Obama to Party: Don’t ‘Run for the Hills’

Source: New York Times

Obama to Party: Don’t ‘Run for the Hills’

By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
Published: January 27, 2010

WASHINGTON — President Obama vowed Wednesday night not to give up on his ambitious legislative agenda, using his first State of the Union address to chastise Republicans for working in lock-step against him and to warn Democrats to stiffen their political spines.

Mr. Obama appealed for an end to the “tired old battles” that have divided the country and stalled his efforts on Capitol Hill. He promised to focus intently on the issue of most immediate concern to the nation, jobs. And with his top priority, a health care overhaul, delayed in the wake of the recent Republican Senate victory in Massachusetts, he offered a pointed message to both parties.

“To Democrats, I would remind you that we still have the largest majority in decades, and the people expect us to solve some problems, not run for the hills,” Mr. Obama said in his nationally televised speech. “And if the Republican leadership is going to insist that 60 votes in the Senate are required to do any business at all in this town — a supermajority — then the responsibility to govern is now yours as well. Just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it’s not leadership.”

The speech, Mr. Obama’s third to a joint session of Congress, comes at a particularly rocky point in his presidency, with many Americans — including some fellow Democrats — complaining that the president has lost sight of the priorities of ordinary people. And Mr. Obama acknowledged their doubts, conceding that some of his political setbacks “were deserved,” a striking admission for any president.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/28/us/politics/28obama.html?th&emc=th

(Would that depend upon what your definition of is is?)

"To Democrats, I would remind you that we still have the largest majority in decades, and the people expect us to solve some problems, not run for the hills"

Well said.

But Mr. President. What do you want us to do when YOU run for the hills? Follow or pull you back?

on lots of stuff this past year.

that he'll see any of it at all.

They relish denying Obama what he wants (or possibly needs) in an almost childish and tormenting way.

If he expects cooperation on issues- he'll have go beyond finger wagging and scolding- and play serious hardball.

Same holds true for those banks he doesn't "want to punish."

said last night, "They're never going to let you into the car, they are NEVER going to let you into the car." Perfect analogy for those who saw it.

he needs to do the same

.... you mean like: kill the insurance company giveaway labeled "health reform" and give the American PEOPLE something they can use, like Public Option or Single Payer??


:shrug:

the people on his failure of leadership.

Bipartisanship is ANTI DEMOCRACY

To quote the dearly departed Zelda Rubenstein.

wish there would have been some other issues in his speech but I will give him a chance - it is a long time until November.

How many times can you say "I'll give him a chance" after failure after failure? He campaigned on a budget freeze being a stupid idea. He said a public option would be a good thing. He said he'd have open government and kick out the lobbyists, then he kicked out the doctors in favor of a public option and made a backroom deal with the lobbyists for the pharmaceutical industry.

He said he'd close Guantanamo. He said he's forbidden torture, but he's still in favor of extraordinary rendition of people to countries where they can be tortured and I understand he's still supportive of the MURDER OF UNITED STATES CITIZENS so long as they're travelling abroad at the time. There was a time when the United States had a policy against assassination of any kind. Now it's alright even to kill US Citizens?

For God's sake, he couldn't even keep his promise to rescue a dog. How F*%&ing difficult is that?

How many chances does this fool get before you realize he's selling us further down the river?

It's the reason he uses for not accomplishing anything, because the R's weren't playing nice. Even while he was running his campaign for the presidency, the word bipartisanship kept throwing up a red flag for me.

It's his way of covering his ass and making legislation fail that he knows isn't going to happen or doesn't really want to happen.

Rachael Maddow's pre-SOTU comments on MSNBC said it all.

-phlem