Will the Republicans continue to obstruct, or will they actually work with the president this time around?

[Heisenberg]

I know one area Republicans will NOT obstruct, and will continue to work with the administration

http://www.lawfareblog.com/2012/11/c...medium=twitter

Click link for rest

Sorry, I don't buy that for a second.

In fact, I think the thought of Congress receiving MORE pushback from Romney or any other GOP candidate to be completely laughable.

I'm not arguing that more pushback is needed, but I certainly don't believe for a second what this article is saying.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Sorry, I don't buy that for a second.

In fact, I think the thought of Congress receiving MORE pushback from Romney or any other GOP candidate to be completely laughable.

I'm not arguing that more pushback is needed, but I certainly don't believe for a second what this article is saying.

You misread it.

The point is Democrats and liberals would provide far MORE pushback to a Romney administration that has secret kill lists and is prosecuting whistleblowers at a record pace.

Since a Democrat is in office and doing the bombing and killing, you won't get the pushback on the administration from Democrats in Congress or the grassroots.

[Heisenberg]

You misread it.

The point is Democrats and liberals would provide far MORE pushback to a Romney administration that has secret kill lists and is prosecuting whistleblowers at a record pace.

Since a Democrat is in office and doing the bombing and killing, you won't get the pushback on the administration from Democrats in Congress or the grassroots.

Fair enough - my mistake for misreading it.

Still not sure I buy it. For better or worse, I'm afraid this has become the new strategy for dealing with suspected terrorists in the ME.

[Larry]

Sorry, I don't buy that for a second.

In fact, I think the thought of Congress receiving MORE pushback from Romney or any other GOP candidate to be completely laughable.

I'm not arguing that more pushback is needed, but I certainly don't believe for a second what this article is saying.

I think that the article is trying to claim that the public will complain less about Obama doing these things, than they would if Romney did them.

And (IMO) he's probably right on that score.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Fair enough - my mistake for misreading it.

Still not sure I buy it. For better or worse, I'm afraid this has become the new strategy for dealing with suspected terrorists in the ME.

It is for the worst and of course it has become the strategy for dealing with "suspected" terrorists in the middle east and that is because a President from the Democratic Party has cemented every single anti terror tool the Bush/Cheney administration wanted and in many cases (Drones) have gone further then Bush/Cheney ever did.

The next R administration will have free reign to do whatever it pleases with drones and Democrats will be unable to stop them because their guy is the one who cemented these policies.

Could you imagine the outcry if a Bush administration had a "secret kill list"

[visionary]

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/09/politi...html?hpt=hp_c1

Boehner, R-Ohio, signaled a willingness to deal on Friday but also maintained hard-line GOP opposition to any tax increase.

"Raising tax rates will slow down our ability to create the jobs everyone says they want," Boehner said at a news conference, noting that higher taxes on the wealthy will hit small business owners.

But he also said that "everything on the revenue side and on the spending side has to be looked at."

Boehner called on Obama to take the lead in offering a workable plan that Republicans can accept but stopped short of providing details, saying: "I don't want to limit the options available to me or limit the options that might be available to the White House."

Asked if tea party conservatives or others in his caucus might oppose an agreement they don't like, Boehner responded: "When the president and I have been able to come to an agreement, there has been no problem in getting it passed here in the House."

[Jumbo]

Could you imagine the outcry if a Bush administration had a "secret kill list"

I don't think you need a list as much if you just invade the countries of interest with your entire military. Then you can just kill whoever.

[SkinsHokieFan]

I don't think you need a list as much if you just invade the countries of interest with your military. Then you can just kill whoever.

Agree. Likewise with a list and drones, you don't need any invasion

Land war invasions are so 20th century now

[Jumbo]

Agree. Likewise with a list and drones, you don't need any invasion

Land war invasions are so 20th century now

I was going to put a smiley on the end of mine, too, but it just didn't feel right.

In truth, if I were to sum up to this day, two signature criticisms (emphasis for the glandular readers) of American foreign policy over the last few decades, no matter which party had the WH, it would be arrogance and ignorance---which are also, IMO, two fundamental components of the (mainly male) "American Personality" in many cases (and common in the message board population ) .

I say this as a guy who is much more comfortable than many with hitting people, shooting people, and who thinks we got a lot of positives as a nation, and you really shouldn't **** with us.

[Gibbsisgod2006]

Although, neither Clinton nor Reagan faced such unanimous, lockstep, opposition.

---------- Post added November-8th-2012 at 09:48 PM ----------

ABC: Boehner Exclusive: Raising Tax Rates 'Unacceptable' but Will Put New Revenue on Table

As predicted.



Not much more about what he means, by revenues that aren't taxes. But the article does cover other topics, like an assertion that Ron Paul has gained new prominence in the Party. Taxes aren't the entire interview.

You really think that Newt is not as bad as Boehner I actually think Newt was worse than Boehner? Bill Clinton was able to reach across the table and compromise with Newt unlike President Obama so far has done in this deal.

[Mad Mike]

It is for the worst and of course it has become the strategy for dealing with "suspected" terrorists in the middle east and that is because a President from the Democratic Party has cemented every single anti terror tool the Bush/Cheney administration wanted and in many cases (Drones) have gone further then Bush/Cheney ever did.

The next R administration will have free reign to do whatever it pleases with drones and Democrats will be unable to stop them because their guy is the one who cemented these policies.

Could you imagine the outcry if a Bush administration had a "secret kill list"

Well Obama's strong counter terrorism policies are why I was able to vote for him, especially the first time. While everyone else was hearing what they wanted to hear, I was listening to what he said, and I knew he was going to be aggressive on terrorism.

Terms like "secret kill lists" and "suspected" terrorist are completely misused. The "suspected" terrorists in the ME are people we have tracked and seen working with AQ and other dangerous groups. This is a ******* WAR. A war we did not start. And in war, you don't have a trial for every targeted unit. And you certainly don't publish your target list.

And no, the next Pres will not be able to do whatever he wants. If he abuses his power, he will be impeached. Those are the rules.

And one more time because I have never been one to stop hammering home a point.... Pakistan doesn't like our use of drones... big surprise. They don't like our use of ground troops, manned air power, or anything else we do to hunt terrorists. Are we supposed to stop fighting AQ because some crazy ass country like Pakistan where parents can kill their children over "honor" doesn't like it? Really? We have all learned this lesson personally in one way or another... you can't please everyone. And pleasing the terrorist supporting radicals in Pakistan is not high on my list.

[visionary]

And no, the next Pres will not be able to do whatever he wants. If he abuses his power, he will be impeached. Those are the rules.

Well, that's only if he does something that really registers with people in the US or Congress.
There are plenty of ways to abuse power under the rader, or in ways that congress might not care about or overly disagree with.

(this isn't a criticism of Obama though, just a general thought)

[Larry]

Well, that's only if he does something that really registers with people in the US or Congress.

And, as we've all seen, what "really registers with Congress" depends a whole lot on whether they're the same Party or not.

[visionary]

https://twitter.com/politico

Breaking News: Obama said Friday he’s invited congressional leaders to White House next week to begin negotiations over the fiscal cliff.
1:16 PM

[Heisenberg]

Some pretty smart political maneuvering by O during his discussion today IMHO.