Page 1 of 1
Obama
Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2016 1:41 pm
by poorpete
Sick of seeing a particular post appear at the top, so just throwing in this.
What do you think his lame-duck projects will be? I can think of 3:
- get Merrick Garland a vote
- get TPP a vote
- get last prisoners out of Guantanamo
Ideally he'd put "fix Obamacare" in there too, but I think we'll be sitting in this stalemate until 2017 at least.
Re: Obama
Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2016 2:02 pm
by Kyle
The first one won't happen and probably not the TPP. Maybe Guantanamo, but I don't know how he really feels about it. It seemed like an important issue eight years ago, but didn't happen. Which tells me he didn't want it to.
Re: Obama
Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2016 2:12 pm
by poorpete
I think TPP will happen because enough Republicans want this to overcome the few Democrats who don't. Also it will allow Hillary to keep her promise not not support it, as it will be off the table by the time she's sworn in.
I think he'd also love to decriminalize marijuana, but I think the DEA's decision to keep it a Schedule One has ruined that.
Re: Obama
Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2016 4:26 pm
by Elle
The Senate's refusal to vote on Merrick Garland is in my opinion obscene and is going to go down in history as a memorable moment when they took flagrant liberties with our democracy.
People who puzzle over why we have Trump may consider that even without Trump the State of Affairs we are accepting as normal and tolerable is exactly this obscene.
Re: Obama
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2016 4:12 am
by Cazmonster
Re: Obama
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2016 8:21 am
by Elle
It has now been almost double the time since the last nominee who has the longest time, Louis Brandeis. And that's because Brandeis was a committed "social justice warrior" of his own time, a Zionist and the first Jewish person on the Court. They took that long not to ignore, but to debate. This is different. This isn't ideological disagreement; this is about victory at the expense of ideology. This man is so much better than what they'll get with Clinton, and they can't refuse this long and then vote him in during November. Obscene. Total abrogation of duty. Hostility toward democracy itself.
Re: Obama
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2016 8:49 am
by Mike
McCain stated last week that Republicans will continue to block ANY nominee that Clinton puts forward. Indefinitely. And then almost immediately, his spokesperson came forward and said, "Well, okay... not really."
Re: Obama
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2016 9:20 am
by akiva
Re: Obama
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 1:00 pm
by Elle
These people are destroying whatever shreds of respectability they once enjoyed. McCain is a war hero, for heaven's sake! He could have done so little to remain a national hero and retire after a dignified career of service, even if people didn't always agree with his views. Instead, he let Palin and now Trump make a joke out of him.
Paul Ryan's goose is cooked and it couldn't happen to a nicer Objectivist crazyperson.
There are about three Senators who said Yes, Trump! And then very publicly No, Trump! And now very publicly again Yes, Trump! They all need to go; regardless of whether you're for or against Trump, that kind of finger-in-the-poll-winds batshittery is unacceptable in public leadership.
Anyway, what I came here to say is, if you haven't seen Obama do the phone drop, it's amusing. I wish he would have waited until Thanksgiving because in my deepest heart I am scared to death of what can go wrong until it's all over but the shouting.
Re: Obama
Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 8:43 pm
by poorpete
I still think there will be a TPP-Garland omnibus deal at the end of the term. Or, if no movement on Garland I expect the White House will take Congress to court, claiming not giving hearings essentially forfets veto power over his pick. But Id be really surprised if Obama's trade deal that's supported by enough GOP and Dem congressmen but no future president, would get no vote before he leaves.
I think Guantanamo will be an undeserved blot on his legacy, as it was his first action as president to begin its closure, and yet congress kept him from that goal. I doubt he'll pardon the last of the prisoners, many of whom are pretty awful, but maybe a massive deal to send them to the Hauge.... idunno, tough one.
Re: Obama
Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2016 8:43 pm
by Elle
Not only are they not planning to confirm Garland even if Clinton is elected, but a whole group of the Republican leadership is now saying that they won't confirm ANYONE for FOUR YEARS of a Clinton presidency. No W. T. F. is big and flashing neon enough for that. I want my goddamn democracy back - imperfect, difficult, contentious, but democracy! This is unbelievable.
Re: Obama
Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2016 11:57 pm
by Cazmonster
This is how democracies fail. I can only hope that enough of them get kicked that they can't block discussion any more.
Re: Obama
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 12:07 am
by Elle
If they want to reject every nominee, even that would be better. It's the worst form of craven disrespect for each one of us citizens.
Re: Obama
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 9:55 am
by Mike
Re: Obama
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 6:33 pm
by Cazmonster
I want them to go back to the previous version of the filibuster where they actually have to get up and talk. Threatening to filibuster should not be enough.
Re: Obama
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 7:22 pm
by Elle