Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsA modest proposal for how President Obama should respond to Boehner (from a historical perspective)
"Nuts!"
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 762 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (0)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
A modest proposal for how President Obama should respond to Boehner (from a historical perspective) (Original Post)
Fozzledick
Oct 2013
OP
You know, when Roger West of the Justice Department responded to one of Orly Taitz's filings
msanthrope
Oct 2013
#4
frazzled
(18,402 posts)1. I don't believe there is a historical precedent for this
Not for failing to raise the debt ceiling. It would be the first time ever.
This makes the Gingrich shutdowns of the 90s look like child's play. This time it's sheer derangement.
Fozzledick
(3,860 posts)3. I didn't think I would have to explain it...
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)4. You know, when Roger West of the Justice Department responded to one of Orly Taitz's filings
with "Nuts!" he ended up having to explain it to her, too.
Turbineguy
(37,359 posts)2. When the time comes
Obama will make Congress irrelevant.