It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

111th Congress is Out / 112th is In - Robert Gibbs is Out Too

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 02:03 PM
link   
Source

The 112th Congress has been sworn in today and thus officially ends the reign of the 111th which has added more debt than any of the congresses prior and I believe all congresses combined. It didn't take long for the Democratic Senate which no longer has a super-majority to bring up the end of the of the filibuster to prevent the newly elected Republicans minority (in the Senate) from having a voice. They of course were not concerned about it prior to the election and highly defensive of it when they were in the minority (and so it goes round and round).

In a separate set of news Robert Gibbs is Leaving His Position as Press Secretary - which I personally find terrific as I found him to be a horrific representative of the Office of the President.

I know a lot of people are excited about the prospect of overturning some of the legislation that has been passed but the truth is we now enter in to complete grid-lock (except on expanding the wars and the Department of Homeland Security ) for the next 2 years. The Republican majority in the House will pass a number of "Undo" measures which will all be ignored and defeated in the Democratic majority in the Senate. The Senate will be at a complete standstill due to Republic filibustering and anything that does sneak through that isn't in the Obama agenda will be defeated by Obama himself.

The prediction - The failure to undo any of the Obama agenda by the Republicans will lead to a constant mantra by the press in 2012 that "the Republicans did not do anything..." and "the Republicans failed to get it done..." which will lead to a re-balancing of the House back toward the Democrats and the Senate back toward the Republicans and the show will go on. I predict Obama will be a one-term president but he'll get a wave of support for the next 2 years from his followers because he'll be able to run on his thwarted intentions and not his actual record though he'll be able to execute on nothing other than his executive orders.

The economy will continue to slide and unemployment (actual unemployment) will continue to rise - the public will be under the impression that the Republicans are running the show as the media has been portraying it and blame them and so it will be a much closer election in 2012 than it was for 2010 including the additional turnout for Obama.

All in all, its going to be the same ol' same ol'. The only thing we can expect any movement on is the continuing eroding of civil liberty and expansion of the police state, bi-partisan agreement on the over funding of the federal government and little to no movement on improving the economy.
edit on 1/5/2011 by ararisq because: Typo




posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 02:11 PM
link   
But keep in mind, though your right about the majority of the Senate, it is the House that ultimately has the say so for the spending budget. So with the Repubs owning the house, the funds for un-needed expenditures will hopefully come to end, atleast until some of the Unconstitutional legislation is repealed.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 02:29 PM
link   
The Failure of the Republican Party will have a result by 2012, but not the one you're talking about. Sarah will ride in on her Caribou touting with her, a third party and disenfranchised tea party voters.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
But keep in mind, though your right about the majority of the Senate, it is the House that ultimately has the say so for the spending budget. So with the Repubs owning the house, the funds for un-needed expenditures will hopefully come to end, atleast until some of the Unconstitutional legislation is repealed.


I fully expect the House to fund the federal government in full - there are too many voters tied up in the spending and massive government layoffs will be too bitter a pill to swallow - plus due to the pending loss of jobs in local municipalities and states I expect they will pass a bailout of those as well - plus don't forget the 'war' - the 'war' will be funded more than it has been in the past. The only funding fight I expect will come from the healthcare reform itself. I suspect they'll force a government shutdown as they did in the past but it'll be short lived and result in a firestorm by the media and subsequent funding.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by TheOneElectric
 


I dont think so, on a previous thread, its been suggested that Ron Paul will run, and we defiantly won't have to worry about Sarah and her Caribou.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheOneElectric
The Failure of the Republican Party will have a result by 2012, but not the one you're talking about. Sarah will ride in on her Caribou touting with her, a third party and disenfranchised tea party voters.


As awesome as a non-Republican/non-Democratic election would be - I suspect that it won't happen in my lifetime. Even with all the hatred in 2009 they 3rd parties received less than it did in 1996. The more polarizing the president the more likely the Republican/Democratic rule will last. Obama isn't done and the ABO (Anybody but Obama) campaign will be in full force - John McCain has a better shot than a 3rd party.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by ararisq
 


As you being the OP, you stated eloquently about the filibusters. And thats why I see the spending coming down to a minimum. And if the Repubs play it smart, and push off spending until 2012, thats when the game will turn. to what?...nobody knows. But I think alot of the spending you mentioned above will be halted, atleast until some of the legislation is repealed. Thats my best guess though. I could be 100% wrong though.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by ararisq
 


As you being the OP, you stated eloquently about the filibusters. And thats why I see the spending coming down to a minimum. And if the Repubs play it smart, and push off spending until 2012, thats when the game will turn. to what?...nobody knows. But I think alot of the spending you mentioned above will be halted, atleast until some of the legislation is repealed. Thats my best guess though. I could be 100% wrong though.


Don't get me wrong - I hope you are right - but the national Republicans as a party play percentages and when they start feeling the heat from voters which won't take long given all of the media arrayed against them they will betray the people that put them in office and go along.

I can't wait for all of the bi-partisan, lets come together, the founders never meant for there to be a divide - rhetoric to heat up. People like Robert Gibbs can say that stuff with a straight face - I think it takes an issue with the frontal lobe to be able to do that because I know I wouldn't be able to do it without breaking down in laughter. We need a



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


Here is what I would LOVE. Ron Paul to win the primaries and he brings Sarah in as the VP.
Talk about an unstoppable force. Have you watched any of the discussions where Sarah and Ron were on the same show? Especially the Judge show.

I think Ron is rubbing off on Sarah. You have to remember, Palin quit her position as the Commissioner on the Oil and Gas committee and then went to work on the corruption on both the Rethugs and the Demons, then won the governorship.

Peeps seem to forget about that little component of her history.

Hmmmm, the last time she "quit" and then went after the corruption and cronyism, she went up.

Hmmm, seems to be a pattern.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 




Would you stop doing that! Keep taking my thoughts!


But just exactly! Though I'm not to fond of Sarah, it would be just another poke in the eye to the " libs ", which I'm all for!



Side note: this thread www.abovetopsecret.com...

is a thread from Ron Paul. Pretty good read.
edit on 5-1-2011 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 

Here is what I would LOVE. Ron Paul to win the primaries and he brings Sarah in as the VP.
Talk about an unstoppable force. Have you watched any of the discussions where Sarah and Ron were on the same show? Especially the Judge show.


I don't have any ill will toward Palin but I think as a candidate she's poison to whatever ticket she is on because of the hit-job that was done against her. I know Republicans that will, without flinching, recite every smear that has been levied against her as if it was gospel. She needs to stay on the outside of politics, use the bully pulpit that has been given to her and continue to be the lightning rod.

I fear Ron Paul falls almost in to the same category - the mainstream Republicans have been trained to hate him and will repeat the same type of garbage. I really like what I've heard from Michele Bachmann though. Any women running on the Republican side is going to be painted an uneducated pole-dancer by the press but Bachmann seems like she could completely dismantle the opposition in a debate and she seems more and more like Ron Paul everyday as well.



I think the establishment is starting to fear her as much as they did Palin and so look for her to be entrapped in interviews more and more leading up to 2012.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by ararisq
I think the establishment is starting to fear her as much as they did Palin and so look for her to be entrapped in interviews more and more leading up to 2012.


It doesn't hurt that she's quite beautiful for her age as well. Here is a link to her photos on face book:

www.facebook.com...



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by ararisq
 


BUT, here is the deal.

Ronald Reagan was said to be UNELECTABLE.

He destroyed the Democrats. You have to realize that no matter WHO is put into opposing position, they will be torn apart by both the Democrats and the Lame Stream Media.

Thing is, you have to realize that how are they going to attack people that have already been attacked? They will use the same LIES and OBFUSCATIONS that they have been using for the last 20 years. This is NO time to put in another Bush. It is time to go all the way, so to speak.

Like I said, I think Paul and Paulin would be unstoppable.

Now, you will have the progressives tell you that no one can beat Obama. What a JOKE. He was NEVER challenged on anything on the last election. He was an unknown and was NEVER vetted by the press. You will have the same JournOlists attempting the same thing as last time. Problem is, even MY liberal relatives will not discuss politics with me. Because they know the damage this idiotic Congress and President has reaped upon us.

ANYONE running against Obama will win. ANYONE.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by ararisq
 




In a separate set of news Robert Gibbs is Leaving His Position as Press Secretary - which I personally find terrific as I found him to be a horrific representative of the Office of the President.


Oh seriously? You mean we don't have to hear UHH, every third word? Interesting.
Uhh, uhm, uhh
edit on 5-1-2011 by Nephalim because: "uhh",I add a uhhh, video to uhhh, yea



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 05:20 PM
link   
Hey, earlier I made a mistake in spelling.

I called Palin Paulin. Was it prescient?



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 11:57 PM
link   
This thread has opened my mind to the potential of Palin. The gun toting hockey mum that has as much trouble with international politics as many Americans do. She does remind me a bit like Pauline Hanson here in Australia in the way she listens to the community and has no problems in ripping apart the opposition in political discussion. There was a big media backlash with Pauline Hanson associating her with extremist party's while she was just looking for answers and expressing community concerns. Pauline did make a lot of ground in confronting some difficult cultural challenges, but the pressure of the system got a bit much in the end. She was great to listen to in parliament and quickly got to the point standing up for the people.



posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 


I think it might be a moot point - I think Palin has found where she belongs and that is a voice that cannot be pushed aside - she's become a bit like a Rush Limbaugh in her presence and ability to impact politics. In 2012 she is going to endorse candidates and I think she will endorse Michele Bachmann for a 2012 presidential run - question is who will be on the Bachmann ticket?



posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 01:03 PM
link   
I personally think we might see a Rubio/Bachmann ticket - there is a lot of hope out there for a Palin/Bachmann ticket but I think its clear Bachmann is going to be on the ticket if she wants to be. The only danger is if the RNC gets to too much involvement because they like choosing people with little record to be the VP candidate to play that percentages game. They have no soul.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join