I never thought I would miss Jimmy Carter...

Started Oct 9, 2013 | Discussions
rb59020 Contributing Member • Posts: 668
I never thought I would miss Jimmy Carter...
4

Huffingto Post

"Former President Jimmy Carter said Monday that if he were back in the White House, he would work with Republicans and Democrats to secure more funding for affordable housing and urge more flexibility in resolving differences involving the critical issue."

"I would work as harmoniously as I could with other members of the Congress, and with both Democrats and Republicans, to figure out how we can face a time of great deficits."

Not exactly from the Obama playbook.

 rb59020's gear list:rb59020's gear list
Pentax MX-1 Pentax K-30 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Nikon D5200 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS +11 more
mamallama
mamallama Forum Pro • Posts: 51,510
Re: I never thought I would miss Jimmy Carter...
4

rb59020 wrote:

Huffingto Post

"Former President Jimmy Carter said Monday that if he were back in the White House, he would work with Republicans and Democrats to secure more funding for affordable housing and urge more flexibility in resolving differences involving the critical issue."

"I would work as harmoniously as I could with other members of the Congress, and with both Democrats and Republicans, to figure out how we can face a time of great deficits."

Not exactly from the Obama playbook.

The Tea Party faction in Congress would eat Jimmy Carter alive. Now you know why Carter only served one term.

forpetessake
forpetessake Veteran Member • Posts: 4,892
Re: I never thought I would miss Jimmy Carter...
3

Before Obummer came to the WH everybody thought Carter was the worst president ever. We all have been proved wrong.

RobertSigmund
RobertSigmund Forum Pro • Posts: 10,750
Re: I never thought I would miss Jimmy Carter...
3

forpetessake wrote:

Before Obummer came to the WH everybody thought Carter was the worst president ever. We all have been proved wrong.

What a silly idea to call Carter a bad President. He was one of the best. Have you ever heard of bad luck? That's what he had.

How good he really is he proved and still proves after his term as President.

 RobertSigmund's gear list:RobertSigmund's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 20D Sony SLT-A55 Sony SLT-A77 +2 more
Don_D
Don_D Forum Pro • Posts: 20,109
Re: I never thought I would miss Jimmy Carter...
3

rb59020 wrote:

Huffingto Post

"Former President Jimmy Carter said Monday that if he were back in the White House, he would work with Republicans and Democrats to secure more funding for affordable housing and urge more flexibility in resolving differences involving the critical issue."

"I would work as harmoniously as I could with other members of the Congress, and with both Democrats and Republicans, to figure out how we can face a time of great deficits."

Not exactly from the Obama playbook.

The Tea Party types and Republican right wing has beat up on Obama unrelentingly and without mercy for six years.  It's no wonder that he has hardened his positions.

What goes around comes around.

....and unfortunately the Nation is the loser for all of this animosity.

-- hide signature --

www.pbase.com/dond
Don

 Don_D's gear list:Don_D's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS 40D Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +3 more
TrapperJohn Forum Pro • Posts: 16,481
That's two for two
2

Obama has now made Jimmy Carter look good, along with Vladimir Putin. He needs to go into the PR business. He could make some serious money - Disgraced Leader Rehab, Inc.

Carter had his faults, but he was politically astute enough not to antagonize the other side. So was Clinton, so was Reagan, and all faced opposing majorities in congress. They knew what would happen if they angered the opposition by completely disregarding them. I have no sympathy for Obama on the tp situation - he got them elected, so he gets to live with them.

I respect Obama's ideals as well worth living up to, but his bull in the china shop approach to politics has been nothing short of a train wreck. Can't remember when we had a president who so derided the opposing party - even Carter was a gentleman, and understood that he represented all citizens, not just the ones that voted for him.

If nothing else, the Obama years have given me some respect for professional politicians of any party. I never realized how difficult it was to do the job right - how to get things accomplished with a fractious congress, and not tick off half the nation in the process.

Obama has added at least one more chapter to PolySci 101 textbooks around the world - what happens when you ignore basic political reality.

vadimraskin Veteran Member • Posts: 3,596
Re: That's two for two
3

TrapperJohn wrote:

Obama has now made Jimmy Carter look good, along with Vladimir Putin. He needs to go into the PR business. He could make some serious money - Disgraced Leader Rehab, Inc.

Carter had his faults, but he was politically astute enough not to antagonize the other side. So was Clinton, so was Reagan, and all faced opposing majorities in congress. They knew what would happen if they angered the opposition by completely disregarding them. I have no sympathy for Obama on the tp situation - he got them elected, so he gets to live with them.

I respect Obama's ideals as well worth living up to, but his bull in the china shop approach to politics has been nothing short of a train wreck. Can't remember when we had a president who so derided the opposing party - even Carter was a gentleman, and understood that he represented all citizens, not just the ones that voted for him.

If nothing else, the Obama years have given me some respect for professional politicians of any party. I never realized how difficult it was to do the job right - how to get things accomplished with a fractious congress, and not tick off half the nation in the process.

Obama has added at least one more chapter to PolySci 101 textbooks around the world - what happens when you ignore basic political reality.

How would you propose to deal with a Party that openly proclaimed its prime goal to "Make Obama a one term president" immediately after his election? GOP has become a Party of NO and did not propose any serious steps to reform healthcare, debt and economy? How would you deal with a Party that seemingly cheering every economic trouble and denying even a chance of the recovery? How would you deal with the Party that is bent on creating one crisis after another and destabilizing economy?

 vadimraskin's gear list:vadimraskin's gear list
Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro Olympus E-30 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm 1:2.8-4.0 SWD Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD +3 more
OP rb59020 Contributing Member • Posts: 668
Re: That's two for two
2

"How would you deal with a Party that seemingly cheering every economic trouble and denying even a chance of the recovery? How would you deal with the Party that is bent on creating one crisis after another and destabilizing economy?"

Sounds like you're describing the Democrat party when Bush was President.

It's the federal governments job to protect the United States from outside invaders. It's somewhere in that thing called the Constitution.

The New Deal, and Great Society are socialism to the core.

 rb59020's gear list:rb59020's gear list
Pentax MX-1 Pentax K-30 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Nikon D5200 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS +11 more
RobertSigmund
RobertSigmund Forum Pro • Posts: 10,750
Re: That's two for two
1

vadimraskin wrote:

TrapperJohn wrote:

Obama has now made Jimmy Carter look good, along with Vladimir Putin. He needs to go into the PR business. He could make some serious money - Disgraced Leader Rehab, Inc.

Carter had his faults, but he was politically astute enough not to antagonize the other side. So was Clinton, so was Reagan, and all faced opposing majorities in congress. They knew what would happen if they angered the opposition by completely disregarding them. I have no sympathy for Obama on the tp situation - he got them elected, so he gets to live with them.

I respect Obama's ideals as well worth living up to, but his bull in the china shop approach to politics has been nothing short of a train wreck. Can't remember when we had a president who so derided the opposing party - even Carter was a gentleman, and understood that he represented all citizens, not just the ones that voted for him.

If nothing else, the Obama years have given me some respect for professional politicians of any party. I never realized how difficult it was to do the job right - how to get things accomplished with a fractious congress, and not tick off half the nation in the process.

Obama has added at least one more chapter to PolySci 101 textbooks around the world - what happens when you ignore basic political reality.

How would you propose to deal with a Party that openly proclaimed its prime goal to "Make Obama a one term president" immediately after his election? GOP has become a Party of NO and did not propose any serious steps to reform healthcare, debt and economy? How would you deal with a Party that seemingly cheering every economic trouble and denying even a chance of the recovery? How would you deal with the Party that is bent on creating one crisis after another and destabilizing economy?

In fact: if there is a reproach against Obama then it is that he was much too patient with the madhouse right wingers. This hostage taking about the health reform, however, even Obama cannot tolerate any more. He can't give in and he won't give in. The blame is with the right wing zealots, and the GOP will pay an expensive prize for their behaviour.

 RobertSigmund's gear list:RobertSigmund's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 20D Sony SLT-A55 Sony SLT-A77 +2 more
DT200 Contributing Member • Posts: 835
You are confused, you mean the Tea Party
6

As usual you are confuse. For the record, Obama guided us out of the worst recession in over 100 years that was created by GW Bush and fellow Republicans. While accomplishing this he has had to deal with the Tea Party who has now shut the government down twice, caused the our country's credit rating to decline, and block every bipartisan bill they can (such as eliminating rewards for shipping jobs over seas).

Yep, the Tea Party have made quite a name for themselves and are now considered the dumbest people in government. They won't even listen to the private sector anymore...

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wall-street-tea-party-butt-heads-government-shutdown/story?id=20520136

Frank PA
Frank PA Senior Member • Posts: 1,142
Re: I never thought I would miss Jimmy Carter...
1

forpetessake wrote:

Before Obummer came to the WH everybody thought Carter was the worst president ever. We all have been proved wrong.

I never thought that President Carter was the worst President ever, and I'm part of everybody.

-- hide signature --

All the best,
Frank

 Frank PA's gear list:Frank PA's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7
Roger99 Forum Pro • Posts: 10,888
Re: I never thought I would miss Jimmy Carter...
8

rb59020 wrote:

Huffingto Post

"Former President Jimmy Carter said Monday that if he were back in the White House, he would work with Republicans and Democrats to secure more funding for affordable housing and urge more flexibility in resolving differences involving the critical issue."

Do you really think the Tea Party nutters would be a part of that kind of strategy.  They aren't looking for compromise.  They are just out to humiliate the Obama Whitehouse.  Nothing more, nothing less.  Jimmy wasn't a bad old sod but didn't he learn anything from the Iranian thing.  Try to do the right thing by the Republicans and they will steal your wallet while your back is turned.

"I would work as harmoniously as I could with other members of the Congress, and with both Democrats and Republicans, to figure out how we can face a time of great deficits."

They are not the same GOP as in Jimmies day.  Give in to them and they will just find more ways to strangle the government.

Not exactly from the Obama playbook.

Obama is doing exactly the right thing.  You don't negotiate with terrorists.

I never thought I would miss Ronnie Raygun.  He'd be ashamed of the party he led if he saw it today.

-- hide signature --

The one serious conviction one should hold is that nothing should be taken too seriously.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain an idea without necessarily accepting it. -Aristotle
..oh, and I see by the lack of responses that I am right yet again.

vadimraskin Veteran Member • Posts: 3,596
Re: That's two for two

rb59020 wrote:

"How would you deal with a Party that seemingly cheering every economic trouble and denying even a chance of the recovery? How would you deal with the Party that is bent on creating one crisis after another and destabilizing economy?"

Sounds like you're describing the Democrat party when Bush was President.

It's the federal governments job to protect the United States from outside invaders. It's somewhere in that thing called the Constitution.

The New Deal, and Great Society are socialism to the core.

If I remember correctly, Dems didn't shut the Government, agreed to the Debt limit increases 19 (!) times during his two terms. In fact, all four Republican leaders that the loudest critics of the "out of control" spending are the same four that agreed to raise the Debt Ceiling from $5.95B at the beginning of Bush terms to $9.815 at the end with NO STRINGS ATTACHED. Now they have become very concerned with Debt all of a sudden and DEMAND cuts. Where were they when Bush combined Debt Increase with tax cuts? I know where: in Congress and voting "Yeah" every time. Bunch of hippocras... (Obama is not much better by the way)

Dems talked a lot and raised their fists in frustration but in the end didn’t stand on the way of the Government operations.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/04/14/158424/republican-leaders-debt-limit-hypocrisy/

 vadimraskin's gear list:vadimraskin's gear list
Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro Olympus E-30 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm 1:2.8-4.0 SWD Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD +3 more
RobertSigmund
RobertSigmund Forum Pro • Posts: 10,750
Re: That's two for two

vadimraskin wrote:

rb59020 wrote:

"How would you deal with a Party that seemingly cheering every economic trouble and denying even a chance of the recovery? How would you deal with the Party that is bent on creating one crisis after another and destabilizing economy?"

Sounds like you're describing the Democrat party when Bush was President.

It's the federal governments job to protect the United States from outside invaders.

Green Martians and Mexicans!

It's somewhere in that thing called the Constitution.

The New Deal, and Great Society are socialism to the core.

If I remember correctly, Dems didn't shut the Government, agreed to the Debt limit increases 19 (!) times during his two terms. In fact, all four Republican leaders that the loudest critics of the "out of control" spending are the same four that agreed to raise the Debt Ceiling from $5.95B at the beginning of Bush terms to $9.815 at the end with NO STRINGS ATTACHED. Now they have become very concerned with Debt all of a sudden and DEMAND cuts. Where were they when Bush combined Debt Increase with tax cuts? I know where: in Congress and voting "Yeah" every time. Bunch of hippocras... (Obama is not much better by the way)

Dems talked a lot and raised their fists in frustration but in the end didn’t stand on the way of the Government operations.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/04/14/158424/republican-leaders-debt-limit-hypocrisy/

 RobertSigmund's gear list:RobertSigmund's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 20D Sony SLT-A55 Sony SLT-A77 +2 more
RBFresno
RBFresno Forum Pro • Posts: 12,487
Re: You are confused, you mean the Tea Party
3

DT200 wrote:

As usual you are confuse. For the record, Obama guided us out of the

worst recession in over 100 years

Really?

that was created by GW Bush and fellow Republicans.

So the recession  was completely due to the Republicans and GW Bush?

A strong argument can be made that the causes were much wider, deeper, and longer in the making than GW Bush.

While accomplishing this he has had to deal with the Tea Party who has now shut the government down twice,

83% of the government  is being funded.

But fortunately, the White house has some discretion as to what gets shut down, like the National Parks, National Monuments.However, the widely reported pro immigration rally was recently allowed to proceed on the Mall of the Nation's Capitol.

caused the our country's credit rating to decline,

The reasons for the decreased rating of 2011  has many factors. The recent shutdown had nothing to do with the 2011 degrading of the U.S. credit rating.

But if one had to summarize  one general reason the downgrade, it would be lack of leadership, both in Congress and in the White House.

and block every bipartisan bill they can (such as eliminating rewards for shipping jobs over seas).

Are you referring to the multiple recently passed House bills  to restore funding  that the Senate Leaders refuse to bring to a vote?

Yep, the Tea Party have made quite a name for themselves and are now considered the dumbest people in government.

There's a lot of competition for that title......

They won't even listen to the private sector anymore...

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wall-street-tea-party-butt-heads-government-shutdown/story?id=20520136

Yes. The smartest people would define stupidity, by how little a politician is influenced by  a part of the the private business sector, and how the media reports on it.

RB

 RBFresno's gear list:RBFresno's gear list
Nikon D2H Nikon D4 Nikon AF DX Fisheye-Nikkor 10.5mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR +14 more
TrapperJohn Forum Pro • Posts: 16,481
How would I deal with the tea party?
1

First off, I do not approve of what the tea party has done. I do understand how they came to be, though. You cannot solve a problem until you first understand the root cause.

The tea party represents a substantial minority of voters. Not half the nation, maybe 1/3 the nation, but that's still a huge bloc of voters. And those suckers vote. They may not do a lot of things right, but they definitely vote.

The tp representatives ran on a 'stop Obama' platform, and got elected, which means a lot of people responded positively to 'stop Obama'. They were elected because a large number of voters felt disenfranchised, that the current government, as in the prez and congress, were acting contrary to their best interests, or ignoring their concerns. That was a direct result of obamacare - it ignored almost half the nation, and it adds to an already enormous deficit.

What I would do is address the concerns of the people who voted for tp candidates, and continue to vote for tp candidates. Were it not for Obama ignoring and continuing to ignore the people voting tp, they'd be gone in two years.

Bill Clinton, when faced with an even worse defeat, losing both house and senate, welcomed the opportunity to work with the repubs to better address the nation's needs.

And Clinton didn't get a tea party intent on stopping him at all costs. His second term with repubs running the house and senate got welfare reform and a sustainable tax cut. (also set in motion the real estate meltdown of 2007, but that's another matter) So who's the smarter person - Obama or Clinton? Not a dem thing - Reagan faced the same situation with his long wars with Tip O'Neill, and he handled the situation with far more grace than Obama could.

Blaming the tp'ers for opposing Obama is like blaming the sun for coming up in the morning. They are doing what they were elected to do, and got re-elected to do. Calling them idiots doesn't help. Some of them may be idiots, but they vote.

To solve that problem, get people to stop voting tp, by addressing the reasons why they are voting that way. You don't have to kowtow to them, but you do have to understand their concerns, and make some compromises to keep them from going all radical in the voting booth.

The root cause of the current mess is an inexperienced president who has not addressed the concerns of the people voting tp. In fact, he has either ignored or insulted those people, which doesn't moderate their attitude in the voting booth. Obama makes mistakes that are redlined in political science 101 textbooks.

And that's fine, if you're a community organizer. When you're president and you screw up out of inexperience, bad things happen to a lot of people. Sad to say, the tp mess won't be cleaned up until we get a president who isn't quite so polarizing.

vadimraskin Veteran Member • Posts: 3,596
Re: How would I deal with the tea party?
1

TrapperJohn wrote:

First off, I do not approve of what the tea party has done. I do understand how they came to be, though. You cannot solve a problem until you first understand the root cause.

The tea party represents a substantial minority of voters. Not half the nation, maybe 1/3 the nation, but that's still a huge bloc of voters. And those suckers vote. They may not do a lot of things right, but they definitely vote.

The tp representatives ran on a 'stop Obama' platform, and got elected, which means a lot of people responded positively to 'stop Obama'. They were elected because a large number of voters felt disenfranchised, that the current government, as in the prez and congress, were acting contrary to their best interests, or ignoring their concerns. That was a direct result of obamacare - it ignored almost half the nation, and it adds to an already enormous deficit.

What I would do is address the concerns of the people who voted for tp candidates, and continue to vote for tp candidates. Were it not for Obama ignoring and continuing to ignore the people voting tp, they'd be gone in two years.

Bill Clinton, when faced with an even worse defeat, losing both house and senate, welcomed the opportunity to work with the repubs to better address the nation's needs.

And Clinton didn't get a tea party intent on stopping him at all costs. His second term with repubs running the house and senate got welfare reform and a sustainable tax cut. (also set in motion the real estate meltdown of 2007, but that's another matter) So who's the smarter person - Obama or Clinton? Not a dem thing - Reagan faced the same situation with his long wars with Tip O'Neill, and he handled the situation with far more grace than Obama could.

Blaming the tp'ers for opposing Obama is like blaming the sun for coming up in the morning. They are doing what they were elected to do, and got re-elected to do. Calling them idiots doesn't help. Some of them may be idiots, but they vote.

To solve that problem, get people to stop voting tp, by addressing the reasons why they are voting that way. You don't have to kowtow to them, but you do have to understand their concerns, and make some compromises to keep them from going all radical in the voting booth.

The root cause of the current mess is an inexperienced president who has not addressed the concerns of the people voting tp. In fact, he has either ignored or insulted those people, which doesn't moderate their attitude in the voting booth. Obama makes mistakes that are redlined in political science 101 textbooks.

And that's fine, if you're a community organizer. When you're president and you screw up out of inexperience, bad things happen to a lot of people. Sad to say, the tp mess won't be cleaned up until we get a president who isn't quite so polarizing.

John

This is a good post and I happen to agree with most of what you said. However, you are missing a bit of history in your otherwise very good analysis on the TP movement. Go back in 2008 when BO was elected. I am NOT playing a racist card here but in reality the Tea Party started when the white voters in the rural areas were faced with reality of being governed by a black man. Combine that with a tough economy and you get a volatile mix of anger, fear and insecurity by what used to be a majority of population that found itself in sudden minority.

No matter what he would or could have said or done, they would want him to fail just to prove the fact that blacks are inferior to whites. I might be wrong here but I firmly believe that this is a root cause of the Tea Party movement. Obamacare or ANY health care initiative would have failed or stalled in Congress just like Clinton’s idea. Obama was determined to push it thru the Congress because it was his promise to the country that voted for him. Was he naïve and inexperienced? Of course he was. But I can totally understand his shock and disbelieve when he was met with a total stonewalling by republicans dead set on having him fail. What would you do? So he pushed it with any means that were available to him at that time. Democrats had a slimmest majority and shake one too and Scott Brown was elected and mid-term elections brought in a wave of ideology-charged wackos… What was he supposed to do? Remember summer of 2010 and all these Town Hall meetings that were disrupted by Tea Party activists? Were they there to communicate with their elected officials or to simply create chaos? Go thru you-tube videos, it ain’t pretty.

Tea Party has become an outlet for the white anger, which found a convenient “scape goat” in Obamacare. If it wasn’t Obamacare, it would have been something else. On top of it, if Obama DIDN’T pass the ACA, he would have been blamed for it as well, just as he was blamed for many promises he didn’t deliver (plenty of those). Clinton was intensely hated by many rights but nothing even remotely close to Obama. What shocked me back in 2008 was how this hatred of Obama started immediately after his election. The man wasn’t even sworn in yet but people were already finding his faults and theorizing on his policies. It is much deeper than his manners and partisan tactics.

You can’t compare Clinton and Obama; they faced different nations under different circumstances. And one more thing: Obama is much more than a “community organizer”. He is also an attorney, a Law Professor, a State Senator and a Congressman. I don’t remember anyone calling Reagan an “actor” or Bush, Jr. a “football team owner”.

 vadimraskin's gear list:vadimraskin's gear list
Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro Olympus E-30 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm 1:2.8-4.0 SWD Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD +3 more
RobertSigmund
RobertSigmund Forum Pro • Posts: 10,750
Re: How would I deal with the tea party?

vadimraskin wrote:

TrapperJohn wrote:

First off, I do not approve of what the tea party has done. I do understand how they came to be, though. You cannot solve a problem until you first understand the root cause.

The tea party represents a substantial minority of voters. Not half the nation, maybe 1/3 the nation, but that's still a huge bloc of voters. And those suckers vote. They may not do a lot of things right, but they definitely vote.

The tp representatives ran on a 'stop Obama' platform, and got elected, which means a lot of people responded positively to 'stop Obama'. They were elected because a large number of voters felt disenfranchised, that the current government, as in the prez and congress, were acting contrary to their best interests, or ignoring their concerns. That was a direct result of obamacare - it ignored almost half the nation, and it adds to an already enormous deficit.

What I would do is address the concerns of the people who voted for tp candidates, and continue to vote for tp candidates. Were it not for Obama ignoring and continuing to ignore the people voting tp, they'd be gone in two years.

Bill Clinton, when faced with an even worse defeat, losing both house and senate, welcomed the opportunity to work with the repubs to better address the nation's needs.

And Clinton didn't get a tea party intent on stopping him at all costs. His second term with repubs running the house and senate got welfare reform and a sustainable tax cut. (also set in motion the real estate meltdown of 2007, but that's another matter) So who's the smarter person - Obama or Clinton? Not a dem thing - Reagan faced the same situation with his long wars with Tip O'Neill, and he handled the situation with far more grace than Obama could.

Blaming the tp'ers for opposing Obama is like blaming the sun for coming up in the morning. They are doing what they were elected to do, and got re-elected to do. Calling them idiots doesn't help. Some of them may be idiots, but they vote.

To solve that problem, get people to stop voting tp, by addressing the reasons why they are voting that way. You don't have to kowtow to them, but you do have to understand their concerns, and make some compromises to keep them from going all radical in the voting booth.

The root cause of the current mess is an inexperienced president who has not addressed the concerns of the people voting tp. In fact, he has either ignored or insulted those people, which doesn't moderate their attitude in the voting booth. Obama makes mistakes that are redlined in political science 101 textbooks.

And that's fine, if you're a community organizer. When you're president and you screw up out of inexperience, bad things happen to a lot of people. Sad to say, the tp mess won't be cleaned up until we get a president who isn't quite so polarizing.

John

This is a good post and I happen to agree with most of what you said. However, you are missing a bit of history in your otherwise very good analysis on the TP movement. Go back in 2008 when BO was elected. I am NOT playing a racist card here but in reality the Tea Party started when the white voters in the rural areas were faced with reality of being governed by a black man. Combine that with a tough economy and you get a volatile mix of anger, fear and insecurity by what used to be a majority of population that found itself in sudden minority.

No matter what he would or could have said or done, they would want him to fail just to prove the fact that blacks are inferior to whites. I might be wrong here but I firmly believe that this is a root cause of the Tea Party movement. Obamacare or ANY health care initiative would have failed or stalled in Congress just like Clinton’s idea. Obama was determined to push it thru the Congress because it was his promise to the country that voted for him. Was he naïve and inexperienced? Of course he was. But I can totally understand his shock and disbelieve when he was met with a total stonewalling by republicans dead set on having him fail. What would you do? So he pushed it with any means that were available to him at that time. Democrats had a slimmest majority and shake one too and Scott Brown was elected and mid-term elections brought in a wave of ideology-charged wackos… What was he supposed to do? Remember summer of 2010 and all these Town Hall meetings that were disrupted by Tea Party activists? Were they there to communicate with their elected officials or to simply create chaos? Go thru you-tube videos, it ain’t pretty.

Tea Party has become an outlet for the white anger, which found a convenient “scape goat” in Obamacare. If it wasn’t Obamacare, it would have been something else. On top of it, if Obama DIDN’T pass the ACA, he would have been blamed for it as well, just as he was blamed for many promises he didn’t deliver (plenty of those). Clinton was intensely hated by many rights but nothing even remotely close to Obama. What shocked me back in 2008 was how this hatred of Obama started immediately after his election. The man wasn’t even sworn in yet but people were already finding his faults and theorizing on his policies. It is much deeper than his manners and partisan tactics.

You can’t compare Clinton and Obama; they faced different nations under different circumstances. And one more thing: Obama is much more than a “community organizer”. He is also an attorney, a Law Professor, a State Senator and a Congressman. I don’t remember anyone calling Reagan an “actor” or Bush, Jr. a “football team owner”.

I agree. Whatever one can dislike about his politics cannot explain the intensity of the hatred against him.

 RobertSigmund's gear list:RobertSigmund's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 20D Sony SLT-A55 Sony SLT-A77 +2 more
DT200 Contributing Member • Posts: 835
Re: You are confused, you mean the Tea Party
2

RBFresno wrote:

DT200 wrote:

As usual you are confuse. For the record, Obama guided us out of the

worst recession in over 100 years

Really?

that was created by GW Bush and fellow Republicans.

Yes, and his 8 years of "leadership" that took us from a surplus to a massive deficit, got us in to 2 wars, and believed everything "curveball" told him.


Are you referring to the multiple recently passed House bills to restore funding that the Senate Leaders refuse to bring to a vote?

You know there is one bill with majority support by the house and senate, and that the president is willing to sign.   The senate has voted against provisions in the billy ou mention multiple times and the president said he would veto it.  Only an idiot would pursue the bill with zero chance when their is a bill with MAJORITY support in both the house and senate.

Why won't the speaker let the bill with MAJORITY support be voted on?   It WILL pass and end this in a matter of minutes.

DT200 Contributing Member • Posts: 835
Re: How would I deal with the tea party?
1

RobertSigmund wrote:

vadimraskin wrote:

TrapperJohn wrote:

First off, I do not approve of what the tea party has done. I do understand how they came to be, though. You cannot solve a problem until you first understand the root cause.

The tea party represents a substantial minority of voters. Not half the nation, maybe 1/3 the nation, but that's still a huge bloc of voters. And those suckers vote. They may not do a lot of things right, but they definitely vote.

The tp representatives ran on a 'stop Obama' platform, and got elected, which means a lot of people responded positively to 'stop Obama'. They were elected because a large number of voters felt disenfranchised, that the current government, as in the prez and congress, were acting contrary to their best interests, or ignoring their concerns. That was a direct result of obamacare - it ignored almost half the nation, and it adds to an already enormous deficit.

What I would do is address the concerns of the people who voted for tp candidates, and continue to vote for tp candidates. Were it not for Obama ignoring and continuing to ignore the people voting tp, they'd be gone in two years.

Bill Clinton, when faced with an even worse defeat, losing both house and senate, welcomed the opportunity to work with the repubs to better address the nation's needs.

And Clinton didn't get a tea party intent on stopping him at all costs. His second term with repubs running the house and senate got welfare reform and a sustainable tax cut. (also set in motion the real estate meltdown of 2007, but that's another matter) So who's the smarter person - Obama or Clinton? Not a dem thing - Reagan faced the same situation with his long wars with Tip O'Neill, and he handled the situation with far more grace than Obama could.

Blaming the tp'ers for opposing Obama is like blaming the sun for coming up in the morning. They are doing what they were elected to do, and got re-elected to do. Calling them idiots doesn't help. Some of them may be idiots, but they vote.

To solve that problem, get people to stop voting tp, by addressing the reasons why they are voting that way. You don't have to kowtow to them, but you do have to understand their concerns, and make some compromises to keep them from going all radical in the voting booth.

The root cause of the current mess is an inexperienced president who has not addressed the concerns of the people voting tp. In fact, he has either ignored or insulted those people, which doesn't moderate their attitude in the voting booth. Obama makes mistakes that are redlined in political science 101 textbooks.

And that's fine, if you're a community organizer. When you're president and you screw up out of inexperience, bad things happen to a lot of people. Sad to say, the tp mess won't be cleaned up until we get a president who isn't quite so polarizing.

John

This is a good post and I happen to agree with most of what you said. However, you are missing a bit of history in your otherwise very good analysis on the TP movement. Go back in 2008 when BO was elected. I am NOT playing a racist card here but in reality the Tea Party started when the white voters in the rural areas were faced with reality of being governed by a black man. Combine that with a tough economy and you get a volatile mix of anger, fear and insecurity by what used to be a majority of population that found itself in sudden minority.

No matter what he would or could have said or done, they would want him to fail just to prove the fact that blacks are inferior to whites. I might be wrong here but I firmly believe that this is a root cause of the Tea Party movement. Obamacare or ANY health care initiative would have failed or stalled in Congress just like Clinton’s idea. Obama was determined to push it thru the Congress because it was his promise to the country that voted for him. Was he naïve and inexperienced? Of course he was. But I can totally understand his shock and disbelieve when he was met with a total stonewalling by republicans dead set on having him fail. What would you do? So he pushed it with any means that were available to him at that time. Democrats had a slimmest majority and shake one too and Scott Brown was elected and mid-term elections brought in a wave of ideology-charged wackos… What was he supposed to do? Remember summer of 2010 and all these Town Hall meetings that were disrupted by Tea Party activists? Were they there to communicate with their elected officials or to simply create chaos? Go thru you-tube videos, it ain’t pretty.

Tea Party has become an outlet for the white anger, which found a convenient “scape goat” in Obamacare. If it wasn’t Obamacare, it would have been something else. On top of it, if Obama DIDN’T pass the ACA, he would have been blamed for it as well, just as he was blamed for many promises he didn’t deliver (plenty of those). Clinton was intensely hated by many rights but nothing even remotely close to Obama. What shocked me back in 2008 was how this hatred of Obama started immediately after his election. The man wasn’t even sworn in yet but people were already finding his faults and theorizing on his policies. It is much deeper than his manners and partisan tactics.

You can’t compare Clinton and Obama; they faced different nations under different circumstances. And one more thing: Obama is much more than a “community organizer”. He is also an attorney, a Law Professor, a State Senator and a Congressman. I don’t remember anyone calling Reagan an “actor” or Bush, Jr. a “football team owner”.

I agree. Whatever one can dislike about his politics cannot explain the intensity of the hatred against him.

The Tea Party at first was trying anything to deny the reality the a Black man was elected president.   They said he was not born in the US (like Ted Cruz who they claim can be President), they said he never attended college and that his degrees were fake.  They say he is a Muslim, and on and on and on.  During the 8 years Bush was President and taking the budget surplus to a massive deficit, we didn't hear a peep from them.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads