Something’s don’t change. And if Obama doesn’t start acting like Harry Truman, they never will...

Only a mere four days after taking back control of the House of Representatives – Republicans are already drunk on power. Speaking at the Heritage Foundation yesterday, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell discussed the GOP’s agenda over the next two years and it can be summed up in 2 words: Dump Obama. McConnell says that the only way Republicans can succeed in passing legislation to repeal health care reform, end bailouts, and cut spending is to, “put someone in the White House who won't veto any of these things.” Keep in mind that a plan to simply repeal health care reform and end bailouts won’t do anything to bring down the nation’s nearly 10% unemployment rate – So the American people shouldn’t expect any real solutions to come out of the House for the next two years. Republicans have already made their choice – politics over policy. And they are not going to budge as indicated by GOP Congressman Mike Pence who said there will be, “no compromise” with Democrats on their legislative agenda. “Are you listening President Obama?!” This statement comes on the heels of a new Reuters poll that said 56% of voters want to see bipartisan consensus on policy making and according to a CBS poll – 78% of Republicans - that’s Republicans! - want their party to compromise to get things done. There you have it - it only took less than a week for the GOP to completely ignore voters. As Harry Truman said 1948 when he accepted the Democratic nomination, “the people know that the Democratic Party is the people's party, and the Republican party is the party of special interest, and it always has been and always will be.” Something’s don’t change. And if Obama doesn’t start acting like Harry Truman, they never will.


PhilipHenderson's picture
PhilipHenderson 12 years 29 weeks ago

I expect that about 42 percent of the population is Republican. They vote Republican regardless of who the candidate is. They do not care if their representative votes against their interests. I know many Republicans (I live in Orange County California) who will always vote for Republicans becasue Democrats support a woman's right to choose. They hate Democrats because they see them all as Pro Choice. These single issue candidates, or Low Information Voters, side with Republicans because Republicans are more in favor of War, Guns, the Death Penalty, and Christian values above the Constitution. Republicans are anti-abortion, anti-immigrants, anti-taxes, anti-gay rights--they are so strong about those issues that they will vote against Democrats every time, even though the Democrats support the individual rights of these Republicans. Republicans also seem now to be against the First Amendment.

Rebublicans shout that they LOVE the US CONSTITUTION . . . they just don't like the fine print, such as the entire First Amendment or the entire Second Amendment. They like the Constitution they just don't like what it says. I have challenged some of my Republican friends to study the Constitution with me. I asked them to read a section and discuss with me what that section means. They have all refused. Most of them admit that the last time they read the Constitution was in high school. These are adults at least 50 years old. No wonder they are easily confused.

I think no matter how badly the Republicans behave, they will be ignored by their supporters. How else could Michelle Bachmann get elected.

Philip Henderson, Ethical Magician

wdharper's picture
wdharper 12 years 29 weeks ago

The Republicans I know want smaller government, less taxes, and a greater say in how they live their own lives. The religious ones also want to force a woman to stand by her own choice, when she has unprotected sex. If she happens to get pregnant, they want her to be legally forced to have her unwanted baby, should it naturally come to full term. Many of the non-religious Republican voters that I know also want no gun control. Somehow, they think that they are voting for their own self-interests when they cast that vote for the party of the corporate oligarchy. They think that because many of the poor, uneducated, unemployed, and unemployable people are living off the backs of the taxpayer, that this is an unnecessary burden upon the USA taxable wage earners. Yet, our continental and overseas military infrastructure of over 700 military installations, which costs more than the entire rest of the world spends on defense, annually, is an absolute necessity to my Republican friends. We have to protect our overseas corporate interests, afterall. Maybe, if we reduced the size of our military empire, pulled out of the third world, and let them live their lives in peace (and be as backwards towards technical advances as they want to be), then they would not find a need to become terrorists, which is about the only way they can possibly fight against an empire as powerful as the USA.

Maybe, as about 22% (gov't admits to 9.6%) of us are still looking for a decent paying job, that will keep us alive, while paying what we owe in rent, mortgage, transportation costs, food costs, energy costs, health-care, auto, life and property insurances and many, many other expenses besides what could be called entertainment costs, not to mention taxes, some of those Republicans will change their miniscule viewpoints and look at the bigger picture. It is us against them. Not Republicans against Democrats, though. Both parties are equally to blame for the downfall of the American middleclass lifestyle. Clinton did sign NAFTA, did he not? (After Bush I wrote it up.) And wasn't the Glass-Spiegel Act repealed on his watch, too?

The conflict is really the people against the corporate infrastructure. Whose side is the government on? Why are so many of us Americans currently unemployed? Because the corporations sent all our jobs overseas, so they can make a better profit margin. Who allowed the corporations to outsource all our jobs? The government did. Why did the government ignore what is in the best interests of the people? The lobbyists paid them to.

How do we fix it?............................................................Good Freekin' Question


PEACEAUTHOR 12 years 29 weeks ago

We have to bring back Alan Grayson. All that you say about the Democrats being weak and needing an approach like the one Harry Truman used is totally true. Nothing seems to work like strength. They don't like President Obama and probably never will. What does he have to lose to have the GOP respect and fear him. He has the power now and in two years it will go to the next person. If he uses it wisely the country will rally behind him and he will be that next person. If he doesn't he will not be able to energize his base.

Kindness is for kids. Using the office of the Presidency is for adults.

PEACEAUTHOR 12 years 29 weeks ago

This is something I have been preaching for over a year. I watched the President try to compromise with the GOP and thought he might have a good idea. I was willing to see if his way was good.

What I saw was disasterous. Everything points to the fact that the Republicans don't respect him, don't like, and want to dump him. It is in his own best political interest to toughen up. But it is also in the best interest of the country for him to go out there and give them h...L. He seems to feel that somehow they will compromise and work with him if he only waits long enough.


I felt the tenor of his leadership when Joe Barton made a fool of him at a joint session of Congress. It felt like a nation waiting to see the reaction ( as a class waits to see the teacher's reaction when a student tests the teacher) and what we got was nothing. He is now giving the impression that he is empty suit.

As far as getting the message out...he needs to learn to speak the audience's language and talk the level of 8th graders. Anything more elegant gets past this audience of high school dropouts.

Sink or Swim....but the problem is that we are all in the same boat.

cliff-econ's picture
cliff-econ 12 years 29 weeks ago

Imports Subsidize Exports

The solution to jobs in the USA is to to have imports subsidize exports. Its the most cost-effective job stimulus program.

10 million jobs can be created at the cost of $100 million dollars. Unemployment would drop to 4%. Taxes for the federal and state govenments would go up about $60 billion a year.

Talk about leverage!


Thom's Blog Is On the Move

Hello All

Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.

Please follow us across to - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.

From Unequal Protection, 2nd Edition:
"Beneath the success and rise of American enterprise is an untold history that is antithetical to every value Americans hold dear. This is a seminal work, a godsend really, a clear message to every citizen about the need to reform our country, laws, and companies."
Paul Hawken, coauthor of Natural Capitalism and author of The Ecology of Commerce
From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"Thom is a national treasure. Read him, embrace him, learn from him, and follow him as we all work for social change."
Robert Greenwald, political activist and founder and president of Brave New Films
From Screwed:
"Once again, Thom Hartmann hits the bull’s eye with a much needed exposé of the so-called ‘free market.’ Anyone concerned about the future of our nation needs to read Screwed now."
Michael Toms, Founding President, New Dimensions World Broadcasting Network and author of A Time For Choices: Deep Dialogues for Deep Democracy