Politics & Current Events
MommyLiberty5013
member
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Breaking 'Gridlock of Congress' Obama Claims
A snippet of the article...
"Obama was in Ohio on Saturday for a second straight day. "I'll work with any party to make this country move forward," he said. "If you want to break the gridlock of Congress vote for me."'
Okay call me crazy, but didn't he just have four years to break gridlock? And weren't the first two years of his term very very favorable to get his stuff done with a majority of Dems in Congress? Also, he was cited as the most left-ward leaning Senator of all of them back when he held that office. Why should we think he would be any different in another four years?
The track record is there..."incomplete" doesn't cut it.
Re: Breaking 'Gridlock of Congress' Obama Claims
I'm also hoping for bipartisanship, but when people like Mitch McConnell say things like, "Our No. 1 priority is to make this president a one-term president," instead of saying his number one priority is jobs and economy, I just can't imagine it happening.
Also, I talk just as much as the next citizen about bi-partisanship, but when both sides differ so much ideologically, it's hard for me to actually mean it. I struggle to think of what I would even want President Obama to compromise with the conservatives on, you know? I don't agree with many of their ideas.
I am one of the many, many citizens who want our president to be even more liberal and left leaning. So, myself and many others, would rather see compromises in that direction over the other. It really is a conundrum.
Why?
Because I myself am more liberal and left leaning than he is. So, per normal human aspiration, I would like the highest government official in the land to represent my belief system as closely as possible.
But, why do you want someone more liberal than you? What benefit would it bring to you or to others in this country? That's what I meant when I asked, "Why?" I apologize for not clarifying my point.
She doesn't want someone more liberal than herself, she specifically said she's more liberal and left leaning than he is." Pay attention.
The threat of non-cooperation is less bad than 4 years of actual non-cooperation, but nice try at turning the democrats into the bad guys.
I hope he doesn't push for that, it would be douchey and I hope that the D's are better than that even if the R's aren't.
No, I am just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Well, that was my post and I've said before and I'm saying right now that I condemn it on either side.
Out of curiosity, am I to assume that you agree it was an inappropriate and unjust strategy for the republicans to adopt?
Maybe you should move to a more conservative country?
are there any?
Iran?
Saudi Arabia is more conservative than Iran.
I think both parties are at fault for the political gridlock. Congressmen and Sentators have all, regardless of political affiliation, forgotten that they are here to serve the interests of the citizenry, not the interests of lobbyists or corporations.
The sooner we can shake things up and vote for more 3rd party candidates than Ds or Rs, the better.
Agreed!
Because this is their America, and the rest of us need to get the fcuk out.
Neither Romney nor Obama can break the insanely divided, partisan nature of congress right now.
It has to come down to people at the state level passing and demanding an end to gerrymandered districts. More competitive districts will mean more purple congresspeople and less Eric Cantors and Michelle Bachmanns. But the Federal Government does not, nor should they, have the power to control that.