Obama blames Founding Fathers

[D3thr0n3d K1ng]

Obamas right. The US government was created by a landed aristocracy for the benefit of landed aristocracy. Originally only white male land-owners were allowed to vote.

Thats why any type of populist or social democratic legislation always gets shot down so easily, despite having lots of popular support.

 

[Cold Front]

Obamas right. The US government was created by a landed aristocracy for the benefit of landed aristocracy. Originally only white male land-owners were allowed to vote.

Thats why any type of populist or social democratic legislation always gets shot down so easily, despite having lots of popular support.

Oh, you mean shot down like the Great Society and the New Deal were shot down?

 

[MicroBrew]

Looks to me like he is making an observation , as opposed to condemning our form of government as unfair and broken.

 

[LucasWithLidOff]

Typical Conservative's, defending an archaic system that doesn't work any more Ruth Bader Ginsberg Who is a hell of a lot smarter then any of you neck beard's. confirmed that a parliamentary system works better.

Ruth Bader Ginsberg. lawl

 

[Cold Front]

Obama has failed because he's a low-energy guy and an incompetent executive who was elected because he was charismatic and a post-racial symbol. He also lucked out by coming along just as the GOP was imploding.

Managing bureaucracies and legislative initiatives takes a lot to concentrated executive energy.

LBJ could do it by working eighteen- and twenty-hour days and knowing more about the legislative process than anyone alive. Eisenhower could do it because he had been a general who had managed huge armies. FDR could do it because huge bureaucracies essentially didn't even exist before he came along and so bureaucratic inertia didn't affect his legislation.

Obama can't do it because he's never had to work hard for a living in politics, and he's not an experienced executive. He thinks he can give a speech and a good program will come into existence.

 

[Cold Front]

Looks to me like he is making an observation , as opposed to condemning our form of government as unfair and broken.

Presidents don't just make academic observations. They know - even if you don't - the effect of their comments on national debates.

 

[MicroBrew]

Presidents don't just make academic observations. They know - even if you don't - the effect of their comments on national debates.

So Presidents are never allowed to explain a situation?

Surely you aren't suggesting Obama wanted to change our form of representative government, so what else other than an observation could it be.

 

[Quipling]

You misspelled Ruth Bader Ginsburg there, genius.

And how the hell is she an expert in comparing international political systems?

Ginsburg actually does this on a regular basis. You might be the first person I've heard question her expertise on that. She imports legal concepts from elsewhere into some of her opinions, probably as much or more than any other justice currently on the court.

 

[ocfightfan]

He cites some technically correct facts but fails to explain his lack of a coherent agenda. The President is also the legislator in chief. It is entirely possible for him to propose legislation and work with members of congress to get it passed.

Obama is simply too incompetent to do anything without a super majority. It's the reason why he keeps attempting to do things through executive fiat. He is unable to deal with the reality of trying to work with congress. That takes skill and a work ethic, two things he lacks.

His entire life he was handed things on a silver platter because of who he was. Guilty white liberals were eager to promote him without a shred of substance. Now he actually has to work hard and deal with people that aren't just going to role over and do tricks for him. He is not up to the task.

 

[LucasWithLidOff]

He cites some technically correct facts but fails to explain his lack of a coherent agenda. The President is also the legislator in chief. It is entirely possible for him to propose legislation and work with members of congress to get it passed.

Obama is simply too incompetent to do anything without a super majority. It's the reason why he keeps attempting to do things through executive fiat. He is unable to deal with the reality of trying to work with congress. That takes skill and a work ethic, two things he lacks.

His entire life he was handed things on a silver platter because of who he was. Guilty white liberals were eager to promote him without a shred of substance. Now he actually has to work hard and deal with people that aren't just going to role over and do tricks for him. He is not up to the task.

That's unfair to criticize Obama just because racists don't want to compromise with him.

 

[ralphc1]

He cites some technically correct facts but fails to explain his lack of a coherent agenda. The President is also the legislator in chief. It is entirely possible for him to propose legislation and work with members of congress to get it passed.

Obama is simply too incompetent to do anything without a super majority. It's the reason why he keeps attempting to do things through executive fiat. He is unable to deal with the reality of trying to work with congress. That takes skill and a work ethic, two things he lacks.

His entire life he was handed things on a silver platter because of who he was. Guilty white liberals were eager to promote him without a shred of substance. Now he actually has to work hard and deal with people that aren't just going to role over and do tricks for him. He is not up to the task.

Republicans absolutely will not work with Obama. Their party will shun them if they do, meaning no money for elections and a well funded campaign to unseat them.

 

[Cold Front]

So Presidents are never allowed to explain a situation?

Surely you aren't suggesting Obama wanted to change our form of representative government, so what else other than an observation could it be.

No, he doesn't want to change our system of government. That would take too much work, and Obama is not that ambitious.

What he does want to do is explain his own failure, and so he goes back to 1787 to give his analysis a distinguished lineage.

Of course he largely skips over the next two hundred and twenty-seven years because any micro-analysis would show some rather large holes in his theory.

 

[Denter]

Pretty much. The vast majority of governance was always supposed to be a state responsibility which is why passing things at the federal level was made so hard.

But these days, it seems like people want everything done at the federal level from minimum wage to healthcare to social policy. Even though that was never the Founding Fathers' intent.

Good post.

 

[Cold Front]

Ginsburg actually does this on a regular basis. You might be the first person I've heard question her expertise on that. She imports legal concepts from elsewhere into some of her opinions, probably as much or more than any other justice currently on the court.

Comparing judicial systems doesn't make her an expert on whether the parliamentary system is better than the checks-and-balances, American-style of government. Nor does it qualify her to understand what factors she should be looking at to even judge the difference. Better in what way and for whom?

 

[drowningidiot]

He cites some technically correct facts but fails to explain his lack of a coherent agenda. The President is also the legislator in chief. It is entirely possible for him to propose legislation and work with members of congress to get it passed.

Obama is simply too incompetent to do anything without a super majority. It's the reason why he keeps attempting to do things through executive fiat. He is unable to deal with the reality of trying to work with congress. That takes skill and a work ethic, two things he lacks.

His entire life he was handed things on a silver platter because of who he was. Guilty white liberals were eager to promote him without a shred of substance. Now he actually has to work hard and deal with people that aren't just going to role over and do tricks for him. He is not up to the task.

This is like saying somebody is incompetent because they didn't manage to work with the Taliban to create a better world. It's the Republicans right to mindlessly oppose anything the other team tries to do but lets not pretend that failing to work them is some kind indictment of presidential competence.

The silver platter thing is also very amusing considering the GOP's last president and presidential ticket were all trustfund babies.

 

[MyOwnSummer12]

Would you really want the country ran by North Dakotans? I'm from there and wouldn't want them to run the country.

North Dakota is safe, clean, and has about a 1% unemployment rate. They should be the model for the country.

 

[Cold Front]

North Dakota is safe, clean, and has about a 1% unemployment rate. They should be the model for the country.

Exactly.

http://www.businessinsider.com/happiest-states-in-america-2014-2

North Dakota has the highest "Well-Being Index Score" among all states in the country.

Low unemployment, low crime, cheap real estate and cost of living. Yeah, let's make the middle of America more like California and New York - that will make them happier.

 

[Cold Front]

The silver platter thing is also very amusing considering the GOP's last president and presidential ticket were all trustfund babies.

Both Bush and Obama owe their presidencies to their fathers. There I said it. You happy now?

 

[MyOwnSummer12]

Sounds like someone doesn't understand the reasoning of the Founders.


Constitutional History Lecture 7: The Philadelphia Convention
[YT]y9FlfjWr60Q[/YT]

Constitutional History Lecture 8: Ratification
[YT]rxBJTQicLt4[/YT]

Constitutional History Lecture 9: The Federalist (Papers)
[YT]TEibeUEgJR0[/YT]

 

[D3thr0n3d K1ng]

Oh, you mean shot down like the Great Society and the New Deal were shot down?

The New Deal was controversial when it was enacted and is still controversial today.

And even after the US was in a terrible, desperate depression and it was enacted, as soon as it started to make some progress in improving the economy the government stopped it for fear of being 'too Commie'.