Obama: America voting for Republican majorities will result in "hand-to-hand combat"

[Little-Acorn]

When I first saw that headline, I thought it was some hysterical blogger exaggerating for all he was worth (which isn't much). But no, the President himself used those words, in public, apparently to describe the Democrats' response to a vote they disagreed with.

He likely meant it metaphorically. Still, might it be time to send Bill Clinton to have a little talk with the other black president behind the woodshed, about being careful in using language that might incite violence?

BTW, now Obama is calling in on radio talk shows to try to get people's attention. Is that what "Change" has come to? Or maybe "Hope"?

If he believes that calling in on a radio talk show is an appropriate venue for the President of the United States, why doesn't he call in on Rush Limbaugh's show? I'm sure Limbaugh would put him on the air immediately. And the audience would be anywhere from ten to a hundred times larger than anything he'd find on Baisden's show.

-------------------------------

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-obama-base-20101008,0,3160644.story

GOP takeover of Congress would mean 'hand-to-hand combat,' Obama warns

By Michael A. Memoli, Tribune Washington Bureau
Thursday, Oct. 7, 2010
3:36 p.m. PDT

A Republican majority would threaten policies to stabilize the economy, the president says during a radio interview, part of an effort to rally key Democratic constituencies.

Washington — A Republican majority in Congress would mean "hand-to-hand combat" on Capitol Hill for the next two years, threatening policies Democrats have enacted to stabilize the economy, President Obama warned Wednesday.

Speaking on Michael Baisden's syndicated radio show, Obama also made a direct appeal to African Americans about the importance of the November vote, even though he's not on the ballot himself.

Obama called into Baisden's show, syndicated to 71 radio stations in 21 states, as part of his effort to rally core Democratic constituencies with less than four weeks before the election. Although his campaign itinerary is limited by sagging approval ratings in key states, Obama is making a more-targeted effort focused on supportive venues like Baisden's show.

"They [Republicans] are fired up. They are mobilized. They see an opportunity to take back the House, maybe take back the Senate," he said. "If they're successful in doing that, they've already said they're going to go back to the same policies that were in place during the Bush administration. That means that we are going to have just hand-to-hand combat up here on Capitol Hill."

[KarlMarx]

Obama's rhetoric simply betrays the desperate condition of his Administration and his party.

FACT: 41 million Americans, 1 out of every 7, are now on food stamps, more than at any time in our entire history. What is even worse is that the number has been climbing ever since Obama took office... no wonder Sean Hannity is calling the Democrats "the party of food stamps".

Obama offers nothing but the same tragedy of the last 2 years.... He and his administration offer no plan, have no ideas, and offer no hope.

I may be up the night of November 2nd just to see what kind of trouncing the American public has in store for them.

[Kathianne]

Seems the theme of the week with the administration is violence:

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/123237-biden-riles-the-audience-youre-the-dullest-audience-ive-ever-spoken-to

Biden, being Biden, also insults his audience:



Biden: 'You’re the dullest audience I’ve ever spoken to'
By Jordan Fabian - 10/07/10 02:48 PM ET

Vice President Joe Biden got a laugh from his audience at a Wisconsin fundraising event Thursday when he tried to rile the crowd about the economic collapse of 2008.

“We want to reward people who manufacture things in the United States, in Wisconsin, not to take them overseas to China and to other countries!” he said to a silent room at the event for Democratic gubernatorial nominee Tom Barrett, according to a White House pool report.

He continued, saying, “You’re the dullest audience I’ve ever spoken to," at which point he got applause and laughs. "Do you realize how many jobs Wisconsin lost? It’s staggering!"

...

The vice president has argued at previous events that Democrats have begun to reverse the momentum that had them sliding to large losses on Election Day. He has also taken several pointed shots at the GOP, jokingly saying this week that he would "strangle" Republicans who talk about the deficit.

...

[fj1200]

"That means that we are going to have just hand-to-hand combat up here on Capitol Hill."

It's nice to say that you want to be "post-partisan" with majorities in both houses but now he says "hand-to-hand" when he will actually have to work with the other side? Way to open up the next Congress. :rolleyes:

[SassyLady]

I say them keep talking ... they are helping dig their grave even deeper.

BTW ... I not voting for any imcumbent ... regardless of their party.

This time I really do want "change" and I "hope" this election and the next one (2012) breaks up the "club" in DC.

[red states rule]

I say them keep talking ... they are helping dig their grave even deeper.

BTW ... I not voting for any imcumbent ... regardless of their party.

This time I really do want "change" and I "hope" this election and the next one (2012) breaks up the "club" in DC.

Could not agree more. I want Obama and Biden to be on TV everyday between now and Nov 2

The numbers are getting better and better for the country

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/

[bullypulpit]

When I first saw that headline, I thought it was some hysterical blogger exaggerating for all he was worth (which isn't much). But no, the President himself used those words, in public, apparently to describe the Democrats' response to a vote they disagreed with.

He likely meant it metaphorically. Still, might it be time to send Bill Clinton to have a little talk with the other black president behind the woodshed, about being careful in using language that might incite violence?

BTW, now Obama is calling in on radio talk shows to try to get people's attention. Is that what "Change" has come to? Or maybe "Hope"?

If he believes that calling in on a radio talk show is an appropriate venue for the President of the United States, why doesn't he call in on Rush Limbaugh's show? I'm sure Limbaugh would put him on the air immediately. And the audience would be anywhere from ten to a hundred times larger than anything he'd find on Baisden's show.

-------------------------------



It's not "likely" at all that he meant "hand to hand combat" metaphorically. It's a certainty. You might wanna ice yer groin after that stretch.

[Indy]

When I first saw that headline, I thought it was some hysterical blogger exaggerating for all he was worth (which isn't much). But no, the President himself used those words, in public, apparently to describe the Democrats' response to a vote they disagreed with.

He likely meant it metaphorically. Still, might it be time to send Bill Clinton to have a little talk with the other black president behind the woodshed, about being careful in using language that might incite violence?

BTW, now Obama is calling in on radio talk shows to try to get people's attention. Is that what "Change" has come to? Or maybe "Hope"?

If he believes that calling in on a radio talk show is an appropriate venue for the President of the United States, why doesn't he call in on Rush Limbaugh's show? I'm sure Limbaugh would put him on the air immediately. And the audience would be anywhere from ten to a hundred times larger than anything he'd find on Baisden's show.

-------------------------------

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-obama-base-20101008,0,3160644.story

GOP takeover of Congress would mean 'hand-to-hand combat,' Obama warns

By Michael A. Memoli, Tribune Washington Bureau
Thursday, Oct. 7, 2010
3:36 p.m. PDT

A Republican majority would threaten policies to stabilize the economy, the president says during a radio interview, part of an effort to rally key Democratic constituencies.

Washington — A Republican majority in Congress would mean "hand-to-hand combat" on Capitol Hill for the next two years, threatening policies Democrats have enacted to stabilize the economy, President Obama warned Wednesday.

Speaking on Michael Baisden's syndicated radio show, Obama also made a direct appeal to African Americans about the importance of the November vote, even though he's not on the ballot himself.

Obama called into Baisden's show, syndicated to 71 radio stations in 21 states, as part of his effort to rally core Democratic constituencies with less than four weeks before the election. Although his campaign itinerary is limited by sagging approval ratings in key states, Obama is making a more-targeted effort focused on supportive venues like Baisden's show.

"They [Republicans] are fired up. They are mobilized. They see an opportunity to take back the House, maybe take back the Senate," he said. "If they're successful in doing that, they've already said they're going to go back to the same policies that were in place during the Bush administration. That means that we are going to have just hand-to-hand combat up here on Capitol Hill."
Calling into liberal talk shows should get him about a dozen listeners.:laugh:

[red states rule]

It's not "likely" at all that he meant "hand to hand combat" metaphorically. It's a certainty. You might wanna ice yer groin after that stretch.

Obama sees the mess he was created mand the bigger mess he will be in starting the monring of Nov 3

Of course, he is leaving country to avoid having to comment on his defeat at the ballot box

He understands he will either have to give up his liberal tax and spend policies or risk standing by those principals and face the voters in 2012

Now you might want to grow a pair and return to this thread BP

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?29418-Another-Insane-Ad-From-the-Enviro-Wackos

[bullypulpit]

Obama sees the mess he was created mand the bigger mess he will be in starting the monring of Nov 3

Of course, he is leaving country to avoid having to comment on his defeat at the ballot box

He understands he will either have to give up his liberal tax and spend policies or risk standing by those principals and face the voters in 2012

Now you might want to grow a pair and return to this thread BP

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?29418-Another-Insane-Ad-From-the-Enviro-Wackos

He started with the mess left behind by yer hero GWB, and the GOP is obstructing every attempt to clean it up. It was the GOP reliance on the long discredited "supply-side" economics during the Bush administration that led us to our current straights. Dick Cheney himself said "Deficits don't matter...". That's straight from the Alan Laffer school of economics. The continued obsession with the Laffer Curve afflicting the GOP has left America struggling to recover from a recession caused by, among other things, the deregulation of financial markets. It has left the GOP unable to see ANY solution to our current economic straights beyond continued tax-cuts. A simple-minded solution for simple minds, but which has nothing at all to do with reality.

Time and time again, it has been shown that income tax rates below 40% have little or no impact on the financial decisions of anyone from a blue-collar worker contemplating a retirement plan to an investment banker pondering a new invention. It's worth noting here that when the Bush tax cuts went into effect, tax receipts didn't expand as the Laffer Curve predicted...they tanked.

Oh, and Red, you might wanna stop drunk typing.

[Nukeman]

He started with the mess left behind by yer hero GWB, and the GOP is obstructing every attempt to clean it up. It was the GOP reliance on the long discredited "supply-side" economics during the Bush administration that led us to our current straights. Dick Cheney himself said "Deficits don't matter...". That's straight from the Alan Laffer school of economics. The continued obsession with the Laffer Curve afflicting the GOP has left America struggling to recover from a recession caused by, among other things, the deregulation of financial markets. It has left the GOP unable to see ANY solution to our current economic straights beyond continued tax-cuts. A simple-minded solution for simple minds, but which has nothing at all to do with reality.

Time and time again, it has been shown that income tax rates below 40% have little or no impact on the financial decisions of anyone from a blue-collar worker contemplating a retirement plan to an investment banker pondering a new invention. It's worth noting here that when the Bush tax cuts went into effect, tax receipts didn't expand as the Laffer Curve predicted...they tanked.

Oh, and Red, you might wanna stop drunk typing.
Hey dumbass, who controls BOTH the HOUSE AND SENATE?????????? and have for 4 years now!!!!!!!! They have a majority in both houses yet they still can't pass anything.... YOU need to get a reality check and realize it isn't only the GOP that has problems with this idiots ideas but his own party as well, if not they would have crammed this shit down our throats already (can anyone say obamacare)........!!!!!!

[PostmodernProphet]

there's been hand to hand combat for two years.....it's just that the Republicans will be getting reinforcements.....

[fj1200]

He started with the mess left behind by yer hero GWB, and the GOP is obstructing every attempt to clean it up. It was the GOP reliance on the long discredited "supply-side" economics during the Bush administration that led us to our current straights. Dick Cheney himself said "Deficits don't matter...". That's straight from the Alan Laffer school of economics. The continued obsession with the Laffer Curve afflicting the GOP has left America struggling to recover from a recession caused by, among other things, the deregulation of financial markets. It has left the GOP unable to see ANY solution to our current economic straights beyond continued tax-cuts. A simple-minded solution for simple minds, but which has nothing at all to do with reality.

Time and time again, it has been shown that income tax rates below 40% have little or no impact on the financial decisions of anyone from a blue-collar worker contemplating a retirement plan to an investment banker pondering a new invention. It's worth noting here that when the Bush tax cuts went into effect, tax receipts didn't expand as the Laffer Curve predicted...they tanked.

Oh, and Red, you might wanna stop drunk typing.

If a certain member of another forum I post on driveled the above I would have summarily accused him of blathering away with his talking points. However, not all of the Bush tax cuts were particularly supply side in the beginning especially when succumbing to Dem pressure he went along with the tax rebate which is not stimulative and drops directly down to the debt. And that would have been the first of 3 such attempts favored by the left in the interest of "fairness." And that doesn't even address the idiotic phasing in of the '01 tax cuts, '03 accelerated the phase in period. But all of that is elementary when it's been shown that the driver for tax revenues is GDP, not tax rates.

[bullypulpit]

Hey dumbass, who controls BOTH the HOUSE AND SENATE?????????? and have for 4 years now!!!!!!!! They have a majority in both houses yet they still can't pass anything.... YOU need to get a reality check and realize it isn't only the GOP that has problems with this idiots ideas but his own party as well, if not they would have crammed this shit down our throats already (can anyone say obamacare)........!!!!!!

HEY DUMBASS...It takes a 60 vote super -majority to invoke cloture and break a filibuster. Or, being the tediously ignorant fuck you are, did you conveniently forget?

[bullypulpit]

If a certain member of another forum I post on driveled the above I would have summarily accused him of blathering away with his talking points. However, not all of the Bush tax cuts were particularly supply side in the beginning especially when succumbing to Dem pressure he went along with the tax rebate which is not stimulative and drops directly down to the debt. And that would have been the first of 3 such attempts favored by the left in the interest of "fairness." And that doesn't even address the idiotic phasing in of the '01 tax cuts, '03 accelerated the phase in period. But all of that is elementary when it's been shown that the driver for tax revenues is GDP, not tax rates.

SO you're a freeper. Nothing to brag about. And like most of that ilk, the facts escape you. Tax cuts, as any responsible economist will tell you do little, if anything to stimulate the economy. The supply side model, tax cuts for the wealthiest do even less. What tax savings the wealthiest 1-2% of Americans receive contributes nothing to the American economy aside from budget deficits.

Your smug, undeserved self-superiority is truly sad to see.

[Nukeman]

HEY DUMBASS...It takes a 60 vote super -majority to invoke cloture and break a filibuster. Or, being the tediously ignorant fuck you are, did you conveniently forget?

Gee dumbass I guess you missed the fact that the Dum's had a "super majority for almost 2 years!!!! Or did you conveniently forget that little truth!!!!!!!!!!!!! So they were filibuster proof and STILL COULDN'T get anything passed... Look in your own party before passing all the blame on the other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[PostmodernProphet]

HEY DUMBASS...It takes a 60 vote super -majority to invoke cloture and break a filibuster. Or, being the tediously ignorant fuck you are, did you conveniently forget?

then they should have proposed doing something that wasn't so incredibly stupid that every Republican plus some Dems didn't want to see inflicted on us..........

[fj1200]

SO you're a freeper. Nothing to brag about. And like most of that ilk, the facts escape you. Tax cuts, as any responsible economist will tell you do little, if anything to stimulate the economy. The supply side model, tax cuts for the wealthiest do even less. What tax savings the wealthiest 1-2% of Americans receive contributes nothing to the American economy aside from budget deficits.

Your smug, undeserved self-superiority is truly sad to see.

I'll go with those "irresponsible" economists then because what we're experiencing is what happens when higher tax rates are on the horizon. Higher taxes and regulations explain, in varying degrees, the Great Depression and the stagnation of the '70s. Lower taxes explain, in varying degrees, the economic dynamism of the '20s, the '80s, and the early '60s not to mention the capital gain tax cuts of the late '90s, even the post Clinton-recession Bush years were positive if not juiced by some bad Fed policy. So nice of you to ignore the non-supply side policies requested by the left and lump it in with supply-side so you can indict it without cause.

A freeper huh? Can't have a discussion without trying to pigeonhole someone can you? Does it help with the talking points?

[Agnapostate]

FACT: 41 million Americans, 1 out of every 7, are now on food stamps, more than at any time in our entire history. What is even worse is that the number has been climbing ever since Obama took office... no wonder Sean Hannity is calling the Democrats "the party of food stamps".

There must have been a sudden pandemic of laziness, with previously employed people instantaneously deciding, "Hey, what the hell, what's wrong with being poor?"

[fj1200]

I think it was more of a sudden pandemic of anti-business rhetoric combined with higher regulations, taxes, etc., with previously investing businesses, investors and entrepreneurs instantaneously deciding, "Hey, what the hell, what's wrong with keeping my money?"