Quantcast

Comments about ‘Letter: Support opposition’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Nov. 5 2013 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Mountanman
Hayden, ID

@ LDS Liberal. How much money were the Democrats forced pay Ted Cruz, Mike Lee and the GOP as a result of their "extortion" as you claim? Ridiculous and irrational accusations from liberals who do not want Obama held accountable for anything! How dare anyone ask Obama for honestly? How dare they demand accountability? No wonder Obama's approval numbers are tanking!

nonceleb
Salt Lake City, UT

The opposition you refer to is really obstruction. It is going outside the democratic lawmaking process and forcing your agenda through the threat of government shutdown and financial default. What is hypocritical is that people like Mike Lee claim to be experts on and defenders of the Constitution, yet will use methods outside the Constitution's legislative powers. If you want to prevail get a Republican candidate elected president in 2016, keep the Republican majority in the House and gain a Republican majority in the Senate.

RedShirtUofU
Andoria, UT

ok liberals, lets get this clear. Lee and others like him are just doing what Hilary Clinton preached back in 2006. She said that it is our patriotic duty to stand in opposition to policies that the government is trying to impose that we do not agree with.

So, either Lee and others like him are patriotic (according to Hilary Clinton) or Clinton is a liar and should be chased out of politics for the damage that her lies have caused.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Reading these comments, these posters must have been born 6 years ago, or they just tuned into politics about the time Obama came along.

Do you not remember Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi pledging to block ANYTHING the Bush Administration proposed and to tie the government up in continuous investigations after Bush was elected? I do. Google "AP: Democrats pledge array of investigations"... or "GOP legislators pledge to investigate (Boston Globe)", Google "Efforts to impeach George W. Bush (Wikipedia)"... and read about it if you don't gave a memory long enough to remember when the Democrats were in the minority and pledging to shutdown the government and anything the Bush administration tried to do.

Now... if you were posting these same comments back then (and not just now)... THEN I will listen to you. Problem is... the same people who complain now SUPPORTED it back then. That's called "Hypocrisy".

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

2bits.

We can always find the wing nuts on both sides.

The question should not be "did some on the left do it back then?"

The question should be "what did I do"

I feel that it was ludicrous to suggest that Bush did anything "impeachable"
Same with Obama. He has done nothing close.
Any attempt to use the debt ceiling as a bargaining tool is wrong. EVERY time, R or D.

I can only speak for myself. But many use past remarks of other as an excuse for their "crazy talk". That does not fly.

I cannot be responsible for the words of others. I am however, responsible for my words.

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

@Mountanman
Hayden, ID
@ LDS Liberal. How much money were the Democrats forced pay Ted Cruz, Mike Lee and the GOP as a result of their "extortion" as you claim?

========

I can't help your reading comprehension skills --
it appears you are the only one filtering that definition in terms of money.
definition #2, under the law clearly states -- "or some other thing of value by the abuse of one's office or authority."

Ted Cruz and Mike Lee did just that.
Hence -- meeting both the english and legal definitions and qualification of Extortion.

ex-tor-tion Spelled [ik-stawr-shuhn]
noun
1. an act or instance of extorting.
2. Law. the crime of obtaining money OR some other thing of value by the abuse of one's office or authority.
3. oppressive or illegal exaction, as of excessive price or interest: the extortions of usurers.
4. anything extorted.

No wonder the Tea-Party and the GOP's approval numbers are tanking!

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

JoeBlow,
I think we just need to be consistent. If it was OK to be the block everything party back when Democrats were doing it... then you can't really flip out about it now (regardless of the tactic used, sending budget proposals you know the Senate won't accept (Republican), or endless legal investigations to keep the Congress to busy to act on anything (Democrat).

Both do the same thing (keep the government from being able to do it's business).

If you didn't criticize it back then... then I have to call BS when you cry about it now.

I agree that neither Bush or Obama have done anything impeachable. But you haven't seen Republicans submit actual impeachment papers on Obama. Democrats did several times. Google "efforts to impeach Bush"... Wikipedia "The most significant of these efforts occurred on June 10, 2008, when Congressman Dennis Kucinich, along with co-sponsor Robert Wexler, introduced 35 articles of impeachment [1] against Bush to the U.S. House of Representatives"...

Now... if you were OK with that. Why?

It kinda makes all the Democrat weeping about Republicans blocking Obama's signature legislation seem like crocodile tears.

Mark l
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

The US is on a path to bankruptcy. The amount of spending is unsustainable given economic conditions in the foreseeable future. Kicking the can, can only go on for so long.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

When one party stands for the Constitution and the other party stands for dissolution of the Constitution, who would ever support those that want to strip us of our Constitution?

We need opposing points of view so that we clearly understand the issues. Now we can clearly see that Obama and those who support him believe in things that are antithetical to America. They want to legislate from the White House. They want the President to pick and choose which laws he will enforce. They want a President who will blatantly lie to the citizens as he tells them that they can keep their insurance, their doctors and that health-care insurance will be reduced by $2,500 per family per year. They have no use for law and order. They want some rich guy to pay for their personal welfare.

Opposition in politics assumes that everyone is abiding by the rules and that those points that need to be discussed are within the rules. Obama does not believe in rules. He believes that he, the President, has the right and the authority to make rules because he knows what is "best" for us. Some foolish people believe him.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@2bits
"Do you not remember Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi pledging to block ANYTHING the Bush Administration proposed and to tie the government up in continuous investigations after Bush was elected? I do"

And when Medicare Part D passed Democrats didn't whine and try and sabotage it, they worked to help it get implemented better. By the way... how many filibusters were there in 2001-2006 compared to 2011-2012? If Democrats REALLY were trying to block things as much as Republicans currently do then the per year filibuster (cloture vote) rate should be similar right? Nope, Republicans are using it more than twice as often as Democrats did against Bush.

UtahBlueDevil
Durham, NC

"When one party stands for the Constitution and the other party stands for dissolution of the Constitution.....blah, blah, blah..."

One party stands for the constitution. Wow.

"Obama does not believe in rules."..... and rendition... what part of the constitution covers that practice? What part of the constitution covers selling drugs to fund weapons to the Taliban?

Mike, your failure to even consider that both parties have been culpable of pushing constitutional limits shows that you are not really academically considering these issues, and that your arguments are purely emotional. We can go back and forth citing inaccuracies stated by both sides.... pretending one side only has done this just shows a willingness to turn a blind eye.... and not holding both sides to the same standards. Doing so does no one any good.

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

"When one party stands for the Constitution and the other party stands for dissolution of the Constitution, who would ever support those that want to strip us of our Constitution?"

Seriously Mike?

You think the GOP "stands for the Constitution"?

Since when did that start happening?

Was it when they championed No Child Left Behind?
Or was it when they pushed Medicare Part D?

Those were voted for by Boehner, McConnell, Paul Ryan and most others that are still in congress today.

If you were honest about supporting the Constitution, you would have been for Ron Paul long before you would side with the GOP.

Something smells funny here.

RedShirtUofU
Andoria, UT

To "JoeBlow" it isn't the parties that you should be concerned with, but political philosophy. It is the Progressives in the GOP and Democrat party that are killing the constitution.

Remember that it was the Democrats that didn't want to be outdone by failed programs, so they have given us bigger programs that will fail. NCLB was a huge failure, so the Democrats decided to make it bigger, more expensive, and more intrusive with Common Core. Medicare Part D didn't add enough to the debt and didn't harm enough citizens, so the Democrats gave us the ACA.

Why follow politicians that are Progressives and are working to make the government bigger and more intrusive?

2 bit
Cottonwood Heights, UT

atl134,
Filibuster is not the only way to block things. It's the correct way (the way provided in the Senate Rules). It's just not the way Democrats picked when Bush was elected. They instead said they would use continual investigations (using their congressional oversight role), endless hearings, justice department probes, impeachment proceedings, etc, instead.

Budget:
The House not passing the Senate budget bill (and visa versa) is not treason. Senate and House not passing each other's bills happens all the time! It's just that Obama's landmark legislation was involved this time, and the consequences were so highly publicized and criticized by the media in this case. But it's the way Congress works, and the reason the Founding Fathers had TWO houses in Congress. I think they expected them to check each other from time to time. But I think they expected compromise when conflicts like this happen (which neither side would do in this case).

As for Medicare Part D... read the "Legislative history" section in Wikipedia. Democrats (and some Republicans) were trying to block it right to the end. It took some arm twisting to get the votes.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@RedshirtUofU
" but political philosophy. It is the Progressives in the GOP and Democrat party that are killing the constitution."

Contrary to the beliefs of people like you and Glenn Beck, mainstream Republican establishment types are not Progressives... at all.

@2bits
"They instead said they would use continual investigations (using their congressional oversight role), endless hearings, justice department probes, impeachment proceedings, etc, instead."

"Continual investigation" is Darrell Issa's middle name...

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

To "atl134" but they are, contrary to the MSM and your liberal masters. Progressives look to the government for solutions. Just look at Bush's term, whenever there was a problem he looked to government solving it. Medicare part D, TARP, and so forth are all progressive, big government ideas. The only difference between the GOP and the Democrats is the rate at which they are moving towards socialism.

The mainstream Republican establishment are Progressives. Just look at McCain or Hatch. They go for the government fix before they let individuals fix the problem either in their neighborhoods or through the free market.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments