Results 1 to 10 of 71
03-25-2015, 05:20 AM #1
Food for thought on Republican Obstructionism....
There have been 168 senate filibusters for Presidential Cabinet Nominee's in the history of the United States. 82 of those (IE almost half).. have been Republican filibusters to President Obama's cabinet. Remember that the next time your friend says everything is Obama's fault because he doesn't "compromise" with the Republicans.
For an updated look at what I have for sale or trade please click my eBay User ID.... usually thousands of items available in all genre's
03-25-2015, 08:34 AM #2
This means that the numbers in the graphic -- 82 presidential nominees blocked under Obama and 86 nominees blocked previously -- were described incorrectly. The figures actually represent the number of cloture attempts that had been made, not the people who were nominated .
This matters because some of the nominations resulted in multiple cloture efforts. By our calculation, there were actually 68 individual nominees blocked prior to Obama taking office and 79 (so far) during Obama’s term, for a total of 147.
It also wouldn't be necessary to attempt blocks if he would stop putting people up for consideration who have such extremist and uber-liberal ideals. My guess is if we had a Republican president who constantly put people up for consideration who support ending abortion, are openly anti-gay, supported mandatory death sentences for all serious drug offenders and wanted to require ID for voting then libs would be doing just as much filibustering.
This whole "working together" thing goes both ways. This liberal idea that Obama should be allowed to do anything and everything that he wants and if Republicans don't go along then they are obstructionist is just ignorant. We have a two-party system and a three body government to provide these checks and balances for a reason. This is not a dictatorship.
03-25-2015, 08:42 AM #3
03-25-2015, 08:46 AM #4
03-25-2015, 09:14 AM #5
We should note that, no matter who is in the White House, the opposing party often figures out ways to create delays in the Senate. Republicans controlled the Senate during much of Bill Clinton’s presidency, so nominees were easily derailed simply by refusing to hold a hearing. While Obama’s judicial nominees have often waited a long time for a vote after committee approval, we have earlier documented how George W. Bush’s nominees were slow-walked by Democrats before the committee hearing. Bush’s appeals court nominees, in fact, took four times as long to get a hearing as Obama’s nominees.
Harry Reids original Tweet that used OP's graphic was given
Two PinocchiosSignificant omissions and/or exaggerations. Some factual error may be involved but not necessarily. A politician can create a false, misleading impression by playing with words and using legalistic language that means little to ordinary people.
Can OP just change his name to I HATE REPUBLICANS? Just wondering
03-25-2015, 09:16 AM #6
03-25-2015, 09:23 AM #7
Whichever numbers you use, they both tell the same story. Even if half of the blocks are "uber-liberals" worthy of being blocked by the GOP that still leaves enough blocks to this one President's nominations to prove the "Obstructionist" point. Claiming BOTH do it, does not make it okay. The whole point of the thread is the disproportionate level of blocking.
03-25-2015, 10:04 AM #8
That's a pretty telling statistic even at 68 rather than 86. It goes to show you how vast the gap is between our political "leaders".Check out my NEW FaceBook Fan page of my abstract painting and graphic design work!!!
03-25-2015, 10:19 AM #9
It goes to show you how vast the gap is between our political "leaders".Jay Shrewsbury
03-25-2015, 11:33 AM #10
The irony in all of this is that Dems want to cry obstructionism while totally ignoring that 1,540 Obama nominees have been confirmed and only 4 have been denied. So this is essentially Democrats going full-blown crybaby over .002% of their nominees not being approved. Freakin idiots.