The Obama Hypocrisy: Fail To Complain About Democrat Obstruction During Bush Admin But Complain About Repub. Obstruction Now

By 11 Comments 4,332 views

Byron York writes about Obama railing against the attempts by Republicans to stop his railroading of the United States:

In his speech at a Denver fundraiser yesterday, President Obama repeated what has become a key talking point for Democrats — that the Senate “doesn’t get anything done” and the reason for that is that some Republicans, who “don’t believe in government,” are happy to block the administration’s initiatives because blocking government initiatives is “consistent with their philosophy.” Here’s what the president said:

Look, something you got to understand — for those who don’t believe in government, those who don’t believe that we have obligations to each other, it’s a lot easier task. If you can gum up the works, if you make things broken, if the Senate doesn’t get anything done, well, that’s consistent with their philosophy. It’s a whole lot easier to say no to everything. It’s a whole lot easier to blame somebody else. That politics that feeds on peoples’ insecurities, especially during tough political times — that’s the easiest kind of politics. There’s a long, storied history of that kind of politics.

It’s a charge you’ll no doubt hear more in the coming campaign.

The point of Byron’s article is to point out the flip-flop of this talking point since it wasn’t too long ago that the President was praising Congress about how much they got done because of his “new direction.”

I don’t disagree and its a valid point to bring up but I want to point out that Obama didn’t complain about this kind of behavior when the Democrats were the minority during the Bush administration. Why didn’t he bring up the blocking of legislation by Democrats on The Patriot Bill? Bush’s energy bill? The border security bill? Parental notification bill? Class-action lawsuit reform?

And this was only after five minutes of digging (if you find more examples please leave them in the comments).

So why wasn’t he complaining then?

Because back then it was ok to shut down the Senate on important matters because they didn’t want the legislation. But now that the Democrats are in power its NOT ok.

Hypocrisy, thy name is the Democratic Party.

Curt served in the Marine Corps for four years and has been a law enforcement officer in Los Angeles for the last 24 years.

11 Responses to “The Obama Hypocrisy: Fail To Complain About Democrat Obstruction During Bush Admin But Complain About Repub. Obstruction Now”

  1. 1



    “But when our laws, our leaders or our government are out of alignment with our ideals, then the dissent of ordinary Americans may prove to be one of the truest expressions of patriotism.”Barack Obama

    And this was only after five minutes of digging (if you find more examples please leave them in the comments).

    How about on social security reform?

  2. 3


    Democrats blocked Social Security Reform that is now causing us major problems, IF they would have let us fix it then , the problems would be much smaller now.

  3. 5


    The dems didn’t want Bush and India to go ahead with a nuke agreement. Trying to remember how that went, Bush wanted them to be able to go ahead with more plants because that country was beginning to be a high energy user. By having more nuke plants in country it would lower their demand for oil.

    What about the Rockefeller memo? It wasn’t exactly obstruction, the dems were setting up a plan to unscrupulously use the Iraq War investigation to advance their political gains.

    Then there was the Kennedy plot that blocked a judicial appointment until after the U of Mich race case was decided.

    Byron York wrote an article about the dems obstructing judicial appointments and the underhanded way they went about it. Much of this story is about the dastardly Levin and the dumb Stabenow blocking Michigan appointments. Interesting read.

    More Dem Obstruction

    Excerpts of a floor speech Senator DeMint’s did in 2005 after hearing his colleague from Illinois lying about President Bush and the Iraq war. He didn’t mention if it was Durbin or Obama, could have been either. He has much to say about that, but I am only including his mentions of obstruction.

    Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I was just across the way in my office working on several things that I think are important to the country. We were working on a bill to stop the increases in taxes that will occur unless we act immediately. This is another bill that the Democrats are trying to obstruct, but it is critically important that we pass this stop-the-tax-increase bill in order to keep our economy growing and to keep creating jobs in this country.

    We are dealing with a serious energy situation in this country today, but for the last decade they have obstructed any development of our own domestic energy supplies. Now they are on the floor blaming President Bush for the high energy prices, while the President and the Republican Congress have managed, despite the Democratic obstruction, to pass an Energy bill that will move us toward energy independence.

    The Democrats are on the floor often complaining about American job losses, but when we try to pass legislation that improves the business climate in this country, they obstruct. They obstructed passing our elimination of junk lawsuits and the elimination of fraudulent bankruptcies. They tried to stop that, voting en bloc against it. But the President and the Republicans have been able to pass that and move us along.

    There are a whole list of things that Republicans, with the President’s leadership, have done from the Energy bill, to class action and bankruptcy reform. We have passed a budget that reduced the growth in spending. We have passed a number of things that improve vocational training. There is a huge list.

    On the back side of this list is what America needs to know about: The Democrat agenda, of which they have none. The reason they are misleading the American people about our President and the importance of winning the war on terror is they have no agenda. They are not willing to step out and take any leadership on any issue. So all they do is obstruct, attack, distort, and complain with their “do nothing” agenda.

    Social Security.

    Reading through a column David Limbaugh wrote I find some very interesting paragraphs midway through, old Harry Reid had so much to say about President Bush creating a crisis with Social Security, how’s that working out now?

    As another example, consider the Democrats’ obstruction of President Bush’s efforts to reform Social Security. Who can forget the Democrats’ (Bill Clinton’s, Al Gore’s) insistence that the future solvency of this entitlement was in such jeopardy that it must be placed off limits in a lock box?

    Yet when President Bush attempted to reform this “third rail of politics,” Democrats didn’t just oppose the eminently sensible “partial privatization” aspect of his plan. They went further, completely reversing themselves and denying the system was in trouble at all. Our old friend Sen. Harry Reid said, “Social Security is not in crisis. It’s a crisis the president’s created, period. … The president has never seen a crisis he hasn’t created. … [Bush is] exaggerating the solvency.”

    This time they went to the other end of the chronological spectrum and used seniors as props. Here again, they pretended to be intervening for the very group of people their demagogic opposition was sure to harm: future Social Security recipients.

    Demonstrating once more their contempt for the private sector and free markets, they tried to scare seniors into believing President Bush was imperiling Social Security with his very modest proposal to allow participants to invest a small portion of their own funds.

    Bush’s valiant effort was dead on arrival, and we kicked the ball down the road. This week, we were reminded of the consequences of this reckless procrastination when the first baby boomer of a projected 80 million, Kathleen Casey-Kirschling, applied for her benefits. Despite the Democrats’ denials in the name of protecting seniors —- most of whom are not yet seniors —- Social Security outlays are projected to exceed its receipts by 2041.

    Oops, seems the year 2041 is a bit off right now. Democrats remind me of an old song, had a verse in it that went something like….if there’s no such thing as bad luck I’d have no luck at all. With them, it’s if there’s no such thing as bad help, they’d be no help at all.

  4. 6



    That journalist is crazy-mad!

    Looks like most are saying, “none of the above” in that poll, I did.

    Participated in grading the president yesterday in I think it was a USA Today poll and another at CBS. By wide margins, he got F- in both.

    None are scientific, but remembering back in the Vote.Com days, the different polls VC would put out would be posted at all the lefty sites to encourage the multitudes to flood the polls. That doesn’t seem to be happening anymore. Obama’s supporters do not seem to be as energized to show support for him as they were when they were lashing out at Bush.

  5. 7



    “That journalist is crazy-mad!”

    Like nearly all the Lefties, it would seem.

    “Looks like most are saying, “none of the above” in that poll, I did”

    Me too! Have a great weekend.

  6. 8


    As usual, the facts get in the way of a good meme, that GOP obstruction now is the same as Dem obstruction back then. It is not, of course, for several reasons. First, the GOP never had the margins in the Senate that the Dems have now. Meaning, when people went to the polls in 2008, they sent to DC an overwhelmingly Dem Senate. For a minority of 41% of a body to block the 59% majority from doing anything meaningful on BIG HUGE ISSUES is ridiculous.

    Second, the GOPers never produced a bill on Social Security reform. It was a notion and a talking point, but there was no bill for the Dems to actually block. Compare that to now, where the vast majority of the elected House and the vast majority of the Senate supports doing something about health care, but you have a rump minority from the party that LOST THE LAST ELECTION basically making sure that the dysfunctional status quo remains and 30 million people who could be coverage with health insurance will, instead, not get it.

    Third, the GOPers have taken mendacious obstruction to new heights. Obama’s smackdown of the House GOPers a couple weeks ago mentioned this. But in the Senate, you had GOPers who had sponsored a deficit reduction commission turn around and oppose it because Obama supported it. How the hell does that make any sense? Please explain to me how that is not needless obstruction.

  7. 9



    I realize the intellectual consistency is pretty much impossible for any political partisan, but we’re going to try…

    If Republican minority obstructionism is bad based on a 54-45 Democratic majority, and Democratic minority obstructionism was good based on a 55-44 Republican majority, what is the numerical split that changes it?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *