Originally Posted By: afsaneh77
Originally Posted By: Camarel
Obama didn't exactly achieve much during his first 2 years either when he controlled both the House and the Senate. The fact is he can blame the repubs in Congress, but at the end of the day getting Republicans to work with him is part of his job, Clinton did it well. I just think Obama was to inexperienced for this job to begin with. Even though Clinton was about the same age he had ran a state for a decade or so while Obama had been a Senator for a very short period.


Not when the senate minority leader says it is their "job" not to let this president get anything done. Notice that he doesn't think his job is to pass laws that are good for people. Clinton was a white Southerner who knew the language to GOP base and signed DOMA for pete's sake. Obama made Hillary who dragged him through the mud his SoS. That's how much he is willing to work with others. If republicans were remotely up for it, he would've worked with them. They shot down their own bills when he went for those bills. Case in point: Simpson-Bowles. Look it up. And then NSA, and now Syria. They couldn't be more obvious as to why they hate this president so much.


First that was said once the Republicans got the majority in the house, Obama had already had 2 full years with full Democrat control of the Congress. Secondly i don't think it's fair to pull a random line out of a full interview.

NJ: You’ve been studying the history of presidents who lost part or all of Congress in their first term. Why?
McConnell: In the last 100 years, three presidents suffered big defeats in Congress in their first term and then won reelection: Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, and the most recent example, Bill Clinton. I read a lot of history anyway, but I am trying to apply those lessons to current situations in hopes of not making the same mistakes.
NJ: What have you learned?
McConnell: After 1994, the public had the impression we Republicans overpromised and underdelivered. We suffered from some degree of hubris and acted as if the president was irrelevant and we would roll over him. By the summer of 1995, he was already on the way to being reelected, and we were hanging on for our lives.
NJ: What does this mean now?
McConnell: We need to be honest with the public. This election is about them, not us. And we need to treat this election as the first step in retaking the government. We need to say to everyone on Election Day, “Those of you who helped make this a good day, you need to go out and help us finish the job.”
NJ: What’s the job?
McConnell: The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.
NJ: Does that mean endless, or at least frequent, confrontation with the president?
McConnell: If President Obama does a Clintonian backflip, if he’s willing to meet us halfway on some of the biggest issues, it’s not inappropriate for us to do business with him.
NJ: What are the big issues?
McConnell: It is possible the president’s advisers will tell him he has to do something to get right with the public on his levels of spending and [on] lowering the national debt. If he were to heed that advice, he would, I imagine, find more support among our conference than he would among some in the Senate in his own party. I don’t want the president to fail; I want him to change. So, we’ll see. The next move is going to be up to him.
NJ: What will you seek from the president on the tax issue?
McConnell: At the very least, I believe we should extend all of the Bush tax cuts. And I prefer to describe this as keeping current tax policy. It’s been on the books for 10 years. Now, how long that [extension] is, is something we can discuss. It was clear his position was not [favored] among all Senate Democrats. They had their own divisions. I don’t think those divisions are going to be any less in November and December.

Here’s how McConnell explained his remarks in a speech after the election, when Republicans had taken over the House of Representatives and made huge gains in the Senate:
“Let’s start with the big picture. Over the past week, some have said it was indelicate of me to suggest that our top political priority over the next two years should be to deny President Obama a second term in office. But the fact is, if our primary legislative goals are to repeal and replace the health spending bill; to end the bailouts; cut spending; and shrink the size and scope of government, the only way to do all these things it is to put someone in the White House who won’t veto any of these things. We can hope the President will start listening to the electorate after Tuesday’s election. But we can’t plan on it. And it would be foolish to expect that Republicans will be able to completely reverse the damage Democrats have done as long as a Democrat holds the veto pen.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact...a83bf_blog.html

So when it's seen in full context, he's talking about Obama cooperating with the Republicans just as Clinton did. Everything else you said is correct, but it's ridiculous when Obama supporters blame it 100% on the Republicans, as has already been said in this thread both sides are to blame.