Posted on 12/06/2014 9:31:03 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
Old habits die hard. The media are so enamored of the continuing (and largely contrived) story about the great Republican civil war that they fail to appreciate that the real internecine fight is being waged on the other side of the aisle.
I grant that there's a lot of shouting today among Republicans. But it's a ritual skirmish over whether a government shutdown would force the president to withdraw a signature measure — last time, Obamacare; this time, executive amnesty.
From opposite sides of the (Democratic) spectrum, Schumer and Warren are trying to remake and reorient the Democratic Party post-Obama. So while Republicans are debating the tactics of stopping presidential lawlessness — an inherently difficult congressional undertaking, particularly if you still control only a single house — Democrats are trying to figure out what they believe and whom they represent.
Which do you think is the more serious problem?
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
Good
And you wonder how all of this can affect Hillary.
Is America weary of Democrats and liberalism and political correctness and all of that? Hillary if she’s the Democrat nominee, will represent 4 or 8 more years of Obamaism if elected president.
In spite of Hillary wanting to distance herself from Obama, she is a good Democrat, Obama is a good Democrat, and she was his Secretary of State. We need to tie Hillary to the Obama administration since she was a part of it.
2016 could be a year of upheaval though, if Democrats bypass Hillary for someone even more liberal such as Elizabeth Warren. I’ve heard that the Clintons are not liberal enough for many of today’s Democrat activists.
It’s the Mensheviks vs. the Barackeviks.
This is nonsense, and pure theater - Dems are publicly retreating from Obama’s damage (for votes), but they were in lock-step with the Bolshevik agenda (and still are).
Schumer is a commissar who is only concerned with being the minority party in Congress; he will do whatever it takes to get Dems back in power.
Somebody once said we had to endure Jimmy Carter in order to get to Ronald Reagan.
Based on that, perhaps America, having endured Obama, will be ready to turn to a strong conservative? But then, we have the whole issue of the Republican primaries/caucuses and who will survive that process to be the 2016 nominee.
I don’t want Hillary. Primary reason, she is another Clinton, and she pretty much makes Billy Jeff Clinton in the White House for another 4-8 years. Sorry, I couldn’t vote for Billy Jeff on his own merits, rudeness, and juvenile behavior, and that is before his party even becomes an issue to me.
This will only get worse if we don’t try to impeach Obama.
If we try to impeach Obama, that will rally the rats around Obama, and they will forget about fighting each other.
The old rats in the $inate like Boxer, Reid, ________, fill in the blank are in real trouble. Boxer has gotten very little money for her next run er crawl to be elected. Her handlers live in fear that she will open her mouth at the wrong time and say the wrong thing.
The Clintons are willing to be as liberal as neccessary to compete with their fellow Democrats.
Dear leader handed all politicians a virtual guarantee of control over individuals with Obamacare and its individual mandate. In light of that, I find it hard to believe he’s done damage as far as politicians are concerned.
good point Grampa
” From opposite sides of the (Democratic) spectrum, Schumer and Warren are trying to remake and reorient the Democratic Party post-Obama. So while Republicans are debating the tactics of stopping presidential lawlessness — an inherently difficult congressional undertaking, particularly if you still control only a single house — Democrats are trying to figure out what they believe and whom they represent.Which do you think is the more serious problem?”
Easy - stopping dictator Obama is infinitely more important.
Of course, Carter in 1977-81 was far more preferable to the rabidly liberal, anti-semitic, half-senile shell that currently calls itself Jimmy Carter.
Parties rarely survive a two-term president with a 3rd win.
Only Reagan and FDR managed that. FDR was because of the war only. Reagan because we REALLY didn’t want him to go.
I hope so! Ted Cruz in the WH would be mighty nice.
There’s one aspect in which Hillary could be worse-she’s got more of a work ethic than the racist-in-chief. But then again, almost anyone who’s not a societal leech does.
I don’t know why they’d be very worried, the leftist lapdog lackey media wouldn’t report it anyway.
Electorally, the best we can hope for is that a benevolent tyrant takes office in 2017.
It is way past time for the states to reclaim their pre-17th Amendment powers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.