Jump to content

Opinion: Lindsay Graham Betraying Senate


Jamalisms

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Soxcat said:

That isn't something anyone wants to see happen but since Pelosi is such an ass about one dollar for a wall it forces the president's hand.  I know this is over your heads.  But both sides should seek a negotiated bi-partisan agreement that avoids a government shut down or Trump having to use the emergency declaration.

 

I want to let you libtards in on something.  The founders of this country and the constitution never envisioned some ass hat house leader literally shutting down the government over this or any issue.  The libs have lied (voted for barriers before) and made up stories about how walls don't work (to the point of sounding like lunatics).  IMO the POWER of the speaker of the house to usurp the elected president's position is what is a concern.  The Republicans hold two of the three branches of government and 199 of the 435 seats in the house (46%).  But to you libtards that means the Dems have all the power?  Really?   

The president shutdown the government. Not the house. You goddamn partisan hack moron.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Like the one that they voted 100-0 for in the Senate before Trump SINGLE-HANDEDLY said no and forced a shut down?

They had a bill in place and then Trump comes back at the last second and says I want this stuff too or I won't sign.  Even goes on National TV and tells I'm going to cause this.  He makes demands and

Like the one they had in December before Trump destroyed all pretenses of good faith and negotiation and demanded the US taxpayers accommodate his untenable campaign promise that >60% don't want an

Posted Images

3 hours ago, begooode said:

Like the one they had in December before Trump destroyed all pretenses of good faith and negotiation and demanded the US taxpayers accommodate his untenable campaign promise that >60% don't want and is only supported by the fear-stoking state TV that is Fox.

Oops...Sox just got bitch slapped with the truth

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jamalisms said:

An opinion piece, but one I generally agree with. Partisan, ends-driven governance is toxic. Not only to the moment but to the institution itself. It actively corrupts the ability to given responsibly in the future and undermines the institution these people serve.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/581500/

 

 

The man has done a complete 180 on Trump. Which begs the 64,000 dollar question: why?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Last week, George Will has a similar opinion piece. Why do people such as Lindsey Graham come to Congress?

 

"In 2015, he said Donald Trump was a “jackass.” In February 2016, he said: “I’m not going to try to get into the mind of Donald Trump, because I don’t think there’s a whole lot of space there. I think he’s a kook, I think he’s crazy, I think he’s unfit for office.” And: “I’m a Republican and he’s not. He’s not a conservative Republican. He’s an opportunist.” Today, Graham, paladin of conservatism and scourge of opportunism, says building the border wall is an existential matter for the GOP: “If we undercut the president, that’s the end of his presidency and the end of our party.” 

 

"During the government shutdown, Graham’s tergiversations — sorry, this is the precise word — have amazed. On a recent day, in 90 minutes he went from “I don’t know” whether the president has the power to declare an emergency and divert into wall-building funds appropriated by Congress for other purposes, to “Time for President . . . to use emergency powers to build Wall.” The next day, he scrambled up the escalation ladder by using capitalization: “Declare a national emergency NOW. Build a wall NOW.” Two days later, he scampered down a few rungs, calling for his hero to accept a short-term funding measure to open the government while wall negotiations continue. Stay tuned for more acrobatics."

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-do-people-such-as-lindsey-graham-come-to-congress/2019/01/23/9830a174-1e68-11e9-8e21-59a09ff1e2a1_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.115c534c5923

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jamalisms said:

Leverage for his party or the institution he serves on?

 

The point I was trying to make is that his support for bypassing the Senate on this eroded the power of the Senate/Congress. Were emergency declaration to prevail in this clearly-not-an-emergency case, the President's power is greatly strengthened and checks and balances are reduced. For all time.

This isn't really about leverage. He knows they don't have any.

 

Its about him being spineless. He knows that if they push for this then they probably shut down the government again. And in order not to piss off his base, he'll have to support it for a while.

 

But he also knows they have no leverage so that means they'll end up caving to the Dems in the end either with trump on something he'd then take a lot of the blame for or worse, against trump by voting for something that's veto proof to reopen the gov which would piss off his base.

 

So he'd much rather trump try a national emergency bc then it'd be all on Trump. The Senate could just pass a clean CR and he could just talk tough against the Dems for his base while passing off the subject for the courts to decide as he kicks the can down the road. 

 

Aka he's being gutless. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump shut down the government. You can't ask for something, have a tantrum when you don't get it, and then blame those who didn't give it to you for *your* actions *you* took when having the tantrum.

 

Even if what you asked for is reasonable, how you react is still *your* actions. Own them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, 9 Nines said:

Senator Graham is now urging President Trump to tie raising the debt ceiling to getting his wall. 

 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/29/politics/lindsey-graham-debt-ceiling-border-deal-talks/index.html

Democrats should honestly impeach McConnell if they do that...

Edited by Starkiller
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jamalisms said:

Like the one that they voted 100-0 for in the Senate before Trump SINGLE-HANDEDLY said no and forced a shut down?

Are they actually this retarded? I battle with myself on that front, but I’m about 75-25 that yes they’re indeed this retarded. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys Lindsay Graham is one of the easiest people to read in the world.

 

He's a politician. As such, his first duty to is to hold office. I mean, a politician that can't win is more useless than tits on a bull. And he has an election coming up, in deep red South Carolina. Most importantly, a primary election.

 

In his true little heart of hearts, Lindsay Graham is pro-immigration. Rush Limbaugh's nickname for him used to be (still is?) Lindsay Gramnesty. He was skewered when he and McCain tried to do comprehensive immigration reform years ago. And also in his true heart of hearts, Trump is anathema to pretty much every core value he has.

 

Lindsay, being a political whore and nobody's fool, sees where the political winds have blown in the Republican Party. And it is away from a path to citizenship, and toward xenophobia, demagoguery and border walls. Therefore, he is now strongly in favor of a wall as well.

 

Of course, being a human being, every once in a while his true beliefs escape out of his mouth, sort of like a morning belch. And that's when Lindsay seems difficult to read and understand.

 

Be not troubled or confused by the occassional displays of Lindsay's true soul. Because his true love is his elected position, and he will always right the ship to return to serving his true master - his vanity as a politician.

 

(By the way this applies to the majority of Senators, on "BOF SIDEZ!" so please don't think I'm singling out poor Lindsay)

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Soxcat said:

In reality Graham would have been MUCH better off as a "politician" both in SC and as a presidential candidate if he had not taken his position on amnesty. 

DACA amnesty?  I thought that most of the electorate was fine with that, given the circumstances and overall profile of this group.

 

And GOP is pro-business, which usually means pro immigration, legal, of course.

Edited by begooode
Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Soxcat said:

Graham is pro legal immigration despite holding the position on amnesty.  The amnesty issue has been a thorn for many Republicans and people in SC do disagree with Graham.  But this is such a black and white world for libs.  That doesn't mean people can't compromise.  Both sides can give in a little.  Are the Dems giving in anything for the wall?  In reality Graham would have been MUCH better off as a "politician" both in SC and as a presidential candidate if he had not taken his position on amnesty. 

No.  Not just no but hell no.  There will be no dumbass coast to coast wall.  Ha ha ha.  Neener neener.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...