Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Clyburn Pooh-Poohs Bipartisanship

By Perry Bacon Jr.
Already facing strong GOP opposition to some of his policy ideas, President Obama may face another challenge to bringing about a new era of bipartisanship in Washington: Congressional Democrats.

While Obama has tried in words and deeds to say he's open to GOP proposals and eager to hear any good idea, some of his Democratic colleagues in Congress are being less magnanimous. In a week in which Democrats have played down the importance of winning substantial Republican support for the stimulus, House Majority Whip James E. Clyburn (D-S.C.) went even further in suggesting Democrats won't need GOP help to get their package passed.

"We are trying to be as bipartisan as we can," he said in an interview that will air over the weekend on C-SPAN.

"We had an election on November 4, and the American people voted overwhelmingly for the approach being offered by the Democrats," Clyburn said. "And I think my Republican friends ought to respect that."

He added: "If we respond to the American people and that fails, then they [the Republicans] will have all the fodder they need going into the next election to try it their way..." Obama "was elected and we ought to do it his way, and we'll look at the Republicans' way after the next election, maybe."

Asked if there was a goal number of GOP votes that would help make a vote on the stimulus look bipartisan, Clyburn offered a telling comparison.

"I would love for it to be bipartisan, but I'll remind you that in 1993, President Clinton passed a package without a single Republican vote," Clyburn said, referring to Clinton's economic proposals. "It passed in the House by two votes, in the Senate by one vote, but a lot of people say it had the biggest and best growth in the economy that we have ever had and that was done without a single Republican vote.... Because it's bipartisan doesn't mean it will be successful. That's all I'm saying."

By Web Politics Editor  |  January 23, 2009; 3:49 PM ET
Categories:  Hill Transition  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Curious Case of Caroline and Kirsten
Next: Three New Homeland Security Hires

Comments

THE HONEYMOON IS OVER ... sad to say this because we have not even given the new President a chance to succeed!! I am still a loyal conservative independent that is going to support this President. WE WERE ALL TOLD that there was going to be rough times ahead ... we all know from all leading economist that we have to spend our way out of this recession/depression ... WE WERE ALSO ALL TOLD from both sides of the ideological divide that WE WERE NOT SURE IF ANY OF THIS WILL WORK THE WAY WE THINK IT SHOULD ... So, now I find Senator John McCain and the Republicans in the House and Senate hypocritical when they say: WE KNOW THE STIMULUS WILL NOT WORK. President Obama you won and you will have to lead us through these tough times despite the cynics and critics who are TRYING TO PARALIZE HOPE. President Obama there are even those in your own party who are acting out what Rush Limbaugh was man enough to say publicly "I want the President to fail". President Obama you have come from a different place that 99% of the politicians in Washington ... you know the grassroots - MAIN STREET. Both Republicans and Democrats in Congress have known Wall Strteet for too long!! We will continue to TRUST THE MAN FROM MAIN STREET inspite of the foot draging that is going on in Washington

Posted by: amitchell13 | January 25, 2009 12:46 PM | Report abuse

A fool blurped: "President Clinton passed a package without a single Republican vote," Clyburn said, referring to Clinton's economic proposals. "It passed in the House by two votes, in the Senate by one vote, but a lot of people say it had the biggest and best growth in the economy that we have ever had"

Yeah Clyburn, that Bubble took a little while to finally kill the World!

It was Clinton and his ability to pull stunts on our systems that Blocked government oversight of Hedges, Bundles, Derivatives, and Swaps!

In 1998, AIG dabbled in a few $Million.

In the recent "Meltdown", they were caught with $2.4 TRILLION of just Swaps!

The Country needs to listen to Romney on Stimulus, not some Congressional Clowns beholden to Lobbying Masters!

Posted by: SAINT---The | January 24, 2009 5:33 PM | Report abuse

A Jacka$$ blurped: "President Clinton passed a package without a single Republican vote," Clyburn said, referring to Clinton's economic proposals. "It passed in the House by two votes, in the Senate by one vote, but a lot of people say it had the biggest and best growth in the economy that we have ever had"

Yeah Clyburn, that Bubble took a little while to finally kill the World!

It was Clinton and his ability to pull stunts on our systems that Blocked government oversight of Hedges, Bundles, Derivatives, and Swaps!

In 1998, AIG dabbled in a few $Million.

In the recent "Meltdown", they were caught with $2.4 TRILLION of just Swaps!

The Country needs to listen to Romney on Stimulus, not some Congressional Clowns beholden to Lobbying Masters!

Posted by: SAINT---The | January 24, 2009 5:24 PM | Report abuse

Freepost-
Mush Lamebrain is the false prophet of angry clowns.

Get help.

Posted by: rooster54 | January 24, 2009 1:02 PM | Report abuse

The republicans had free reign to do just about anything they wanted to for the last eight years and it nearly killed us. In fact it DID kill a lot of us. The republicans and their entitled, welfare queen, spoiled brat, "let other people do everything for me because I'm helpless and to good for real work", business leaders need to get out of the way and let the adults do their job.

Bush's spectacular failures should be a lasting reminder to us that neocon and neoliberal ideas are mistakes that should never be repeated.

Posted by: rooster54 | January 24, 2009 12:05 PM | Report abuse

NoMoreFour:

If I will agree that Obama was born in Hawaii, will you agree that Bush didn't lie about Iraq?

Posted by: JakeD | January 24, 2009 10:07 AM | Report abuse

unbelievable quote from Clyburn:

He added: "If we respond to the American people and that fails, then they [the Republicans] will have all the fodder they need going into the next election to try it their way..." Obama "was elected and we ought to do it his way, and we'll look at the Republicans' way after the next election, maybe."

Is it any wonder that "leaders" like this have brought this country to it's knees. This is why we're in the present position we're in. Our elected officials only care for the advancement of their own parties and care nothing for the American people.

If this is change, thanks, I don't wanna play anymore.

Posted by: deecue | January 24, 2009 10:02 AM | Report abuse

What a misleading headline that implies Clyburm is against bi-partisanship. He is not. He is calling out the Republicans for their response to the approach. Given these statement by Clyburn, the headline is erroneous:

"We are trying to be as bipartisan as we can," he said in an interview that will air over the weekend on C-SPAN.

"We had an election on November 4, and the American people voted overwhelmingly for the approach being offered by the Democrats," Clyburn said. "And I think my Republican friends ought to respect that."

He added: "If we respond to the American people and that fails, then they [the Republicans] will have all the fodder they need going into the next election to try it their way..." Obama "was elected and we ought to do it his way, and we'll look at the Republicans' way after the next election, maybe."

WaPo editors seem to like making Democrats look bad even when they don't.

Posted by: NeilSagan | January 24, 2009 9:58 AM | Report abuse

JakeD you crack me up. Still at it I see! Was it too lonely on the other blog? I appreciate your intelligence, conviction and perseverance. My only hope for you, me, and the WaPo blogs...is that one day will use it for good. Sigh.

Posted by: NoMoreFour | January 24, 2009 12:18 AM | Report abuse

I hope the Republicans wake up and smell the coffee. We are a better country with a 2 major party system and I fear the end of the GOP if Clyburn's direct policy. Pelosi thought she could add some member items to the 850 billion, but was told by Obama he would veto anything like that and all other partisan bills. Nancy wisely backed down and maybe will get something done in the interest of the people. Her track record is well deserving of the less than 25% approval.

Posted by: jameschirico | January 23, 2009 11:51 PM | Report abuse

I think it's fine if Republican Senators and Congress people continue to take an obstructionist stance. First, it will not be effective. Second, this behavior got little attention during the last two years, but now it will really make the headlines in a big way. When people are finally able to see how damaging this attitude is, these obstructionists will lose their jobs.

I want to see Congress appoint a special prosecutor to look into the allegations that Bush and Cheney violated American citizens' civil rights by wiretapping indiscriminately.

I also want to know more about the deliberate disinformation campaign that got us into the Iraq war - its being passed off now as bad intelligence, but everyone responsible knew very well before the intelligence was ever presented to US citizens that it was bad. So how did it make it into the State of the Union address?

Cheney and Bush need to come clean about their real motive for invading Iraq, which I believe was to forcibly secure vast oil reserves for British and American oil companies to control, drill for and then sell to us at upwards of $5.oo a gallon.

Posted by: justathought3 | January 23, 2009 11:18 PM | Report abuse

RE:""Obama is nothing but a punk community organizer who is in way over his head."
===========================
Do you even know what a community organizer does?

The average organizer has more drive, more consensus-building skills and more savvy than any Yale grad who got into school because his name is Bush.

Posted by: EnemyOfTheState | January 23, 2009 11:11 PM | Report abuse

RE:"Obama is dangerous and needs to be impeached now!"
========================
OK, but let's wait until he's actually committed some sort of crime -- other than holding views that are different from yours.

Posted by: EnemyOfTheState | January 23, 2009 11:01 PM | Report abuse

RE:"Obama is nothing but a punk community organizer who is in way over his head. In 12 months or less he will be a laughingstock."
============================
Then, clearly, you are hoping the country goes to ruin. Another "patriot" heard from.

Posted by: EnemyOfTheState | January 23, 2009 10:56 PM | Report abuse

This "President" is the most arrogant and appalling person to ever hold this office. For the first time in history, we've had a POTUS who extorted, that's right extorted the opposition party at the same time he smeared a private citizen. In this particular case, Osama told Republicans that if they wanted to get anything done, they can't listen to Limbaugh. Imagine what would have happened if Bush told the Demoncraps that they would have been on the sidelines if they listened to Helen Thomas or Al Franken, or Al Gore?

Whether you agree or disagree with Limbaugh, he has the right to express his opinions. Moreover, Americans have the right to listen to whomever they want without fear of retribution.

It is an absolute crime that the media has ignored this story!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Obama is dangerous and needs to be impeached now!

See the article here (because the Compost doesn't have the courage to report on this):

http://www.nypost.com/seven/01232009/news/politics/prez_zings_gop_foe_in_a_timulating_talk_151572.htm

Posted by: freepost | January 23, 2009 10:54 PM | Report abuse

I am a Democrat, but I am simply appalled by the arrogance of Rep. Clyburn. In fact, I am extremely disheartened by almost all the Democratic leadership in the House and Senate, who seem bent on pettiness and "pay backs" for earlier Republican arrogance. This does not move us forward.

One of the things that I admire most about Barack Obama is the grown-up tone of his discourse. This man is a problem-solver, not a petty, arrogant revenge-seeker for past wrongs, nor an ideologue who just wants to jam his own ideas down others' throats. I applaud his challenge to others to break from the way politics have been exercised in the past and work toward making our country strong again instead.

Posted by: GHSpiva | January 23, 2009 10:40 PM | Report abuse

zukermand:

Obama was not sworn in as President on January 20, 2009 -- exactly as I predicted -- even ask JRM2.

I am not leaving, and I am not insane. Are you?

Posted by: JakeD | January 23, 2009 5:53 PM

//

Good, Jake. Stick around. Keep shoveling this nonsense. Stand on the street corner and sell it. See whose mind you change.

Posted by: Attucks | January 23, 2009 10:33 PM | Report abuse

Hey left-wing dingbats, don't you remember - "Dissent is Patriotic." Hopefully the Republicans in Congress and conservatives nationwide will show Obama as much respect as liberals showed George Bush. Obama is nothing but a punk community organizer who is in way over his head. In 12 months or less he will be a laughingstock.

Posted by: get_it_right | January 23, 2009 9:49 PM | Report abuse

JRM2,

"So if you love obstructionism so much then stop crying about the last two years.
My point is that the Repubs abused the filibuster, you talk about balance, show me the balance."

I never said anything about balance nor the last two years. You decried obstructionism. I made the point that the government works best when it not working at all. Divided government, gridlock, partisanship, filibusters,-these are beautiful things that keep our elected representatives from bigger mistakes.

Posted by: bend1 | January 23, 2009 9:42 PM | Report abuse

let Obama and his merry henchmen have there way.

In 4 years after the demo-rats have failed our country miserbly.
We will ride, Obama and the demo-dopes out of Washington on a rail.

Posted by: dashriprock | January 23, 2009 9:34 PM | Report abuse

JMR2,


"So if you love obstructionism so much then stop crying about the last two years.

My point is that the Repubs abused the filibuster, you talk about balance, show me the balance."

Posted by: bend1 | January 23, 2009 9:32 PM | Report abuse

Believe it or not, I can understand Clyburn's point. The thing I disagree with is, he's not the one who should be making that point. All Clyburn is doing is proving that Congresspeople can't see past the next election. He's trying to scare the people, when in fact Congress should be scared of us.

JakeD, Bush43 was not legally POTUS after the 2000 election, having been "elected" by the Supreme Court instead of the voters, but that didn't stop him. Why do you not think he's legal? He was born in Hawaii in 1961. Hawaii has been a U.S. state since 1959. Sounds perfectly legal to me.

Posted by: mssnatchquatch | January 23, 2009 8:48 PM | Report abuse

OK, the birth certificate thing again. If we ever do get to see the original one, chances are it will vary from the current official one, but not in any way that would DQ Obama from being POTUS. What's the difference between an original and a current official one? Nothing for me, but for my kids there is a big difference. Their original birth certificates list their biological father as the father. The current official one lists me and only me--as if the other guy never existed. (Obviously, I adopted them.) But the place and date of birth does not change. So maybe Obama is hiding something, but he is a natural born U.S. citizen.

Posted by: Compared2What | January 23, 2009 8:19 PM | Report abuse

I see that Jake's wearing his tinfoil hat today. My sons were recently born in Virginia. There's no such thing as a "long form" birth certificate. There's the original birth record (complete with very cute foot prints). Then, there's the birth certificate from the state. They're two completely different things. As Jake knows. Hes just banging that drum....

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | January 23, 2009 8:02 PM | Report abuse

Clinton passed a Democrat only bill in 1993 and got stomped at the polls in 1994. Do these idiot Democrats ever get it?

Posted by: hz9604 | January 23, 2009 7:51 PM | Report abuse

Enough with the birth certificates and the conspiracy theories. NOBODY CARES!

Posted by: isaac32767 | January 23, 2009 7:51 PM | Report abuse

At the very least, they need to vote "no" in order to "run against him" (and the Congressional Dems) on the issue.

Posted by: JakeD | January 23, 2009 7:36 PM | Report abuse

If the republicans were smart they wld let Obama implement his plan and if it fails run against him on that. They are afraid that it will work and that is why they are obstructing his plans. Obama has 4 years to make this work and he needs to know who wants him to suceed and who does not. Bipartisianship is a good thing if its genuine, if it is not then its an obstacle. America voted for change this election and if getting the repubs on board is getting in the way then Obama needs to kick them off the bus and give us the change he campaigned on. You cnt pls everyone, especially the people whose butt you just kicked.

Posted by: rbprtman23 | January 23, 2009 7:20 PM | Report abuse

Flashback! Didn't King George # 43 call his re-election a 'mandate'? HEY DEMS: don't cooperate with the GOP,and by the way-why not do a little dredging and impeach W too? He deserves zero legacy anyhow...let's hope Grover Norquist doesn't fall in love with George Bush and brow beat my town to re-name our sewer system after # 43!

Posted by: gm467 | January 23, 2009 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone remember Tom "The Hammer" Delay and his "K Street Project"?=
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Tom Who. Wonder what happened to him? Like Clyburn, he got uppity because he believed the Repubs were going to be in power for years. Unoh. Things change. Sometimes quickly. Just supposed we're in this same financial mess in 2012?
Scary isn't it. Could change completely.

Posted by: bnw173 | January 23, 2009 6:46 PM | Report abuse

bnw173:

I think you are right.

At today's meeting with Obama, Rep. Eric Cantor of Virginia, the No. 2 House Republican, passed out copies of the Republicans’ five-point stimulus plan. At first blush, Obama said, “Nothing on here looks outlandish or crazy to me,” according to a source familiar with the conversation. He seemed particularly receptive to some Republican ideas about increasing benefits to small businesses.

But when the conversation got down to other specifics, it was clear that some of the Republican ideas were clearly non-starters, including calls to put off tax hikes during the recession. “He rejected that out of hand and said we couldn’t have any hard and fast rules like that,” Cantor said.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17862.html

Posted by: JakeD | January 23, 2009 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Clyburn, you nitwit. You're totalling missing the Obama's approach. Take care of the country's business but try to do it in a unified way. We didn't elect you to do it the way you like or DEM or REP way
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Maybe Obama winked at Clyburn when he talked about bi-partisanship. Obama is bad to wink when he makes a promise. Remember?

Posted by: bnw173 | January 23, 2009 6:29 PM | Report abuse

HIP, HIP, HOORAY!!!

Posted by: JakeD | January 23, 2009 6:27 PM | Report abuse

"Three cheers for obstructionism!

Posted by: bend1 | January 23, 2009 6:04 PM"
----
So if you love obstructionism so much then stop crying about the last two years.

My point is that the Repubs abused the filibuster, you talk about balance, show me the balance.

Posted by: JRM2 | January 23, 2009 6:25 PM | Report abuse

"Speaker Pelosi, may I remind you you won the elections in 2006, and did nothing for two freakin' years.
Posted by: Chasmosaur1 | January 23, 2009 4:43 PM"
---------
During which time the Republican minority used the filibuster a record amount of times, more than any other congress in American history. Not to mention Bush using the veto at least 6 times (prior he had never used the veto)

It's called 'Obstructionism" and it hurts the American public.

Posted by: JRM2
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Got where the Repubs mentioned or veto Demd folded like a newspaper. When it was the other way the Dems would cry filibuster and Repubs would cry Nuclear rule and the Dems woulfd fold like newspapers.
Be honest. Repubs have balls and Dems have none. Wussys all. It got embarrassing. That is why I went Ind. in June 2008.

Posted by: bnw173 | January 23, 2009 6:24 PM | Report abuse

I do not for one moment believe that the American People voted for a Democrat Ruled White House, I truly believe America voted first and foremost for President Barack Hussein Obama and it is the ideology of the 44th President that needs to be heard and acted upon. The new President is a man of hope, that is what was voted for. Bush is GTT, Gone to Texas, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rove need impeachment hearings. It is not a blame game, it is about accountability. For America to be seen as a member of the World Community I believe Guantanamo should be kept open and simply house Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove, the true axis of evil. I believe Bush to have been a naieve and simple puppet to these three.

Posted by: kiwicafe | January 23, 2009 6:23 PM | Report abuse

Reversal of fortune. Bush out. Obama in. All's right with the World.

Posted by: BlueTwo1 | January 23, 2009 6:22 PM | Report abuse

HIP, HIP, HOORAY!!!

Posted by: JakeD | January 23, 2009 6:18 PM | Report abuse

"You Librals will do everything to hide the truth about Obama’s birth certificate! We all know that this is a conspiracy between the minions of the evil Dr. Soros working through his proxies , The Knights of Templar, The Illuminati, the Masons and of course the vast left wing conspiracy. Why don’t you tell the truth about how the wicked Elders of Zion forged Obama’s birth certificate with assistance from the One Worlders at the Trilateral Commission? And how Obama’s really the 2nd shooter on the grassy knoll. Yeah, I know you’ll say how could he be in Dallas that day when he was only 3 years old but you conveniently hide the secret of how he transported back in time through an anomaly in the space time continuum that was created by the Hadron Supercollider being run by the Gnomes of Zurich. Obama said nothing in opposition to that project though he knows that a black hole was created by that machine and that is where the original drummer from Spinal Tap really is and that he didn’t die in the ridiculous “bizarre gardening accident” , which is nonsense spouted by that fat Hollywood crypto-Marxist film director, Rob Reiner.

How much longer will this conspiracy continue? When will America wake up? Oh the hannity"

Posted by: CynthiaD1 | January 23, 2009 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Isn't that the almost same thing the Repubs said in the past twelve years before 2006. Wonder what happened in their case. They were talking of 40 to 60 years of rule. You would think politicians would have some sense. I guess Clyburn has a safe seat. Seems selfish to me. Kinda like calling the Clintons racist so he could switch his support to Obama.

Posted by: bnw173 | January 23, 2009 6:17 PM | Report abuse

"Obama was not sworn in as President on January 20, 2009 -- exactly as I predicted -- even ask JRM2.

Posted by: JakeD | January 23, 2009 5:53 PM"
--------
As we all know by now Chief Justice Roberts flubbed the swearing in by reversing the context of one line. Whether or not that meant he wasn't sworn in legally I just don't know but enough people were concerned to have Obama take the oath again the following day. So it is possible that JakeD's prediction actually came true which I find funnier than s**t.

Posted by: JRM2 | January 23, 2009 6:17 PM | Report abuse

"Three cheers for obstructionism!"

HIP, HIP, HOORAY!!!

Posted by: JakeD | January 23, 2009 6:13 PM | Report abuse

So when the U.S. State Dept vetted Obama's birth certificate they did a lousy job because they didn't checkout the "long" version?

Did they do a better job with GWB's when he applied for one? And his "long version" (or any copy for that matter) has never been posted on line.

How do we know that along with violating the 12th amendment (since both Cheney and Bush were residents of Texas)whether Bush is a native born American? Where's the proof that his bc is valid?

Posted by: CynthiaD1 | January 23, 2009 6:08 PM | Report abuse

JRM2,
Obstructionism, whether by Republicans or Democrats, more often helps, rather than hurts the American public. It prevents the government from doing something and, seeing as how the government so often makes problems worse with their "solutions," it prevents the government from doing something wrong. I wish the Democrats has been more obstructionist in 2003 when they sided with Republicans in authorizing the President to use force in Iraq. I wish that they had been more obstructionist when President Bush pushed the prescription drug benefit. I wish Republicans had been more obstructionist with respect to the Wall Street Bailout. I pray they will be more obstructionist with this "stimulus" bill.
Obstructionism is a large part of why America has had a stable government and economy for 200+ years and as far as I can tell, it is the primary purpose for the existence of the senate.
Three cheers for obstructionism!

Posted by: bend1 | January 23, 2009 6:04 PM | Report abuse

If anyone else want to discuss the difference between short and LONG FORM birth certificates, please see my posts on the thread linked below ("Oaths, Bibles, and Presidents").

Posted by: JakeD | January 23, 2009 6:00 PM | Report abuse

Clyburn, you nitwit. You're totalling missing the Obama's approach. Take care of the country's business but try to do it in a unified way. We didn't elect you to do it the way you like or DEM or REP way. We elected you people to look after our best interest in the most civilized manner, not rubbing the Republicans noses in it sort of speak which would put their backs up, you nitwit! That's what's called business as usual in Washington DC. Change was promised, remember? Do try to act like an adult.

Posted by: pelohoki | January 23, 2009 5:59 PM | Report abuse

For the record, I am not disputing Obama's American citizenship -- which is why he could get a passport, become a Senator, pass by FactCheck.org, etc. -- simply whether he was born in the United States.

Arnold Schwarzenegger is an American citizen too, but he cannot become President either. No one has seen Obama's LONG FORM birth certificate to verify that fact. Why won't he release that?

Posted by: JakeD

----------
Either the birth certificate is false or it's a valid document. Obama had to submit his bc to get the passport. If the circumstances of his birth were not as stated in the document then the State department would have rejected his application. The entire document had to have been vetted. If he wasn't born in Hawaii, as per the bc, then what part of the document could they then accept as being valid?

And he went through a thorough vetting in 2005 when he was sworn in as Senator. Do you have any idea of how deep the investigation is when you apply for a security clearance? They interview your pet dog. If his birth certificate was in any invalid he would have been denied the clearance.

Yours is such a ridiculous argument.

Posted by: CynthiaD1 | January 23, 2009 5:57 PM | Report abuse

zukermand:

Obama was not sworn in as President on January 20, 2009 -- exactly as I predicted -- even ask JRM2.

I am not leaving, and I am not insane. Are you?

Posted by: JakeD | January 23, 2009 5:53 PM | Report abuse

"Speaker Pelosi, may I remind you you won the elections in 2006, and did nothing for two freakin' years.
Posted by: Chasmosaur1 | January 23, 2009 4:43 PM"
---------
During which time the Republican minority used the filibuster a record amount of times, more than any other congress in American history. Not to mention Bush using the veto at least 6 times (prior he had never used the veto)

It's called 'Obstructionism" and it hurts the American public.

Posted by: JRM2 | January 23, 2009 5:51 PM | Report abuse

During the campaign, it was sport, now it's just crankery, and a little scary.

Posted by: zukermand | January 23, 2009 5:50 PM | Report abuse

Innocently followed a link from the front page. Imagine my surprise at finding you're still at it over here, needling Dems. Get a life. Do some good.

Posted by: zukermand | January 23, 2009 5:48 PM | Report abuse

Please read this except from the 12th amendment to the U.S. Constitution:

"The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves..."

In 2000, during that campaign, Dick Cheney changed his voting registration from Texas to Wyoming in a move to preempt any constitutional challenge if he and GWB were elected. Both were residents of Texas. Cheney spent the majority of his time in Texas in 2000, not Wyoming.

Please note though that the constitution explicitly states, "inhabitant of the same state", not "registered voter".

The 2000 election of GWB as POTUS and Cheney as SCOTUS was clearly a violation of the 12th Amendment. Where were you cons and repubs (and wingnuts) when these two were being sworn in?

Posted by: CynthiaD1 | January 23, 2009 5:45 PM | Report abuse


Obama will not be sworn in as President on January 20, 2009 -- mark my words.

Posted by: JakeD (at least 300 times over the past year)
==========
OK, your words are marked. So, what now?

Posted by: zukermand | November 5, 2008 2:34 PM


zuckermand:

So, now you just have to wait until January 20, 2009 to see if I'm wrong. Regardless, he will never be my President.

Posted by: JakeD | November 5, 2008 4:26 PM

================

What's your deal? Are you insane?


Posted by: zukermand | January 23, 2009 5:45 PM | Report abuse

For the record, I am not disputing Obama's American citizenship -- which is why he could get a passport, become a Senator, pass by FactCheck.org, etc. -- simply whether he was born in the United States.

Arnold Schwarzenegger is an American citizen too, but he cannot become President either. No one has seen Obama's LONG FORM birth certificate to verify that fact. Why won't he release that?

Posted by: JakeD | January 23, 2009 5:37 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats will have to descend to quite a low point to equal the partisanship that was exhibited by the Repubs when they held the majority in the House from 1994 to 2006. Does anyone remember Tom "The Hammer" Delay and his "K Street Project"?

There's no issue if the Democrats can pass legislation without having to get Republicans assistance. That's not the same as the vindictiveness that characterized Republican misrule.

Posted by: CynthiaD1 | January 23, 2009 5:34 PM | Report abuse

dirtyoleman and/or magicInMiami:

If you want to discuss further:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/01/22/oaths_bibles_and_presidents.html

Posted by: JakeD | January 23, 2009 5:26 PM | Report abuse

One of the reasons I love to read the comments on these news stories is to read the remarks of the Right wing wingnuts. They are so entertaining!

And the ones that beat all are the ones that are still focused on President Obama's "birth certificate controversy". Don't you guys know the real story with his BC? It's in the possession of space aliens who have formed an underground colony in Roswell, New Mexico!

Ok, for the upteenth time: Obama's birth certificate was vetted by the Department of State when he applied for his first passport, when as U.S. Senator he obtained a security clearance and by Factcheck.org. The Supreme Court, which is made up of primarily justices appointed by Republican Presidents, has twice dismissed law suits from vexatious wingnuts on this issue. On of lead nuts on this, Philip Berg, is a 9/11 "Truther"!

I know that nothing will stop you guys just as no manner of logical argument will dissuade those who believe that the Apollo moon landings were faked, that the 9/11/01 attacks were actually launched by the U.S. government and that Elvis Presley is alive and didn't die in 1977.

By the way, unlike President Obama, GWB never posted a photocopy of his birth certificate online. How do we know that he was a legitimate President?

ROFLMAO

Posted by: CynthiaD1 | January 23, 2009 5:25 PM | Report abuse

"And lets be blunt about today's Republican leaders. When they ran the House they didn't give Dems the key to the bathrooms. They were about as cooperative as a flock of rabid bats"

What do you have against rabid bats?

Posted by: thebobbob | January 23, 2009 5:19 PM | Report abuse

C'mon people, politicians say a lot of stuff getting elected, but they don't really believe in this "bipartisan" cr@p. They don't care about working with the other side -- they hate them and will not let anyone but "their party" take credit. If any of you really believed this caca, you are too stupid to exist. You "party people" are a joke -- "my side is doing the work of god, the other party is the devil's spawn" . . . you're both just so much stupid masquerading around as informed and reasonable. A plague on BOTH your houses!

Posted by: RBCrook | January 23, 2009 5:18 PM | Report abuse

The American Psychiatric Association needs to revise its Diagnostic Manual and add a category for "I think Obama wasn't eligible to be President" disorder.

Posted by: davidscott1 | January 23, 2009 5:14 PM | Report abuse

i'm with onestring! Neocons gone...now we can watch out for the democrats who enabled them. It may take a while to clean House (and Senate)...and we need to keep vigilant watch and pressure!

Posted by: las100 | January 23, 2009 5:09 PM | Report abuse

Bipartisanship would be nice, but I'm not holding my breath about it. Whatever it takes to get the job done is fine with me, and any congressional republicans who get in the way can kiss their seats good-bye like so many of their buddies in the last two years.

Posted by: binkynh | January 23, 2009 5:09 PM | Report abuse

And if Senate Republicans really want to stand in the way of a recovery bill in the midst of the worst economic crisis in years....

Go for it.

Posted by: davidscott1 | January 23, 2009 5:07 PM | Report abuse

dirtyoleman:

Not necessarily. Between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, the law specified that if you were born outside of the United States and only ONE of your parents was a citizen, that parent must have resided in the United States for a minimum of 10 years, at least FIVE of which were after the age of 16.

READ: http://travel.state.gov/law/info/info_609.html

That was not the case with Obama's mother.

Posted by: JakeD | January 23, 2009 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Dems clearly don't need GOP votes to get much of anything through the House. Where House GOP votes could matter is when a bill goes to the Senate, where it would be preferable to have had some bipartisan support.

I tend to agree with Clyburn though. When you have the House votes already, why go out and give the Republicans larger tax cuts than you want -- or help them loot the Treasury even more to benefit the rich. Been there done that.

And lets be blunt about today's Republican leaders. When they ran the House they didnt give Dems the key to the bathrooms. They were about as cooperative as a flock of rabid bats. These are also people who emphatically proved they have no willingness to take on the major issues of our time. (They gave us a Senate Environment Chair who called global warming a hoax. They gave us Tom DeLay.) I say roll 'em.

Posted by: davidscott1 | January 23, 2009 5:04 PM | Report abuse

JakeD,
What are you talking about, even if he was born in pacific islands. His mother was American. So that makes him a natural born. It is so funny about your point is that if it was true then McCain would have been in the same boat.

Posted by: dirtyoleman | January 23, 2009 5:02 PM | Report abuse

I was actually surprised that Obama took the oath on a Bible the first time he tried it:

http://godfearin.blogspot.com/2008/11/obama-mocks-bible.html

Posted by: JakeD | January 23, 2009 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Here is a warning to Rep Clyburn and the other baby-boom-dinasaur-era politicians that are still operating in the 20th century:

WE KICKED OUT THE LAST PILE OF NEO-CON SCUM AND IF YOU DON'T GET IN LINE, REJECT YOUR OLD WAYS OF DEM'S "NON-WORK", AND DO THE PEOPLE'S BUSINESS WITHOUT PARTISAN B.S.... WE'LL VOTE YOUR SORRY DEMOCRATIC PARTY BUTT OUT OF OFFICE, TOO!

We are watching the dinasaurs like Clyburn, Pelosi, and Reid just as much as we are paying attention to the crimes of the NEO-CONS and we are NOT pleased.

Shut up with the partisanship and get busy on the people's work!

Posted by: onestring | January 23, 2009 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Jake -

Wow! What a new and novel argument for you!

I'm so glad to see you're expanding your dialectic these days to get your point across...

Posted by: Chasmosaur1 | January 23, 2009 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Speaker Pelosi, may I remind you you won the elections in 2006, and did nothing for two freakin' years.

Congress needs a collective enema, or perhaps a collective b*tch-slap. Your positions of power will mean neither diddly nor squat if you don't come together and stop playing these stupid games.

I thought at the Inauguration the "childish things" was a wee bit contrived, but maybe I was wrong. Could Speaker Pelosi's statement be any closer to "nanny-nanny-boo-boo" if she tried?

I'm waiting for Senator Mark Warner to run for the Presidency - a man who can stand on the floor of the Democratic convention and state that he doesn't care what side of the aisle a good idea comes from works for me.

Posted by: Chasmosaur1 | January 23, 2009 4:43 PM | Report abuse

magicInMiami:

I've never said that a Bible was legally required for the oath -- I served in the Army Signals Corp. -- my main concern is whether Obama is a "natural born" citizen.

Posted by: JakeD | January 23, 2009 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Sorry JakeD, take it back to Fox News Channel for another attempt to make the Obama presidency invalid.

Nothing in the constitution says the oath has to be taken with a hand on the bible. He could have used a comic book wouldn't have mattered.

If you had ever served in the military you would know this. When u take the oath, both enlisted and officer, no religious book is used.

Would u, fox news and rush please stop these attempts. Its the bush regime all over again. Just go with the facts. He was elected POTUS; He is POTUS.

STOP THE MADNESS YOU FOOLS!!! YOU LOST!!! LET US GET ON WITH IMPROVING THE COUNTRY!!!

Posted by: magicInMiami | January 23, 2009 4:33 PM | Report abuse

Tell the Republicans to be part of the solution or get out of the way. After all, it's a mess of their making the rest of the country is trying to dig out from under.

Posted by: SarahBB | January 23, 2009 4:30 PM | Report abuse

If the Repubs have a good idea PRESIDENT Obama will consider it, I haven't heard any good ones yet. I am willing to give up my portion of a tax cut if the money could go towards job creation because I know that in the long run, my children and society in general will be better off than if we get some temporary tax relief.

I think PRESIDENT Obama wants as many people on board as possible, not just enough to pass PRESIDENT Obama's stimulus package.

Posted by: JRM2 | January 23, 2009 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Fine by me (BTW: Obama was "elected" but he is not legally POTUS).

Posted by: JakeD | January 23, 2009 3:52 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company