Obama's Final Two Years

BlazerBob wrote:

ZHawke wrote: And, PrintSmith, as you state, the next two years will, in fact, be a defining of principles, not just of Obama and his legacy, but also of Republicans and Democrats in Congress who've been charged with doing their freakin' jobs and ...........

I see reality and the political class as two ships passing in the night but I would like to be wrong.

In the Presidents remarks today I saw the slightest glimmer of reality. He said something along the lines of that for decades Washington's bureaucracy has done less and less with more and more and he and his cabinet are chipping away at the problem.

Sidebar: That is my interpretation so do not even think about asking for me to prove it or for quotes.

I wouldn't dream of doing that, BlazerBob.

I remember a "Born Loser" cartoon from way, way back in which the main character was taking a nap on his couch. His wife was talking to a friend about him thus:

"He kept learning more and more about less and less until he knew everything about nothing".

Kinda goes to what you said, eh? But I'd apply it to D.C., in general, not just the President or Democrats or Republicans.

PrintSmith wrote:

In fact, if you look at some of the ballot initiatives on a national basis there appears to be a trend toward more liberal initiatives while, at the same time electing more conservative representatives and senators who oppose those more liberal initiatives. Contradiction? Confusion? It would seem that way.

This was your post, correct? Do you know for a fact that Cory Gardner, or any other "more conservative representatives" elected to national office don't share the view that minimum wage laws are only improper at the federal level? That, after all, is the "more conservative" view with regards to minimum wage laws. Not, necessarily, that there shouldn't be one, but that there absolutely shouldn't be a one size fits none federal one.

My apologies. Yes, I did make that statement. Thanks.

With regard to the rest of your post, I guess time will tell, eh?

ZHawke wrote: And, PrintSmith, as you state, the next two years will, in fact, be a defining of principles, not just of Obama and his legacy, but also of Republicans and Democrats in Congress who've been charged with doing their freakin' jobs and passing legislation that will ultimately benefit their constituencies from a "national" perspective.

All Congress can do is pass legislation which they think appropriate. If the executive disagrees, and the Congress is unable to override that veto, then Congress has done what it has been tasked by the Constitution to do. IMNTBHO, Obama has enlisted the aid of Reid to ensure that legislation doesn't reach his desk which gives him, in his mind anyway, justification for going it alone and effectively legislating from the Oval Office.

PrintSmith wrote: All Congress can do is pass legislation which they think appropriate. If the executive disagrees, and the Congress is unable to override that veto, then Congress has done what it has been tasked by the Constitution to do. IMNTBHO, Obama has enlisted the aid of Reid to ensure that legislation doesn't reach his desk which gives him, in his mind anyway, justification for going it alone and effectively legislating from the Oval Office.

Isn't that kinda sorta what I was trying to say? The fact is we have checks and balances factored into the Constitution. To me, it seems a bit disingenuous to place full responsibility at the President's feet when, in fact, it does take two to tango. You don't like Reid. I don't like Boehner. Nor do I like McConnell. So, from my perspective, both the Congress and the President need to do the jobs they were elected to do.

Given that the Senate changed hands, and that the main theme behind those campaigns was that the election was a referendum on the policies of Obama specifically and the Democrats at large, what do you think this Congress has been elected to do Z?

PrintSmith wrote: Given that the Senate changed hands, and that the main theme behind those campaigns was that the election was a referendum on the policies of Obama specifically and the Democrats at large, what do you think this Congress has been elected to do Z?

Their jobs.

ZHawke wrote:

PrintSmith wrote: Given that the Senate changed hands, and that the main theme behind those campaigns was that the election was a referendum on the policies of Obama specifically and the Democrats at large, what do you think this Congress has been elected to do Z?

Their jobs.

Could your answer be more vague?
I think their job is to protect the borders and keep the country safe. Obama doesn't agree.

FredHayek wrote:

ZHawke wrote:

PrintSmith wrote: Given that the Senate changed hands, and that the main theme behind those campaigns was that the election was a referendum on the policies of Obama specifically and the Democrats at large, what do you think this Congress has been elected to do Z?

Their jobs.

Could your answer be more vague?
I think their job is to protect the borders and keep the country safe. Obama doesn't agree.

My answer was intentionally vague. Given the fact there's been so much acrimony, dysfunction in all things political, I feel it is safe to say pols on both sides of the aisle need to start doing their jobs. This Congress has the lowest approval ratings I've ever see in my lifetime ( www.gallup.com/poll/1600/congress-public.aspx ). They adjourn and vacation more than those on the conservative side of the aisle accuse the President of taking. Voter turnout is abysmal by any standard ( www.fairvote.org/research-and-analysis/voter-turnout/ ). Voter confidence is arguably at all time lows. They squabble about "who" is responsible for shutting down the government rather than owning the fact it happened and then trying to do something to address the issues they seem so able to help create. I could go on and on - and it isn't partisan on my part. BOTH sides of the aisle are culpable...period, end of story.

Their job is to work for their constituents. Those constituents arguably expect their electees to try to work together for the national good. After all, this is a representative constitutional republic. The representatives are supposed to represent their constituents. I believe there are few that actually do. That's my own pessimism coming through.

If you want to get down to individual issues that need to be addressed, maybe a new thread might be warranted.

ZHawke wrote:

PrintSmith wrote: Given that the Senate changed hands, and that the main theme behind those campaigns was that the election was a referendum on the policies of Obama specifically and the Democrats at large, what do you think this Congress has been elected to do Z?

Their jobs.

And the job they were elected to do is attached at the hip with the platform on which they ran, which is essentially a repudiation of the last 6 years. In the House the Republicans are looking at their largest majority in nearly a century. The Senate swing has the potential to also be the largest in nearly a century. Across the Union Republicans hold more seats in the legislature than they ever have.

That, to me, is a pretty clear indication of what "their job" for the next 2 years is according to their constituents.

PrintSmith wrote: And the job they were elected to do is attached at the hip with the platform on which they ran, which is essentially a repudiation of the last 6 years. In the House the Republicans are looking at their largest majority in nearly a century. The Senate swing has the potential to also be the largest in nearly a century. Across the Union Republicans hold more seats in the legislature than they ever have.

That, to me, is a pretty clear indication of what "their job" for the next 2 years is according to their constituents.

I would counter that the new Republican majority in the Senate and the existing (increased) Republican majority in the House don't necessarily accurately reflect a representative constituency, especially given the almost record low voter turnout for the mid-term elections ("you get who you don't vote for" some would argue).

That being said, the Republicans do, in fact, have the majority. No disagreement there. Whether we see continued obstructionism and D.C. gridlock for the next two years remains to be seen. Along with that, the blame game for same should be interesting if it should actually occur.