Justice Scalia found dead in Texas

[dabrockster]

White House: President Obama regrets having filibustered Alito.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/josh-earn...alito-in-2006/

Do'oh.

Follow his own advice?? What does that even mean...

[Topper]

Follow his own advice?? What does that even mean...

He seems to be pulling a Hillary. He is intimating that he advised against filibustering, or looking back, he wishes he had followed his now current, convenient and politically expedient advice of doing whatever is best for his party, uh hum, nominating and not holding up a nominee.

[cowboy]

Lots of hyperbole here. For example, this can be easily disproven:

"Further, Obama has criticized the GOP and the right virtually every time he steps in front of the mic."

Either way, your anecdotes don't answer my question. Did Obama not work with the republicans on ObamaCare or did they refuse to work with him? Obama may not have fixed our current culture of political divisiveness, but he sure as hell didn't create it.

As for the modern president least able to work with opponents to craft compromise, I don't think anyone can top Jimmy Carter. Great ex-president. Terrible president.

Let's make this simple. You disagree with my assertion that O is the most divisive president in modern history. Who, then, do you think has been more divisive and why do you think so? I supported my opinion, now it's your turn to state and support yours.

[old_gregg]

Let's make this simple. You disagree with my assertion that O is the most divisive president in modern history. Who, then, do you think has been more divisive and why do you think so? I supported my opinion, now it's your turn to state and support yours.

lincoln

[old_gregg]

http://www.theonion.com/article/obam...bortion--52361

“These are all exemplary candidates with strong homosexual values and proven records of performing partial-birth abortions, but am I missing anyone?” Obama reportedly asked himself while reviewing his list of queer, gender-nonconforming, feminist Planned Parenthood employees, all of whom were also said to be black immigrants. “I definitely have enough post-op transsexuals on the list, but it is a little light on pre-op candidates. And I should probably add a cop killer or two on here just to round out my options.”

[creekster]

lincoln

Ha.

[Clark Addison]

Let's make this simple. You disagree with my assertion that O is the most divisive president in modern history. Who, then, do you think has been more divisive and why do you think so? I supported my opinion, now it's your turn to state and support yours.

I am not Elbowski, but I'll say that Reagan was incredibly divisive as president. I think you could make arguments for Carter, and W as well.

My personal view is that it is very hard to judge, as so much of what we consider "divisiveness" is driven by the mood of the people, of congress, etc., and it all gets piled on the President. I don't think Obama did a very good job of being a uniter, but I also think he was no more divisive than W.

[BlueK]

I am not Elbowski, but I'll say that Reagan was incredibly divisive as president. I think you could make arguments for Carter, and W as well.

My personal view is that it is very hard to judge, as so much of what we consider "divisiveness" is driven by the mood of the people, of congress, etc., and it all gets piled on the President. I don't think Obama did a very good job of being a uniter, but I also think he was no more divisive than W.

Another thing about Obama that even democrats would rather not admit or think about is that he's absolutely lousy at getting even those in his own party to follow or listen to him. Other than healthcare, he can't even get his supposed friends to take him seriously. They love him as a powerless figurehead who they can hold up as an example of a victim of racism when the other party doesn't go along with what he wants. But the ironic thing is that congressional dems don't care much what he does or says, and treat him essentially the same as the Repubs in practice, albeit not in words. He may be the least persuasive or effective president in my lifetime, and that includes Carter. That said, I think he's actually a nice guy and good family man, but just a terrible chief executive.

[Northwestcoug]

I am not Elbowski, but I'll say that Reagan was incredibly divisive as president. I think you could make arguments for Carter, and W as well.

My personal view is that it is very hard to judge, as so much of what we consider "divisiveness" is driven by the mood of the people, of congress, etc., and it all gets piled on the President. I don't think Obama did a very good job of being a uniter, but I also think he was no more divisive than W.

I agree, but I would go further and say that W has been more divisive. The democrats (and a significant proportion of independents) believe the Iraq war was a horrendous mistake. I doubt they will support most political issues put forward by the republicans, partly because of distrust based on the W years. And I'll bet the next generation of dems and independents will stay clear of most republican issues.

Obama is divisive, and it is jarring because of his lofty rhetoric before he was president. But he certainly isn't an outlier.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Let's make this simple. You disagree with my assertion that O is the most divisive president in modern history. Who, then, do you think has been more divisive and why do you think so? I supported my opinion, now it's your turn to state and support yours.

Well I already mentioned Jimmy Carter in my post above. He didn't have a clue how to work with congress and even alienated members of his own party.

But in more general terms, my contention was that Obama has been president during a period in time when the nation is highly polarized politically, therefore it can be difficult to discern whether Obama is more divisive than usual, or it just seems that way. I don't need to argue that someone else is more divisive in order to make that point. I will also say that I don't see a huge difference between recent presidents in terms of riling up the opposition.

[byu71]

Another thing about Obama that even democrats would rather not admit or think about is that he's absolutely lousy at getting even those in his own party to follow or listen to him. Other than healthcare, he can't even get his supposed friends to take him seriously. They love him as a powerless figurehead who they can hold up as an example of a victim of racism when the other party doesn't go along with what he wants. But the ironic thing is that congressional dems don't care much what he does or says, and treat him essentially the same as the Repubs in practice, albeit not in words. He may be the least persuasive or effective president in my lifetime, and that includes Carter. That said, I think he's actually a nice guy and good family man, but just a terrible chief executive.

Speaking of racism. When I hear Obama or President Obama the thoughts that come to my mind are President or liberal.

I oppose him getting a supreme court nominee through because I believe he will appoint a liberal. I understand there are those who think differently.

However, I just found out from a Hillary speech that if I oppose President Obama getting his choice through I am actually a racist. Of course all the republican candidates and members of Congress are also racists.

I do still think Hillary could unite the country.

[BlueK]

I agree, but I would go further and say that W has been more divisive. The democrats (and a significant proportion of independents) believe the Iraq war was a horrendous mistake. I doubt they will support most political issues put forward by the republicans, partly because of distrust based on the W years. And I'll bet the next generation of dems and independents will stay clear of most republican issues.

Obama is divisive, and it is jarring because of his lofty rhetoric before he was president. But he certainly isn't an outlier.

W could have kept the country pretty united if he had taken a different approach with Iraq. He listened to some bad advice there. After 9/11 the entire country was with him and no one was opposed to going after the Taliban and Bin Laden in Afghanistan. That operation was actually pretty successful. The problems started when his neocon advisors wanted really badly to use it as the excuse to attack Iraq and W went with it. He should have listened to Collin Powell (a real military guy and not another stupid politician) instead. That was a huge mistake. We created an ungovernable and volatile power vacuum there that terrorists and Iran have been very happy to go in and fill.

[Maximus]

Ugh
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/02/24...tion.html?_r=0

[Commando]

Ugh
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/02/24...tion.html?_r=0

Um... these assholes are the reason there is a better than average chance of dudes like me, who would really like to vote republican, voting democrat.

[imanihonjin]

Ugh
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/02/24...tion.html?_r=0

Meh. Dems would do the same. They started this whole thing with political grandstanding the selection process with Bork and further entrenched themselves to their position with Thomas, Alito and many lower Federal court appointments made by GW Bush. Time they get theirs.