When I heard the news about Republican, Judd Gregg, withdrawing his name for Commerce Secretary, I immediately wondered if it was really "irreconcilable differences." Did Gregg really leave because his philosophy differed with Obama's? If so, he should have known that before he accepted. One has to wonder if there is more to this than meets the eye. This article addresses the effect of the announcement on the majority right wing of the party. I note that those quoted are the far right wingers from Georgia, now the heart of Republican country.
The Republican Party has decided to do everything is can do to obstruct Obama's goals, which is understandable to an extent. However, during this difficult time for this country, too much obstructionism can bring the country's downfall. "Praying" for the Obama Administration to fail is one thing. Actively contributing to the failure borders on treason.
Obama reached out to Republicans, yet the likes of McCain complain that it isn't enough. Obama appointed a Republican for Commerce Secretary, but he withdrew without, apparently, discussing his differences. This sounds very much like another Republican ploy to disrupt the Administration. With the other issues that have come up with nominees this untimely withdrawal simply pours fuel on the fire. One has to wonder what they will come up with next to continue to disrupt the operation of government.
Power corrupts and the Republican Party is a perfect example. The loss of power by a corrupt entity causes even more evil to lurk in the dark recesses of the back rooms as plotting goes on to regain that power. At this point with Republicans, re-capturing power is more important than the state of the country. They will be content to bring down the government, if they think they will be able to rise from the ashes and be in control.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
That is a typical assessment by you. How about considering that a Republican was picked from an area that the Dem. Governor could replace him with a Dem and bring their beloved power into stronger force and then take away the census control from appointee and give to himself and his party, thus bringing more power to Dem party? There are more than one way to consider things if you care to be open minded. I expect censorship soon of conservative talk also under the guise of fairness, when in truth, liberal talk is so lousy that no one wants to listen, thus it is not profitable for sponsors.
Have you not noticed how the talk from campaigning is not now matching the walk? So much hypocrisy that you are willing to overlook. mom2
I love you mom2. I wouldn't worry too much about that censorship. That only comes when the Republicans are in power and are disregarding the Constitution. You are probably right about the choice of Gregg. It could very well have been the fact that a Demo could have been appointed in his place. He sounds like a pretty fair guy. His response to questions about his withdrawal was pretty fair and straight forward.
I think our president has gone a bit too far in his quest for bipartisanship. Well, certainly as far as he can with these guys.
I have another viewpoint: what about if this was merely a political ploy on the part of President Obama so he could say he was a bipartisan president? Whether or not Senator Gregg accepted or declined, President Obama could say the same thing. Regardless, I really tire of the political stunts out of both parties, but that's part of the Washington system & will likely never change.
Regarding Mom2's comment on the so-called Fairness Doctrine: reinstating it would eliminate conservative talk radio. Liberal talk radio typically has to pay stations to air it, rather than the reverse. Therefore, a station can't sell enough advertising to keep it due to low listenership. But, when government targets something, ever notice how they always miss? If stations can't carry conservative talk radio unless they have equal time to opposing viewpoints, then the stations will change their format altogether to something other than talk radio, which would eliminate liberal talk radio too.
Dirk
THE FIRST AMENDMENT, NOT POLITICALLY CORRECT II
http://tsalagiman2.blogspot.com/
Dirk, I agree on the fairness doctrine. Besides, the only ones making an issue of it are the right wingers who are just trying to drum up support for their side. Democrats have already answered them and said they have absolutely no desire to go back to the fairness doctrine.
Post a Comment