain, Santorum and Gingrich were practically ignored.
I've never cared for Newt, but I liked it when HE jumped on the NBC moderators for trying to stir things up between them. To their credit, NONE of them allowed themselves to be pulled off track.
There is still no doubt in my mind the Cain is the one candidate up there with the working man's knowledge of dolars and sense to FIX this economy.
I can't prove this of course....there's no way to prove it, but I think the reason the NBC boys only asked Cain a few "token" questions, is because NBC solidly supports Obama, and they don't WANT the American public to hear Mr. Cain in any kind of detail, because they don't want THEIR candidate to have to run against him next year.
I think Obama is genuinely afraid of Herman, and his media isn't going to give this guy any more talkign space than they have to. Romney & Perry sound more like politicians, where Cain talks common sense.
The left doesn't want to deal with that when its for all the marbles next year............the closer a GOP candidate might sound to "business as usual,.....the better for THEM.
There was way too much attention on Perry & Romney.
No Skeeter..........I think all the GOP has to do is run on the LEFT's record. They can't defend it....and it should be enough.
Sorry if I misunderstood you Kelly, my mistake.
Obama is on his own for his performance though. The Tea Party was not responsible for the decisions that he has made.
Let Obama take his share of the blame for the mess instead of giving the blame. he is a big boy.
The tea party is not attacking Obama but the government at large for the entire mess that we are in. It wouldn't matter if the incumbents were Republican or Democrat, they just want something done. We all do.
And while we are on the subject, Look up George Soros and tell me what you think his agenda is and how much he has contributed to different organizations and political campaigns. He has spent billions of dollars for influence peddling and not in the interest of America, but his own.
George soros
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soro...
I agree with you totally on that. Too many cooks in the kitchen.
I am sick and freaking tired of all this politicking so far ahead of the primaries.
Rick Perry, Gov. of Texas
Ron Paul, Congressman
Michelle Bachman, Congresswoman
These people have been elected to office to TEND TO THE PEOPLES BUSINESS, NOT POLITIC!
The rest of them can spend their spare time as they wish.
I have a great idea. 1 day for all states to have their primary or caucus. Campaigning limited to the 6 weeks prior. PERIOD! Stop this stupid year around fund raising nonsense.
General Election 6 weeks after the Primary day. Enough of this nonsense.
Ban, outlaw PAC'S, big money corrupts big time!
If the ordinary person wants to contribute, they will. Stop allowing the buying of OUR PUBLIC SERVANTS AND OUR GOVERNMENT!!!!
Campaign finance reform now! If a candidate has several million laying around and wants to spend it on a campaign, fine let them write the check and make it public! None of this loan stuff, no write off, NOTHING! Full public disclosure! Want to know where our politicians learned to spend so freely? Follow the money. On the Left and the Right, our country is for sale to the highest bidder. The more you do their bidding, the money you get.
Absolutely no outside sources of income while in office. No speakers fees, NOTHING!
Radical sounding? You betcha. This is a cancer that requires radical action if this great Republic is to survive.
No I really wonder about Herman Cain. I just learned this and it disturbs me greatly
"A radio talk show host and former chief executive officer of Godfather's Pizza, Cain was chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City's board of directors and has never been elected to political office."
Not so much of an outsider in my book.
http://news.yahoo.com/factbox-republican...
Grr, I meant now.
That's EXACTLY what would make Herman Cain the ideal president, Roy.
He HAS no political background............THAT'S reason ENOUGH to vote for him. he isn't already part of the GOAT ROPE back there.
And because he's had to make his way to the top on HIS "nickel", and on behalf of the stockholders, this is also a huge plus in my book.
Cain hasn't HAD the comfort of government bailouts, and TAXPAYER MONEY to bridge the gaps if there were any screw-ups.
Herman cain HAD to know what he was doing to get where HE is.
The man understands dollars & sense, how to deal, how the bargain, how to trade and cut dead weight and wasteful spending.
What the other goofballs talk about up there....ideas, theory and rhetoric (Including Obama's bunch)......what the rest of them TALK ABOUT, Cain has DONE, and done it successfully.
And NBC went OUT OF ITS WAY to try and ignore him last night.
But THIS is the guy who is up front, plain speaking and KNOWS how an economy is supposed to work.
From 2 different stands, he sounds like he advocates a Christian theocracy. Not a good thing. We are a REPUBLIC with the freedom of religion or freedom from religion. Religious bigotry or bigotry of any kind is just flat wrong!
Mike,do you really support these stands? And I mean all of them.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2012/Herman_C...
except for Herman Cain who doesn't want a Mosque built in Murfreesboro Tennessee, he opposes the construction. He wants freedom of religion Cain style !
Good call Roy. Maybe we should follow the British model and not run for election until 2-3 months before the poll date. Maybe then, our 24 hour news services would report on things that actually happen; as opposed to a two year he-said-she-said horse race.
As for one blogger's remark...that a favored candidate has no political experience;therefore, that's reason enough to vote for him: Just what kind of fuzzy logic is that?!
In other words, a person has no experience in business...that's reason enough to put him/her in charge of business. Someone has never had to deal with the challenges of mathematics, let's make that person a Dean of Mathematics at our university. Someone has never had to deal with the problems of diagnosing illnesses...must be qualified to be a medico. Are you kidding me?
The last guy I remember running for President based on the platform of...I'm just plain folk...was James Earl Carter III. What a glorious 4 years that "non-politician" brought us.
So, homer, you would support a Christian Theocracy? One where religious leaders make all the rules for everyone, Christian and Non-Christian? Which Christians? Where religious bigotry is legalized?
I'm sure you read my latest blog and decided not to comment, but you just opened this can of worms here.
Homer, How about Judaism?
http://news.yahoo.com/israeli-rabbi-pair...
Please read the whole thing.
Homer, If you had read my blog, you would see where the freedom to practice has already been thrown under the bus once. The reason nothing was said was that it was a persecuted group that were burned out of their places of worship and driven out of their homes all in the name of Christianity. Funny thing is, they believe in God. They worship on Sundays. They practice good deeds world wide. They aid the needy of any religion. They don't believe in welfare, never have. There is a man running for the republican nomination for the second time, whose worthiness to serve has been questioned due to his religion, the same thing that happened to J.F.K.
Freedom from religion means not having someones religious beliefs dictating my personal life. Remember the days when dancing in public was banned because some religious group deemed it immoral?
To support the right of certain people who hold certain religious beliefs to dictate to the rest of is WRONG. I can just imagine what you think of the American Episcopalian Church, given it views.
The point is the danger in allowing any religious group to impose their beliefs on others. Did you see in the article that there is no civil marriage in Israel? There is no civil divorce. All that is dictated by a group of Rabbis. There are many variations of Jews, many of who have different views who are held to be less than relevant due to the fact that their religious views don't match those of the ruling theocracy. I know that it is a different country, but they claim to hold the same ideals of freedom that we hold. But do they? Is what they practice what you would like to see for America?
And before anyone brings up Warren Jeffs, the man is a child rapist. No more, no less.
Do I believe in polygamy between consenting adults?
It doesn't matter. They are adults and have the right to live their lives as they see fit, as long as they harm no one else. There are too many laws and regulations regarding the private behavior between consenting adults, and depriving those adults of certain legal rights.
You've been quiet Wayne, what's up lately?
Got it.
Roy....it took me awhile today to get back to this blog. Yes, I support Cain on nearly everything, except the DADT-----I would reverse it ANYWAY.
When I look at the other candidates, there are several areas I do not like their stand on.
I have maybe ONE opposing issue with Cain, but the rest of them are just "politicians.
I agree with Obama on NOTHING, except the shutdown of the Space Program and the killing of Bin Laden.
Economically and as a national leader, I've said it on a number of occasions.........Obama might be a nice guy, and he might have the best intentions in the world...........
but he does NOT know what he's doing. He is a "lieutenant", trying to run an entire fighter squadron.
It doesn't work...............and it HASN'T.
I solidly support Herman Cain in our primaries.
Roy.....there is NO candidate who is going to fill every square for everyBODY.........
But as much as we all get into these "left & right" debates, I think we could ALL agree, that our number ONE problem facing this country right now are in the immediate future, is the ECONOMY.
The economy, and I'd be surprised if anyone on these blogs could come up with a HIGHER priority right now.
It is also a documented fact that the BULK of the Senate, the Congress and the White House itself.....are made up of ex-LAWYERS, which is why nobody could make heads or tails of that 2,000 page monstrosity that had to be passed so we could all "find out what's in it."
If all of these yo-yo's were OUT of politics and were suddenly thrust into the investment counselor business, who would you invest YOUR PERSONAL MONEY with?............some slimeball, lying, inept ex-lawyer?
Not ME! I'd go to see a guy like Herman Cain....Ross Perot....Donald Trump...........
You cannot fix something you do not understand to begin with. The only thing THIS administration understands is how to tax, spend, and tax some more to make up for it.
I think that probably any one of those other 7 meatballs on that stage last night, would be an improvement on the current occupant of the Oval Office............but I hope it doesn't come down ONCE AGAIN, to this "lesser of two evils" garbage.
I'm supporting Cain because I want to be able to vote FOR somebody this time....rather than just voting AGAINST the other guy.
There's a difference.
You wouldn't seek out a gynocologist for open heart surgery...........you'd find a specialist that's PERFORMED a couple hundred of them.
I'm tired of ex-LAWYERS handling our money.
Cain understands finances, even on a large scale----because he's HAD to.
They all TALK a good game, but we need to measure these guys (and gals) by their ACCOMPLISHMENTS.....
We already know about this administration...........and all the numbers speak for themselves. 14.6-T now....even MORE people out of work....3 years without a BUDGET and no record to run on but a bad one. It will NOT get any better under a Republican administration, unless that Republican IS "somebody",,,,and not just another empty suit with a "good line" & catchy phrases.
Obama clearly needs to go....but unless we get rid of the REST of th incumbents as well, it will STILL be gridlock back there.
Like I've said before, you can't just replace the old oil filter with a shiny NEW one-------without draining those other 5 quarts of dirty oil out of the pan. Won't be long until that "shiny new filter" is just as dirty.
Republicsn or Democrat......means NOTHING to me next year........everyplace I see (Incumbent) on that ballot------I'm voting for the other guy.
If people HONESTLY want "change"........the first thing WE have to change are our "representatives!"
All of 'em................clean sweep. But it won't happen because of all the indoctrinated, institutionalized trained seals out there.
They still haven't been kicked around enough yet. When there's enough of them sitting on the corners of the WalMart & K-Mart parking lots with their cardboard signs-------maybe it'll eventually start to sink in.
Well Homer, I sure don't worship at the foot of an all powerful Federal Government. If you haven't figured that out about me I give up.
Do I support Radical Islam? NO Just as I don't support Radical Christianity, Radical Judaism or any other Radical whatever that seeks to impose their religious values on ME.
You have said I don't answer questions, I assume you mean yours. If I'm wrong on that I apologize. You haven't answered some of mine. Why is that? You keep saying No national law restricting or forbidding the practice of religion, but you fail to address my question about the treatment of the early Mormons, or the point I made about Mitt Romney. If Marriage is both a civil and religious institution, then what is to be done about Marriages conducted in Episcopal churches between two consenting adults that are of the same sex? Are they null and void?
Homer, an interesting link.
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/foundingfa...
Homer, if 160 years ago is ancient history, then 240 years ago is very ancient history. If you wish to stay in the here and now, are the marriages performed by the Episcopal church valid?
I don't think this link qualifies as liberal/progressive crapola.
http://earlyamericanhistory.net/founding...
Homer, don't forget that those who chose to ignore or disregard history are doomed to live it again.
Selective regard for history?
I'm not the one that supports their views with the term Christian. You seem very willing to brush aside the religious views of some with a very secular Law of the Land statement. You can't have it both ways. Do laws based on religious feelings trump the rights of the few? What of the laws of the other states that you disagree with. Now states have the right to pick and chose which states laws are valid and which aren't? Since when are the rights of the individual a mole hill? I bet if your individual rights came under attack it wouldn't be a mole hill.
http://supreme.justia.com/us/325/226/cas...
That is a law passed by Congress that still hasn't passed Constitutional review by the Supreme Court. There have been other laws passed by congress that have failed to pass Constitutional muster.
The Constitution is the law of the land! If the Supreme Court deems the DOMA unconstitutional then what?
And the majority still must follow the Constitution.
By the way the majority does not rule in the senate. 41 senators can block any major legislation. The majority be darned.
And just who said I supported Obamacare. Not me. Your assuming again Homer. Your side failed to secure 41 votes to block it. Remember the majority rules. How's that workin for ya?
Homer, part of my last comment was uncalled for and I apologize.
No harm, no foul.
Roy, i would like to add just one little there to your comment about all of us having to follow the Constitution.
This is true........but this especially needs to apply to the cut-throats on "Capitol Hill" Our "leaders" need to SHOW THE WAY on "upholding" what they all swore to defend.
To this administration, and to a few Republicans as well.......the "constitution" is just something you take in the morning an hour or so after you eat breakfast.
Well said Mike.
To anyone interested, check the update on countdown blog.
Roy stay away from money, don't accept any. It has the words "In GOD we trust" written on it.
Trouble, who said I didn't believe in God? I believe in God and the Constitution as it is written. Word for word. Nowhere in that document is God ever mentioned, even in the oath of office.
Homer, so do you agree the Constitution was not written as a Christian document?
Our constitution was written by men who knew a lot more than any of US do today.
They LIVED the "history" we can only read about....
It was THEY who had to throw off an oppressive government to be able to build the free country we've been priviledged to live in.
The Constitution, Declaration of Independence and bill of rights, were written for future generations, so WE could stay on TOP of things and preserve what was paid for in blood.
But until recently, most people in TODAY's America have been too blind, stupid and complacement to even see the treason and deceit going on right in front of them.
When you dare so much as to MENTION these things that Ben Franklin and company said----(and they of ALL PEOPLE should KNOW----they were THERE!)-----when YOU mention what's going on today, you are just a "trouble-maker"....a radical, paranoid racist tea-bagging terrorist."
How DARE we condemn the lying, smooth-talking "puppeteers of this great 21st century "Punch & Judy Show!"
Those communists back in D.C. don't fool me in the least They'd lick the boots of the U.N. and sell us out in a heartbeat.......fact is, they've already STARTED, haven't they!
Borders--Language--Culture
Right on, DRACO!
They're still communists. Defend them if you like.
No HewBet, they are COMMUNISTS......look at their agendas....what they have both done and proposed doing........the mandates, disregard of the public as well as the constitution.........
Then......go look the word up in Webster's....or the dictionary of your choice.