View Full Version : Obama blames Founding Fathers’ ‘structural’ design of Congress for gridlock
This jackwagon pisses me off to no end !!!!!!
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
Obama blames Founding Fathers’ ‘structural’ design of Congress for gridlock
President Obama is taking a swipe at the Founding Fathers, blaming his inability to move his agenda on the “disadvantage” of having each state represented equally in the Senate.
At a Democratic fundraiser in Chicago Thursday night, Mr. Obama told a small group of wealthy supporters that there are several hurdles to keeping Democrats in control of the Senate and recapturing the House. One of those problems, he said, is the apportionment of two Senate seats to each state regardless of population.
“Obviously, the nature of the Senate means that California has the same number of Senate seats as Wyoming. That puts us at a disadvantage,” Mr. Obama said.
The Founding Fathers decided in the “Great Compromise” in 1787 to apportion House seats based on population and give each state two seats in the Senate regardless of population. The solution was a compromise between large states and small states in a dispute that nearly dissolved the Constitutional Convention.
The president also blamed “demographics” for the inability of the Democratic Party to gain more power in Congress, saying Democrats “tend to congregate a little more densely” in cities such as New York and Chicago. He said it gives Republicans disproportional clout in Congress.
“So there are some structural reasons why, despite the fact that Republican ideas are largely rejected by the public, it’s still hard for us to break through,” Mr. Obama said.
He also said Democrats suffer from the “congenital disease” of not voting in midterm elections.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/23/obama-blames-structural-design-congress-gridlock/
Yes Mr. President, they knew how to keep a despot from gaining too much power.
No shit Sherlock....just like every other President has had to deal with.
ddoering
05-23-2014, 13:43
I'd love to see his grades from Harvard. He must have been some Constitutional scholar.
I'd love to see his grades from Harvard. He must have been some Constitutional scholar.
He must of read about it in the newspaper.....
mark46th
05-23-2014, 15:19
Apparently, this buffoon of a president missed the class that explained the Checks and Balances principle of the constitution. What an effing moron.
Trapper John
05-23-2014, 18:03
Typical rationalization of a narcissistic, sociopath personality. Everything is about me and nothing is my fault. Sheesh, this shit is getting old!
MOO, it sounds like the president has read the Virginia Plan <<LINK (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/vatexta.asp)>> and that he agrees with Edmund Randolph, et al..
And also, did the president actually take a swipe at the founding fathers, who debated the provisions of the proposed constitution intensely, during his remarks or was he actually being critical of the Republican Party's ongoing intransigence and the practice of political gerrymandering? <<LINK2 (http://www.noodls.com/view/83B5A4541B2B5D590A5C32DA2612DB74713306A9?3705xxx14 00859568)>>
Republican ideas are so roundly rejected by the public that there are 45 of 100 senators and 234 of 435 in the house. What a tool.
you peole are all just jealous because the POTUS is smarter than you...
plus
...you're all racists for being critical
In Barry's own words ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lp8ZESkgIcg
From Feb. 2012 ..... just over TWO years ago.
:munchin
CDRODA396
05-23-2014, 21:19
Well, then why doesn't he use his pen and cell phone and repeal the 17th Amendment to the Constitution and go back to the way our Founding Fathers intended for Senators to be chosen? That should hook him right up...:rolleyes:
Scimitar
05-24-2014, 00:57
In Barry's own words ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lp8ZESkgIcg
From Feb. 2012 ..... just over TWO years ago.
:munchin
Wow, this is one of the best examples I've seen of how much of a political light weight this guys is. He came at the question completely wrong, and set himself up for 3 or 4 really dumb comments.
S
BlueYing
05-24-2014, 07:38
Apparently, this buffoon of a president missed the class that explained the Checks and Balances principle of the constitution. What an effing moron.
Isn't that something that was touched upon all the way from grade school, through high school and into college? I remember reading something about checks and balances a few times.
Personally, I thought the founding fathers genius in their design. I'm also thankful for their design. I'm sure I'm not the only one.
I kinda think of Obam as a floundering father...
Javadrinker
05-24-2014, 08:27
I kinda think of Obama as a floundering idiot...
fixed it for you :lifter
ddoering
05-24-2014, 11:23
Isn't that something that was touched upon all the way from grade school, through high school and into college?
Not in Kenya.
GratefulCitizen
05-24-2014, 11:53
He's just a delusional narcissist throwing a temper tantrum over is lack of omnipotence.
ddoering
05-24-2014, 18:45
Isn't there a little blue pill to fix that?
I think I've run out of adjectives for this guy.
Airbornelawyer
05-26-2014, 21:21
“Obviously, the nature of the Senate means that California has the same number of Senate seats as Wyoming. That puts us at a disadvantage,” Mr. Obama said.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-2nd smallest state in the Union, Senate President pro tempore and third in line to the succession to Pres. Obama, could not be reached for comment. Nor could his Vermont colleague, Sen. Bernie Sanders, the Senate's only self-avowed socialist. Nor could Vice President Biden, formerly senior Senator of the 6th smallest state in the Union.
In the Senate delegations of the 10 smallest states, there are 10 Democrats and 2 Independents who caucus with Democrats, versus 8 Republicans.
The Senate delegations of the 20 smallest states are evenly divided, with 20 Republicans and 20 Democrats/Independents.
The substantive constitutional argument is not really worth going into, since the President is making a partisan claim which is not really supported by the facts. As we can see, the Democrats actually are overrepresented among the smallest states, and the Republicans only have an edge when we move to the more medium-sized states. And the edge is not that significant, since a few competitve elections, of which there are many, in a few of these states, could easily shift the balance either way.
If it was the fault of the republicans, and democrats have all the answers, why does so little get done when the democrats own the white house and both chambers of the legislative branch?
If it was the fault of the republicans, and democrats have all the answers, why does so little get done when the democrats own the white house and both chambers of the legislative branch?
The million dollar question...
The Reaper
05-27-2014, 21:13
Hey, the Dims pulled together to pass Obamacare when they were in charge!
TR
GratefulCitizen
05-28-2014, 08:28
Obsolescence of the big city:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/05/barack_obama_and_his_urban_parasites_declare_war_o n_the_constitution.html
Streck-Fu
07-18-2014, 05:56
MOO, it sounds like the president has read the Virginia Plan <<LINK (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/vatexta.asp)>> and that he agrees with Edmund Randolph, et al..
And also, did the president actually take a swipe at the founding fathers, who debated the provisions of the proposed constitution intensely, during his remarks or was he actually being critical of the Republican Party's ongoing intransigence and the practice of political gerrymandering? <<LINK2 (http://www.noodls.com/view/83B5A4541B2B5D590A5C32DA2612DB74713306A9?3705xxx14 00859568)>>
Probably not.....
In Barry's own words ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lp8ZESkgIcg
From Feb. 2012 ..... just over TWO years ago.
:munchin
caretaker
07-18-2014, 17:21
There was another way around the 2 senator rule that was alive yesterday. Tech billionaire Tim Draper handed over 1.3 million signatures needed to put the Six Californias' initiative on the ballot. The petition would split California into six states presumably giving it 12 senators although that was not the stated objective. All that remained was to have the signatures certified. Today Six Californias' has been accused of voter fraud.
Of course even if the initiative had been certified and passed by the citizens it is still uncertain whether it would have received approval of Congress. It is also doubtful that all six regions share the liberal values of the current Senators. On the other hand I thought it doubtful that the Chief Justice would rewrite the ACA so he could deem it Constitutional. Strange days indeed.
Six Californias' web site: http://www.sixcalifornias.com/
Signatures obtained: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/petition-submitted-split-california-states-article-1.1869251
Voter Fraud: http://sfist.com/2014/07/18/six_californias_accused_of_voter_fr.php
Six Californias would most certainly have some red states. Anyone know what percentage of congress has to approve new states? Is it a simple majority?
caretaker
07-19-2014, 02:51
In a 2012 USNews article discussing the addition of Puerto Rico as the 51st state is says:
"Adding a state to the union is a fairly easy process, legally speaking. Article Four of the Constitution allows Congress to admit new states into the union with simple majority votes in both houses of Congress (and a Presidential signature)." http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/11/07/despite-referendum-puerto-rican-statehood-unlikely-until-at-least-2015
Article IV section 3 has been used five times before to create new states but it was so long ago that the votes do not seem readily available with my rudimentary search skills. http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2012/08/how-to-make-a-state-three-ways-to-redraw-the-u-s-a/
the squid
07-22-2014, 05:59
In Barry's own words ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lp8ZESkgIcg
From Feb. 2012 ..... just over TWO years ago.
:munchin
I am no fan of the President.
Looking at this video objectively - I think he is simply offering up a defense to his critiques on the left that he's not being "liberal" enough. His defense being that we have a system of checks and balances and that he cannot force his will on Congress.
Again, I am no fan of the president.
Streck-Fu
07-22-2014, 07:27
.....he cannot force his will on Congress.
He has refined his language from, "We’re not just going to be waiting for legislation in order to make sure that we’re providing Americans the kind of help they need. I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone."
WarriorDiplomat
07-22-2014, 08:35
Yes Mr. President, they knew how to keep a despot from gaining too much power.
Absolutely, the founding fathers argued for 11 yrs deciding what type of government we would be and they decided on a constitutional republic. Constitutional republics historically take longer than any other government to be dismantled because of the system of checks and balances.
Every time our military deploys the buzz word in any conflict is to establish a democracy. It is no wonder why many of our military believe we are a democracy when the correction is made you get arguements. Try to educate one on the difference the Obama arguement comes out "Most the people live in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, Philadelphia etc...why do the small towns and farms have any say over the governments decisions?". Many a QP has made the same arguement, when a response such as a democracy is a few votes away from a dictatorship the "yeah right" look is given.
In our case for roughly a 100+ yrs the term democracy has replaced republic in public schools and media. Talking to my own kids while they were in school they believed we were a democracy. A hundred years of working on the psyche of the average voter to believe they are not being represented because the majority can be out voted by the minority in our representative system.
Trying to explain the 3 branches and the representative system is complex for someoone who does not care to understand. The media during elections further aggravates the misunderstanding when they compare the electoral vs the popular vote creating confusion and frustration. Explaining that a republic has many small governments that represents each states interests. Explaining that a farm state should represent it's own interests and needs so that the population centers do not pass laws that destroy their critical contributions. Explaining that people of live in LA should have no say over Montana is frustrating. Trying to explain that every governments NG is the state owned militia responsible for the defense of the state.
I think we are watching our republic being slowly dismantled as we speak and I believe that President Obama understands this and feels the timing is right to eliminate the system and replace it with democracy. See the below website.
http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/
Americans pace of life is to blame we are too busy to stop and preserve the sytem that has allowed our prosperity. I have read that the 11 yrs of arguing to establish a constitutional republic had alot to do with the split in ideology not the wording so much many wanted a Monarchy while others wanted a democracy while others argued for a republic.
Where will America be in 20 years?