|
|
We appreciate your help
in keeping this site going.
|
|
11-09-2012, 12:01 PM
|
|
Reformed Know-Nothing
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: MoCo, MD
Posts: 25,920
|
|
Principles
My hackles go up every time I hear the feckin' Teabaggers and the GOP talking about their unwillingness to "compromise their principles." Are they thereby saying that anyone who believes differently than they do has no principles? Not only do 50% of Americans not share the GOP's "principles," they have their own which often differ.
Different principles inform the policy positions of both parties and their respective constituencies. If both refuse to "compromise their principles," there will never been any compromises whatsoever.
In short, in politics the principle of refusing to compromise your principles is a recipe for failure. I don't find anything the least bit respectable about such intransigence.
__________________
As long as the roots are not severed, all will be well in the garden.
|
11-09-2012, 12:28 PM
|
|
Resident octogenarian
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
|
|
Well to start with a horse's rear end has more principles than a tea bagger.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
|
11-09-2012, 12:37 PM
|
|
Possibly admin. Maybe ;)
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Land of the burning river
Posts: 21,098
|
|
I only know one tea party individual fairly closely. She's a good neighbor.
Pete
__________________
“How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.”
|
11-09-2012, 01:17 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,016
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by finnbow
My hackles go up every time I hear the feckin' Teabaggers and the GOP talking about their unwillingness to "compromise their principles." Are they thereby saying that anyone who believes differently than they do has no principles? Not only do 50% of Americans not share the GOP's "principles," they have their own which often differ.
Different principles inform the policy positions of both parties and their respective constituencies. If both refuse to "compromise their principles," there will never been any compromises whatsoever.
In short, in politics the principle of refusing to compromise your principles is a recipe for failure. I don't find anything the least bit respectable about such intransigence.
|
What "principles" has Obama compromised?
|
11-09-2012, 01:56 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: San Diego via Vermilion Ohio and Points Between
Posts: 11,538
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
What "principles" has Obama compromised?
|
Most people from your state disagree.....
__________________
Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor in the future shall any of us cease to be.
|
11-09-2012, 02:15 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,016
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueStreak
He didn't try to shove single payer, or card check down your throat.
(But he should have. )
Regards,
Dave
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by d-ray657
He allowed the Bush tax cuts to survive in toto, compromising the principle that those who have the most should share a little more. He compromised on finding a reduction in the deficit without raising revenues. He compromised on keeping GITMO open, because of those asserting the "principle" of NIBY. He has been a centrist president.
Regards,
D-Ray
|
Obama could not get agreement among DEMOCRATS for single payer. There wasn't a need for any Repub votes for the Dems to pass whatever version of health care reform they wanted. As for card check, the Dems took too long with health reform to take up single payer when they had the votes for it.
As far as the tax cuts, find me a majority of Dems would would have voted in favor of a tax increase ahead of the 2010 mid term elections. Obama didn't have support in his own party for that.
How was there a compromise on budget cuts without revenues? Again, no support in his own party for revenue increases. Both sides failure to agree got us to the sequester which both parties are actively trying to avoid.
Obama didn't compromise on GITMO. He simply had no place to send many of the GITMO detainees, and some of those that were repatriated have reportedly resumed their terrorist activity.
|
11-09-2012, 02:21 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 20,496
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
Obama could not get agreement among DEMOCRATS for single payer. There wasn't a need for any Repub votes for the Dems to pass whatever version of health care reform they wanted. As for card check, the Dems took too long with health reform to take up single payer when they had the votes for it.
As far as the tax cuts, find me a majority of Dems would would have voted in favor of a tax increase ahead of the 2010 mid term elections. Obama didn't have support in his own party for that.
How was there a compromise on budget cuts without revenues? Again, no support in his own party for revenue increases. Both sides failure to agree got us to the sequester which both parties are actively trying to avoid.
Obama didn't compromise on GITMO. He simply had no place to send many of the GITMO detainees, and some of those that were repatriated have reportedly resumed their terrorist activity.
|
All under Bush.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_o...d_to_terrorism
And he DID have places to send them. There were more than a few places willing to accept them in their local correctional facilities. It was Republicans in Congress who blocked the transfers.
John
|
11-09-2012, 03:10 PM
|
|
Admin
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Behind the Orange Curtain in California
Posts: 37,237
|
|
No comment, Whell?
|
11-09-2012, 01:22 PM
|
|
Area Man
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
|
|
He didn't try to shove single payer, or card check down your throat.
(But he should have. )
Regards,
Dave
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa
|
11-09-2012, 01:53 PM
|
|
Loyal Opposition
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Johnson County, Kansas
Posts: 14,401
|
|
He allowed the Bush tax cuts to survive in toto, compromising the principle that those who have the most should share a little more. He compromised on finding a reduction in the deficit without raising revenues. He compromised on keeping GITMO open, because of those asserting the "principle" of NIBY. He has been a centrist president.
Regards,
D-Ray
__________________
Then I'll get on my knees and pray,
We won't get fooled again; Don't get fooled again
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:04 PM.
|