« | »

Obama: It’ll Be Easier To Govern With Dem House

From The Hill:

Obama: ‘Whole lot easier’ to govern with Pelosi as Speaker

By Amie Parnes and Justin Sink | April 4, 2013

President Obama returned to the fundraising trail Wednesday night with an eye on winning a House majority next year, telling donors in California it would be a “whole lot easier to govern” if Democrats controlled both chambers of Congress.

At fundraisers for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) in San Francisco, Obama stressed the importance of returning the speakership to Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), calling her a "fearless leader" who is “tough as nails.”

And dumb as a bag of hammers.

Obama, speaking to supporters at a pair of events, said he has been sincere in his recent outreach to “well-meaning” Republicans and saw the potential for cooperation on a slew of issues ranging from the debt to immigration reform to gun control.

“My intention here is to try to get as much done with the Republican Party over the next two years as I can, because we can’t have perpetual campaigns,” Obama said to about 100 supporters in the home of Kat Taylor and Tom Steyer.

In other words, Obama said the exact of opposite of what he is actually doing. In fact, if he didn’t want a perpetual campaign he would not be fundraising.

But the president said his second-term ambitions can’t be fully realized unless Pelosi wins back the Speaker’s gavel in the 2014 mid-term elections and is again “a fully empowered partner" in Washington.

“I would love nothing better than an effective, loyal opposition that is willing to meet us halfway to move the country forward," he said of Republicans at the home of Ann and Gordon Getty, where the second fundraiser was held.

(Remember when the Gettys used to be hated? But now they give to the Democrats and are universally beloved.)

"But I would be dishonest if I didn’t say that it would be a whole lot easier to govern if I had Nancy Pelosi as Speaker." …

And by "govern" Obama means ‘rule.’

Obama said he was hopeful about the chances of passing immigration reform in the coming months — even as he needled Republicans for not embracing the Hispanic community during the 2012 election.

“It’s interesting how clarifying to the mind Democrats getting 70 percent of the Latino vote was in suggesting that maybe we needed to finally fix a broken immigration system,” he said in his first fundraiser.

During a cocktail reception, he mentioned other priorities, including college affordability and climate change.

“The thing that I’m going to have to try to work to persuade the American people a little more convincingly on is this notion that there’s a contradiction between our economy and our environment is just a false choice,” Obama said.

In other words, once he has full control of Congress, he will also ram through a carbon tax and other ‘climate change’ nonsense.

Steyer, a hedge fund billionaire, is pledging to spend as much of his fortune as necessary to make climate change “the defining issue of our generation.” …

And this fundraiser will make certain he gets his way.

The events marked Obama’s first return to the circuit since Oct. 11, and they followed a successful campaign that raised $1.1 billion for his reelection.

Both of Wednesday’s fundraisers were in San Francisco’s ritzy Pacific Heights neighborhood. Tickets cost between $5,000 and $32,400…

Obama has made no secret of his desire to win back the House next year, which would go a long way toward helping him buttress his legacy. Much of Obama’s agenda is stuck with Republicans in control of the lower chamber.

“We just want to get stuff done,” he said at the Getty home….

And he doesn’t want any opposition to his very unpopular agenda.

This article was posted by Steve on Thursday, April 4th, 2013. Comments are currently closed.

3 Responses to “Obama: It’ll Be Easier To Govern With Dem House”

  1. Liberals Demise says:

    Will he ever get off the campaign trail and vacations?

  2. bousquem25 says:

    Of course it will be easier to “govern” if the dems control all of the goverment. Pelosi will just rubberstamp and browbeat the house into signing off on whatever Obama wants. They’ll do like the did when Obama first got elected, not read laws but pass them in backroom votes that exclude any republicans or opposition members.

  3. Petronius says:

    Nerobama : “I would love nothing better than an effective, loyal opposition that is willing to meet us halfway to move the country forward….”

    It is debatable whether the two-party system still has any value. If there is any value, it rests not in the ability of the parties to compromise and find consensus. Rather the two party system offers one advantage –– it enables the parties to operate as a check and balance on each other.

    This is not a check and balance prescribed by the Constitution. However, it is a check and balance operating by long tradition and custom in support of the Constitution. It is particularly important that the conservative party function as a check on the unconstitutional excesses of the radical party.

    But merely because the Republicans are enabled to operate as a check doesn’t mean that they will in practice do so. And when they don’t check, what purpose do they serve?

    Thus whenever the Republican Party allows the appointment of activist Supreme Court justices and lower court Federal judges –– judges who base legal decisions in Liberal ideology rather than in the Constitution and laws of the United States –– then the Republican Party fails in its mission.

    When the Republican Party fails to speak out against the unconstitutional excesses of Nerobama and his Bolshevik thugs in the Congress, the Republican Party no longer serves any useful purpose. It is no longer a check in defense of the Constitution, but by its acquiescence becomes a silent partner in the destruction of the Constitution and of constitutional government.

    In that case the Republicans are merely the illusion of an opposition party, and all we really have left are two parties sharing power. Through their Congressional committee assignments and seniority system they set the agenda, control the money, and share out the spoils. In that case the Republicans are worse than useless — they become the handmaidens of the radicals. They become part of the problem.

    If the Republican Party lacks the will to defend the Constitution, it should dissolve itself. Failing that it must be replaced by the people with a new party. For otherwise the people have no alternatives but rebellion or slow submission to Bolshevik tyranny.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »