Fuck Bipartisanship.

[undeterred]

I don't want to hear that word again for a very long time.

[timeforpeace]

1. Better not listen tonight then.

[undeterred]

7. I am turning the audio off if he says it once.

[Mithreal]

38. Couldn't have been more right.

[Electric Monk]

2. 11 Recs in a minute

k&r

[spanone]

3. i agree one hundred percent.

[buff2]

4. I agree

It's useless when it comes to the repukes.

[valerief]

5. +14 trillion

[babylonsister]

6. Too bad; it will be mentioned tonight. I think that's more for

people who claim they don't think rethugs are doing enough; Obama does try, and will probably continue to do so. Makes the pukes look bad, ya know?

[pleah]

8. K&R I have said this even before he was elected!

:mad:

to add: Rachel just go it right! If he doesn't address this party of no he will lose a lot of people that backed him.

[Cetacea]

9. k&r

[tekisui]

10. Hell fucking yeah. Bi partisan shit. Fuck the repukes.

[NoFace]

11. Thats what the Republicans say as well....they just said it first and stuck to it. NT

[Cronus Protagonist]

12. Proud to recommend

That canard is DONE.........................................................

[Initech]

13. They didn't give a shit about us when they were in power, why should we do the same?

[cliffordu]

14. I don't want to hear it either.

Let them rot where they stand.

[malaise]

15. Hopefully one day

Obama will agree with us

[BootinUp]

16. Fuck winning elections! Yay!

:thumbsdown:

You gotta play the game friend.

[DKRC]

44. Yeah? How's that workin' out so far?

This is what I keep seeing.

[BootinUp]

45. I can count how about you?

We control 2 branches of the federal government, what more do you want? Its hard to fault the Obama/Democratic political strategy the last several years as far winning elections goes.

[fascisthunter]

47. yeah, and what good has come of it?

maybe it's good for upper middle class folks, but it sure hasn't done anything for the majority who barely get by due to the upper class' greed.

[BootinUp]

51. What has come of it is closer

to what Democrats are for than if we hadn't won the elections. Elementary.

[fascisthunter]

53. That Type of Reasoning has brought us to the brink of Fascism

I voted for the man, because he was the "lesser of two evils," and frankly it has done no good so far. Telling me and other voters that this is better than the alternative, isn't going to fly with the electorate, and the more we are told to appreciate the point you just made, the less people will vote altogether. That's elementary. Never expect voters to lower the bar, it's an insult.

Things are getting worse, not better.

[BootinUp]

66. I don't feel like arguing much

I could easily put the shoe on the other foot, but this is just a waste of time. Believe what you will.

[DKRC]

54. He won by repudiating McCain's stances

which he now is embracing, such as "taxing Cadillac plans", "budgetary freezes", & even using the Repug meme of "entitlements".
He didn't win by telling people he was going to stop being the Obama they went into the voting booth for & become "Bipartisanship Barry" in the Oval Office.

Where exactly are the progressives in his administration? IMO MA was the base telling Obama's Clinton/Bush retread admin that the base gave them Congress & the WH, and the base can take it away. They got that message, or they wouldn't be bringing in the progressives who worked so hard to get him elected. He's back out on the campaign trail to shore up the Dems who are worried about November. If the minority party gets to run DC even when they're out of office what exactly is the point of giving the Dems both houses with good majorities?

Rahm can scream "FUCK the Liberals!" til his little head explodes for all the good it will do him if the base doesn't turn out in Nov. Of course it won't matter since he'll just bump the "seat warmer" out of his way back in Chicago.

[Atticus]

59. Actually, a lot of us thought we were voting for someone who would NOT "play the game".

An argument could certainly be made that "playing the game" has squandered most of the immense good will and political capital he had one year ago. It is one thing to prefer bipartisanship, to be open to it, even to make some concessions in order to foster and encourage it.

It is quite another thing to insist that legislation must be continuously watered down in an attempt to win a couple of token GOP votes at the expense of alienating "them what brung you".

Continuing to reward the obstructionist attention-whores after they've put so many knives in our backs is not just lame, it is sick, as in "pathological".

[undeterred]

17. Good speech so far.

I don't consider encouragement for legislators to work together to be the same as "bipartisanship".

[donheld]

19. They're all good speeches, It's what follows that sucks

[DisgustedInMN]

20. Bingo!

I tried to pay my mortgage with pretty speech, but they insisted on money.

[Dinger]

18. bipartisanshp=bend over

That is all.

[Odin2005]

21. Bipartisanship is a DLC corporatist euphemism for "capitulation".

[Kablooie]

22. But ... if they can't get a Republican Senator to vote aye, no legislation can pass.

[xchrom]

23. Recommend

[proud patriot]

24. I'm in

:bounce:

[Mike_03]

61. Proud Patriot, I recognize you and am wondering

is there any way to get my old status back at DU. I want to come back here. Not sure how.

[Wilms]

25. .

[Vidar]

26. K&R.

[Hepburn]

27. It's not the bipartisanship that gets me....

...it's the Repuke asskissing that pisses me off.

[lame54]

28. yes - when I heard that at the beginning of the speech - I almost turned the tv off

[burning rain]

29. Unfortunately, you'll continue to hear it a lot.

Many Democrats like to lie and say they need Republican cooperation, when in reality they don't need a single Republican vote--just 218 Democrats in the House, and 51 in the Senate with the nuclear option. Bipartisanship and the phony "need" for GOP cooperation are just excuses for not getting things done, while at the same time claiming, Oh, we reeeeeally wanted to, but the meanypants Republicans wouldn't let us! It's bullshit.

[inna]

30. Amen. KR+106

[bvar22]

31. The American People voted for CHANGE....

...NOT for only as much change as the Republicans are happy with.

Letting the Comfort Level of Republicans determine POLICY in the Obama administration is NOT what I voted for.

[Echo In Light]

32. Jon Stewart nailed it last night ... if you caught it

[RoadRage]

33. At least until the '12 or '16 election.. when the "R's" are back in charge.. right?

Sorry.. but from '00 - '06, people bitched and bitched about how the right was just ramming through item after item. Now that the shoe is on the other foot.. we hate bi-partisianship and we want to ram through whatever we can.

Nothing changes.

[undeterred]

34. Totally 100% incorrect.

Fuck Bipartisanship with a party that doesn't believe in it, and does everything they can to make sure nothing good can happen, at the expense of the American people.

Good Democratic Senators like Feingold, are on the left, but highly bipartisan, and they get a lot done.

Democrats play fair and try to engage the other side- Obama has bent over backwards to do so and all they've done is say no to him. If he hadn't tried so hard he would have gotten much more done.

Bush didn't even pretend to be bipartisan.

[defendandprotect]

50. Hardly . . . GOP has never engaged in bipartisanship over decades . ..

Rather they've engaged in political violence, election steals, and aggressive control

of the Congress whether they were minority -- in which case we turned the Senate over

to them -- or when they're the majority.

Not to mention their noise machines -- swiftboating, etal --

Let's look at the last two speeches by Pres. Obama where a Congressman first and now a

US Supreme Court Justice felt a need to aggressively contradict the president during his speech!

These are thugs -- made clear by their own actions.

And let'a recall what W said about offering hands across the aisle --

i.e., that he'd be happy to do it if the Dems were willing to go along with him!

You might also recall the small matter of the 2004 election steal and Conyer's being refused

a hearing room! Conyer's ended up holding the hearing in the basement!

This isn't a matter of "returning the favor" ... it's a matter of understanding --

recognizing -- and acknowledging who we're dealing with!

Enough of the scam -- move on.

[Atticus]

60. Very well said. nt

[NoKoolAideForMeThx]

35. I couldn't agree more...

Its time we remember WE'RE the party in power. Go Bold or Go Home... :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr:

[L0oniX]

36. K & R

[butterfly77]

37. This is one post ..

I definitely agree with..

[Kablooie]

39. Bipartisan has to mean find ways to strongarm Republicans into voting 'yes'.

If you can't do this, it has no meaning at all.
No Repub will vote 'yes' unless he's being threatened.

[Techn0Girl]

40. Welcome To The The Face Of The New DU - One Four Letter Word in a single sentence post- 100+ recs :(

[hay rick]

49. Brevity is the soul of wit.

[undeterred]

68. Actually, its the old face...

Write a long thoughtful post and hardly anyone takes the time to read it.

Spit out a couple of words that happen to hit on what everyone is thinking and its a hit. :shrug:

[MarinCoUSA]

41. Double Fuck Bipartisanship. FOREVER!

Channel your inner fascist-Norquest: bipartisanship is date rape.

[jkeefazo]

42. Remember who's sucking hind tit here. . .

Man, you better believe it. Obama is too full of self-love, he believes that he can charm the Republican snake through his vision of "logic" and/or "civility"--hell, you won the election, now get ON with it. Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead; in short, if you're the boss, BE THE BOSS. . .

[Sannum]

43. I believe in Bipartisanship as much as Cheney does.

Give them a taste of the past 8 years.

[uppityperson]

46. I am tired of the word, but would like to see people working together

I don't give a flying leap which party has the majority, they should work together. This country has become so divided that I really fear for it. I would love to see true Bipartisanship.

[DKRC]

63. We're so divided because some of us are fighting back

instead of trying to reason with unreasonable people. If someone makes it clear they mean to kill me, I am not obligated to buy the gun, load it for them, & then stand there & do nothing.
If you don't want to fight, fine, fall back to make way for someone who does. I'd rather fight & lose, than lose not having fought at all.

YMMV


PS If the Repugs haven't shown you who they are by now I don't know what else to tell you. :shrug:

[goforit]

48. Agree!!!

[undergroundnomore]

52. If someone

is trying to kill you do you have to assist them so they can accomplish their goal? That's how I see the Republican party. They are trying to destroy our country and they want us to help them do it!!!! Well SCREW THAT!!!!! Forget Bipartisanship? ABSOLUTELY

[Plucketeer]

55. Bipartisanship would be fine

if only we had someone to exercize it with.

[Sebastian Doyle]

56. It's bad enough we have to be "bipartisan" with the Repukes in our own party

Trying to find common ground with the admitted Republicans is totally futile.

[Mike_03]

57. I couldn't agree more,. Thos days are over.

I am open to warfare.

[Mike_03]

58. This is too much to ask, but I have been a member here since

2003, and given money to DU, because I fucking LOVE THIS PLACE.

But I left, but I wonder if I could get my old status back, because I made a lot of posts here, gave a lot of money, any way to get my old name back?


It would mean a lot

[uppityperson]

62. Contact the admins

http://www.democraticunderground.com/contact.html

[alberg]

64. K&R!

[SlingBlade]

65. Let me say, K & R Undeterred ....

These bastards will Bi-Partisanship this Nation straight into fascism.
All the while cheering like a bunch of slack jawed imbeciles.

[JanMichael]

67. Agreed. You cannot negotiate away everything people wanted to appease a few assholes.

Arguing with crazy people NEVER works.

I hope, nah, it won't happen...