Well said, Mr. President.
Keep up the good work and keep using the bully pulpit.
You’re great at it!
Obama is 10000% correct. Still this guy is too conservative for my tastes.
“nullify the ability of the President”
Mr. President, they’ve been trying to do that to you since Inauguration Eve, 2007 2009 (thanks, @lestatdelc).
Historians can answer whether other Administrations have faced such a level of obstruction as President Obama has. When I Googled the term “president congress obstruction” for dates up to 2007, I was amused to find this article in the LA Times:
Although the Senate has confirmed most of Bush’s judicial nominees, 10 of his most controversial appointments stalled in the chamber last year, even though it was widely acknowledged that they would have commanded a majority vote for confirmation. They have since been renominated.
Senate Republicans and the president have argued vociferously that judges deserve a simple “up-or-down” vote.
“Senators ought to have the backbone and the gumption to get off their hind quarters and vote yes or vote no and be responsible for that vote with their constituents,” said Sen. George Allen (R-Va.).
One more example of IOKIYAR.
Yes. We. Can. Thank you, Mr. President! Continue speaking the truth!
LOL…I can just imagine how angry this makes McConnell (and other GOPers/Teatrolls) behind closed doors when Obama levels patronizing chastisements at them like he’s an adult talking to children hahahaha…“not acceptable” haha…gives me fucking giggles…
?
If Republicans can’t take over the government legitimately by way of elections, they’re just going to take over by force.
They’ve got the Senate and the House, and now they’re staging a coup to take over the Supreme Court.
Can you explain, in detail, how a more liberal justices would EVER get confirmed assuming the Republicans were in the mood to work. Next given that the Republicans are not in the mood do you think a more liberal justice would make the Republicans look as bad as they do now?
Obama said he thought it was “perfectly acceptable” for Republicans not
to appoint Garland based on disagreements on “important issues.”
…
The role of the Senate is to “advise and consent”, not appoint. That is the purview of the President. The Senate does not appoint.
Well aware.
But the inauguration was January 20, 2009
… not 2007.
inauguration eve, 1977
What’s unacceptable is having republicans in any office anywhere.
They aren’t interested in governing, period. They should all be thrown out until they learn to act in a civilized manner and understand that their job is to work for the people. Not the GOP.
This is an almost perfect answer if not absolutely perfect.
I went to Harvard Law School like Obama, and please by no means think I feel that gives me any special insight here (have you seen some of the thugs who graduated from there?).
However, HLS did offer a pretty robust sample of those rare individuals who can think out loud with little need for editing. I’m sure you’ve seen the same in your lives. I remember taking practice tests with my friends (most classes base your entire grade on one final exam), and when they shared their answers I thought “If you gave me six months I couldn’t top that, and he/she only needed an hour.”
This is why it kills me when all-but-inherently-racist accusations/mockery are hurled against Obama for using a teleprompter, or relying on Affirmative Action to pad his educational resume, or for being a “Community Activist,” as if that’s something that could never lend itself to an altruistic genius. I truly don’t understand how he’s not seen as an unbelievably adept thinker by those who disagree with his politics. I don’t
The title of this article feels like it could use a little bit of editing as it’s a bit misleading to me personally.
“Obama: It’s ‘Not Acceptable’ For McConnell To Stall My SCOTUS Nom”
Maybe replace “stall” with “completely stonewall” or something? The way the topic is presently worded seems to imply that any delay whatsoever in Obama’s nominees is unacceptable and I don’t think that’s precisely accurate to the viewpoint that the president is expressing.
Apologies if this is nitpicking. I know that topic titles need to be concise but I think the title paints the president’s position as far less reasonable than it actually is.
The problem, I’ve come to learn, with people criticizing Obama and/or his rhetoric, is that their way would never have gotten many in this country to come to the realization that he knows exactly how to get done what he can without shouting, without pointing fingers, without excuses. Speaking plainly as a person who’s tall in stature and intelligence.
He’s made the republicans look even more dysfunctional, stupid and pathetic by his example.
They have been bested by one of the best, despite all the money and some in the media.
Makes me smile.
A more liberal guy won’t get confirmed, nor will this “moderate.” My hope is that a Democratic president in 2016 plus a Dem senate will yield a more progressive type.
Vote.
To be clear, I’m not in any way criticizing President Obama’s stance on the issue. I find it to be darned close to perfect. Like you, I’ve long stopped doubting that the man knows how to get results.
My mild criticism is that when reading the title of this article I feel like it somewhat misrepresents Obama’s stance to be harsher than it actually is when you read the details of what he said.