Washington divided, more trouble ahead for Obama?

October 19, 2009

Washington insiders say that not since the 1890’s have the people that represent the U.S. been so divided. From Gay rights to Afghanistan lawmakers are at polar opposites on issues that are on the Obama administration’s agenda. What’s next? And, what’s likely to get the green light or the stop sign?


We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/

Well we can say one thing.
Barack Obama sure sounds good!

Posted by marky | Report as abusive

This president is light years ahead of the mean-spirited and outright incompetent Bush/Cheney duo that preceded him (with Cheney as co-president at an undisclosed location of course). If Obama can’t get consensus, it’s because of conscious or unconscious racism and the constant attacks coming from the fascist neo-cons who are understandably very threatened by Obama. Americans are so conditioned to believe everything they see and hear on TV, and the neo-cons are largely in control of TV (I’m especially referring to Murdock’s highly-rated Faux News network). Obama is not able to get consensus because we are living in Orwell’s 1984 where the proles have been so conditioned to bad news coming from the screen telling us how we’re cool with East Asia now, but it’s on with Eurasia while completely erasing all links to the past. The past never existed. Therefore, this entire economic mess happened the day Obama took office from the “pro-business” predecessors, and he only wants to cram SOCIALISM down our throats and make us have to give all our wealth to those in more need.
And yes, I stand behind my “Racism” word above as a 54 year old white mail who has lived in Georgia all his life, I can tell you with certainty that every white male I see over the age of 40 claims not to be a racist but cannot stand the fact that we have a black president. Every single one.

Posted by ColonelP | Report as abusive

Whether our leaders be conservative or liberal, does not matter. These days, those labels are nothing but show. They mean nothing. It is sad to see that our leaders who we elected to represent OUR INTERESTS not the interests of corporate America, are unfortunately doing just that.

The idea that we have elected officials who are more concerned with profit and loss than they are with solving real human problems is a testament to our our love of money above all other things in this world.

Never should solving the problems of human suffering be dealt with in terms of money. Banking as a business is no longer practical in our country. Profit motive is immature. It obscures real issues by reducing them to dollars. This is why we can’t have any meaningful discussions on capitol hill with regards to real human problems.

So far all arguments by so called conservatives revolve around who’s going to make the money and who’s going to pay the bill.
There are no discussions about making better treatments available. There are no discussions about making medication and alternative methods of care more available. There no discussions about making sure the highest quality of care is available for all citizens.

Profit and interest motivators distort the human issue by turning us into “consumers”. We are only worthy of care if we have money (which by the way, is getting more worthless by the day).

Profit and interest are childish motivators. Like children who won’t say please or thank you unless they get some kind of treat or reward, we “grownups” won’t do anything that betters society unless we can profit from it. There is no way that we can make any meaningful changes that benefit the citizen if we use profit as the motivator to solve our problems.

This is because solving a problem like health care removes the opportunity to profit from “solving” them with flimsy “solutions”. Profit demands that there be a “need” to be filled. This need drives one to extract profit from those seeking solutions while never solving the root problem.

So this health care debate, for some of our leaders, is nothing more than a shell game. It’s a way to disguise profit extraction while preserving the mechanisms that allow the insurance industry to gauge people in their times of need and suffering.

We are not animals. And we should not be content to live as such.

Posted by Benny Acosta | Report as abusive

A house divided can not stand.

Even if Pres Obama is well intentioned, our governement is bought and solds in the restuarants and bathrooms of Washington.

America don’t let the media polorize you any longer. Politicans are just sleezy opportunist who use popularity polls to sell thier legislation.

Posted by marky | Report as abusive

I do think there is a limit on trade policies. We need to be concentrating on self sufficiency rather than being tied to a supply line of imports. All I hear from Grassley and the rest of the Republicans in Washington is mumbling from a mouth filled with lobbiests dollars. They are akin to pulling a string on a puppet. We need true planning which we have not had for the past 20 or more years. A world economy that relies only on trade is real rickity. When you have a truck or tractor that you rely on to produce food and you can’t get parts because someone blew up the factory then it is too late to blame the trade deal.

Posted by f belz | Report as abusive

No doubt both parties do very little to help America. They spend too much time shouting out blame. Unfortunately both parties fail to admit that they are both to blame for our lack of a proactive government. That’s why at least half of America is feeling cheated no matter what party is in office.

Posted by John S | Report as abusive

Colonel P – Maybe you should get out of Georgia more often. Marky has spoken very accurately, all politicians are slimeball slaves to the special interests groups.

Last time I checked there were more networks than Fox – CBS< NBC< ABC< CNN< MSNBC, etc. Their corporate heads are known liberals. So I’d say the liberal media has outnumbered Fox substantially.

Why do liberals think that if you disagree with this President you are being a racist? That’s the biggest cop out I’ve seen to avoid a real dialogue about our nations divisiveness and one that’s getting tiresome.

BTW – Mr. Colonel , sir, I am from Nancy Pelosi’s district.

Posted by HarryB | Report as abusive

It is common for liberals to attack anyone who does not share their opinion (hence fox being attacked lately). So sling your words Mr. Colonel, you squash nothing here.

I agree with Marky, it matters no which side controls the government, they are far removed from us the public. They operate at a different level, have never known poverty (and to help address Mr. Colonel and those like him, don’t figure because of someones race they know poverty).

Truly we need many leaders who want change, not just one that talks about it.

Posted by Mark | Report as abusive

Who are all those Thought Police that are forcing all those people to watch Fox instead of the preferred liberal networks? Seems that the folks are voting their preference with their remote controls. The ratings are the proof.

The liberal networks, especially MSNBC, have gotten so out of touch with mainstream America that the viewers have no interest in such a one sided opinion. It’s simply the marketplace at work by choice, in spite of what President Obama and his minions would like us to believe. Fox does not control the viewer, the viewer chooses Fox.

Posted by Gene | Report as abusive