BO to Boehner – Bite Me

How do you negotiate when one side says they want to negotiate, but the other side has to surrender and give up everything.

When I was a negotiator during my 30+ years doing Contract Administration, it was always a give and take action. We gave up something, and the contractor gave up something. From Noah Webster’s Best Seller here is the definition of negotiations:

ne·go·ti·ate [ni-goh-shee-eyt]
Show IPA verb, ne·go·ti·at·ed, ne·go·ti·at·ing.

verb (used without object) 1. to deal or bargain with another or others, as in the preparation of a treaty or contract or in preliminaries to a business deal.
verb (used with object) 2. to arrange for or bring about by discussion and settlement of terms: to negotiate a loan.
3. to manage; transact; conduct: He negotiated an important business deal.
4. to move through, around, or over in a satisfactory manner: to negotiate a difficult dance step without tripping: to negotiate sharp curves.
5. to transfer (a draft, promissory note, etc.) to a new owner by endorsement and delivery or by delivery.

Of course what is done during negotiations is to present facts as to why the other side needs to give on a point. As the one commercial shows, “You need your Ducks in a row.” What BO is doing is Dictating the terms. His terms are simple, “You Surrender.” Over the years of negotiations, that is not a position. I once dealt with a contractor who would not give a penny on a $1.1million proposal. I showed him he had NO FACTS to support that number. I showed him a law he didn’t comply with. It got so bad I walked out. I came back and my partner had us both calm. He said what do you want. I said one word “FACTS”. He went away, and a few days later provided facts to support his new position around $800K. I said fine, that’s accepted. Now it sounds like I dictated terms, but I just showed him what his contract said.

The House sent their facts. BO’s Minions will blame the Reps, but with a my way or the highway with no facts negotiations, BO has the problem. HE IS NOT A DICK-TATOR, but sure acts like one. By the way, the CONSTITUTION which has been shredded by BO says all Appropriation Bills start in the HOUSE.

Dictator Obama Tells Boehner He Will Not Negotiate On Debt Limit
Posted By Dave Jolly on Sep 23, 2013

President Barack Obama expects Republicans to give up everything they stand for and what their constituents demand. He has made no attempt to hide the fact that he is completely unwilling to compromise on the debt limit and spending bill before Congress. If there is any compromising to be done, Republicans are required to do all of it, according to a recent phone call Obama made to House Speaker John Boehner.

After the House Republicans passed a spending bill that excluded funding for Obamacare, the president called Boehner. Boehner’s spokesman released a statement about the call, saying:


“The president called the speaker this evening to tell him he wouldn’t negotiate with him on the debt limit. Given the long history of using debt limit increases to achieve bipartisan deficit reduction and economic reforms, the speaker was disappointed, but told the president that the two chambers of Congress will chart the path ahead.”

“It was a brief call.”

Obama stated emphatically that he wants Congress to just extend the debt limit without any restrictions. He wants permission to keep spending out of control to bankrupt the government that is already on the verge of a financial collapse. House Republicans didn’t buy the president’s demand for a blank check spending bill. Not only did they opt not to fund Obamacare, at least for one year, they also opposed Obama’s plans to restrict coal ash pollution, to make all civil servants increase their contributions towards their retirement plans and his demands that Congress approve his many regulations.

Read more at http://godfatherpolitics.com/12636/dictator-obama-tells-boehner-will-negotiate-debt-limit/#1pLfjqyb7wcmcT0d.99

6 Comments

  1. By the way, the CONSTITUTION which has been shredded by BO says all Appropriation Bills start in the HOUSE.

    It also states:

    “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.”

    http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2013/09/stop-kabuki-great-betrayal.html

    ——
    Option 4: My view of the 14th amendment option, is that a decision to continue issuing debt appealing to the 14th amendment, may very well work because the Supreme Court refuses to grant standing to the House to challenge it. However, if the Court does allow a challenge then I think it will find that the debt ceiling isn’t unconstitutional as long as Congress allows PCS and consols, because those can be used to get credits to pay off securities as they fall due.

    I also think that using the 14th amendment option is a more likely move from the Administration, then using the coin, or the exploding option, because the balance of advantages and disadvantages will appeal to the President’s constitutional lawyer side. The 14th amendment option has the following advantages. 1) It makes the President look strong by standing up to the Republicans; 2) It continues current practices, so no one will say it’s “weird,” just illegal; 3) It maintains the air of crisis the President would like to have to go after the Grand Bargain, but also decreases economic risk by putting the debt limit problem on the back burner; 4) It has a good chance of surviving a Court suit through a denial of standing to the House; and 5) It carries with it the chance of getting the debt ceiling law invalidated by the Supreme Court.

    Its disadvantages are a few. Unless the Court actually declares the debt ceiling unconstitutional, the House will probably impeach the President, claiming he acted illegally; so this option is risky. If something unexpected happens on the surveillance state front, the risk might unexpectedly increase through a sudden alliance of the left and right against the President.

    Of course, the risk of impeachment increases even more if the Court both grants standing and upholds the debt ceiling law. All that said, I think the likelihood of the disadvantages happening is low, and it may be the kind of risk the President is willing to take because, as a lawyer, he will assess its likelihood as low.
    —–

  2. The Fourteenth Amendment states that the validity of the debt shall not be questioned; that doesn’t mean it must be paid. There are many perfectly legal and valid debts that still don’t get paid.

    No money can be spent save by lawful appropriation by the Congress, and if the Congress does not appropriate, the money cannot be spent.

  3. ObamaCare is illegitimate. It was passed in the dark of night based on nothing but lies and bribes without a single bi-partisan vote and it was done against the overarching opposition of the American people. It’s a typical example of the roughshod corruption and blatant dishonesty characteristic of Barack Obama’s entire Administration.

    Virtually everything about Obama smacks of deception, outright lies, and backroom pay-offs. From his shady parents and his communist pervert mentor, to his prep school drug use, to his secret trips and peripatetic college associations, to his money grubbing terrorist pals in Chicago, to his phony self-aggrandizing books, to his 20 year relationship with a bigoted and racist hate preacher, to his obsessive coddling of terrorists, to his crooked Stimulus legislation, to his phony use of Green Energy to pay-off campaign backers, to protecting Black Panther thugs caught on tape intimidating voters, to covering up government gun running and FBI and ATF malfeasance, and murder in Fast-n-Furious, to putting an innocent man in prison to cover up his complicity in the terrorist attack on Benghazi, to turning his back on Americans fighting for their lives, to siccing the IRS on TEA Party patriots, to tapping telephones, recording emails, to bugging reporters, to undermining the US economy, to selling out our allies, to undermining the 2nd amendment rights of citizens, to refusing to enforce the immigration laws, to brainwashing public school students, to boring the bejesus out of TV viewers, to using Air Force One for his wife’s vacations, to sending the US military to do the bidding of the Muslim Brotherhood, to eating dogs, all this and so much more.

    Enough of this hate filled anti-American pretender. The day he’s frog-marched out of office the nation will rejoice, oceans will cease to rise, and the planet will begin to heal itself.

  4. The light at the end of his rope wrote:

    Enough of this hate filled anti-American pretender. The day he’s frog-marched out of office the nation will rejoice, oceans will cease to rise, and the planet will begin to heal itself.

    I guess that depends on who becomes President on January 20, 2017. If it’s another Democrat, we can pretty much kiss our liberties goodbye.

  5. What is most significant about all of these budget jiggering plots is the fact that liberals have amply demonstrated that they have virtually no interest whatsoever in in either a strictly constitutional government and polity, or the right of the people to govern themselves.

    This is of course no surprise in general terms. The Progressive class has long admitted that their real goal is a well managed herd ruled by an expert class (cite Garry Wills) and that as little as self-government with a small “s” is valued by them in terms of individual moral restraint and character development, self-government with a capital “S” is valued even less.

    What they cannot quite seem to grasp however – and despite their constant menacing remarks threatening social unrest and civil violence – is that whatever illusory social contract these leftist vipers imagine is in force between them and the actually productive portion of the populace, their assaults on the principle of Constitutional government negate that “bargain”.

    Because there is nothing humanly in common under their own system of interpretation between them and us, but the truce.

    Not all progressives need like Perry, to have their feet held to the fire before they will admit the critical logical point that follows. Many, many, liberals have in fact made a particular point of admitting that the understandings of human existence and social life they have embraced (atheistic, utilitarian, relativistic, mechanistic) necessarily entail that the only thing were have really in “common” as species members (and the very notion of a species is itself held to be arbitrary by them) is “our” secular faith … in our supposedly constitutional project.

    My point then is, as in so many times before, there is on the progressive’s own terms no humanity in common, no real moral connection or framework of obligation between us and them … just a public truce, the terms of which which they are busily subverting.

    When they finish destroying all limits, and across the ruins you see them standing there, and you here … What then?

    This is why it’s so unprofitable to associate with progressives. It’s like living in a wooden house with a colony of termites that demands you keep building in the name of some supposed common goal. You build, they eat. You construct, they subvert.

    A contract means nothing to them, and many of them have – thankfully – even ceased pretending it ever did.

    What common goal, or even compatible goals, can traditional edified humans and the political progressives with their species reshaping and managing designs have? What’s the benefit?

    When you calculate that allowing them to run headlong into a brick wall and destroy themselves could only result in a more tranquil and secure, while simultaneously stimulating and enriching life for yourself and your family, it’s had to imagine what that benefit which supposedly comes with underwriting their neurotic obsessions and autogenic dysfunctions, could be.

    Perhaps, despite all the misery they spread, it would be thought to be spiritual. But then no, on their own interpretation, it couldn’t.

  6. ObamaCare is illegitimate. It was passed in the dark of night based on nothing but lies and bribes without a single bi-partisan vote and it was done against the overarching opposition of the American people.

    Remind us again where the Constitution requires laws to be passed during daylight hours, and have both parties agree to them?

    And Barack Obama made it a central plank of his campaign – before the American people elected him.

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/06/obamacare-and-conservative-self-delusion.html

    It’s a typical example of the roughshod corruption and blatant dishonesty characteristic of Barack Obama’s entire Administration.

    It’s a typical example of your wingnut inability to deal with reality is what it is.

Comments are closed.