Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

POLITICS: What’s happened to art of compromise?

Letter by Dan Mills, University Place on Dec. 14, 2011 at 10:23 am with 118 Comments »
December 14, 2011 5:16 pm

Are we becoming a nation with an attack-dog mentality?

Recently, I saw an obscene anti-Bush sticker on the rear window of an automobile. I have seen pictures and heard comments stating that President Obama is replicating actions taken by Nazi Germany.

These actions, in addition to all the negative comments on the Internet about the leadership of both political parties lead me to say, “Yes, we have become a nation of attack dogs as it relates to national politics.”

There does not appear to be any recognition that the president of the United States, regardless of the occupant, is deserving of respect if for no other reason than the office represented.

Have we become incapable of articulating our opposition to ideas without attacking individuals personally when their ideas differ from our own? Solutions to difficult problems come when all views are shared and objectively discussed. Compromise cannot occur when participants have closed agendas.

The majority of the American public is not comprised of pragmatic, hard-nosed party loyalists, but of people who want the best for our nation and desire to deliver to our children a better world than we inherited.

Politics has been described as the art of compromise. Is this no longer applicable in our great nation?

Leave a comment Comments → 118
  1. truthbusterguy says:

    obama listened to Republican concerns about his stimulus, TARP, obamacare and banking laws. obama left no doubt about who’s in charge of these negotiations. “I won,” Obama said as his chin pointed skyward.

    A leader sets the tone and obama set that tone when he said those now two famous words. It’s been downhill ever since. And it will continue a downhill path until we rid ourselves of this person.

    We can’t afford him anymore.

  2. old_benjamin says:

    “The Republicans plan, Obama says, boils down to this: ‘Dirtier air, dirtier water, less people with health insurance.’”

    Given this level of discourse, why would anyone respect this president?

  3. As expected, posts follow this letter providing rationales for bad behavior rather than a acknowledgement of bad behavior.

  4. an acknowledgment

  5. Dave98373 says:

    I agree with you Dan. The main problem is the massive amounts of money in budgets that directly (and indirectly) impact decisons by lawmakers that affect all of us. This is why both parties are at a stand still–there are too many special interest groups in line at the trough and owe each other favors. But when you start to affect the average American’s wallet, people become rabid and irrational. This is also called class warfare. We are currently fighting amongst ourselves for whatever money left (in terms of government tax breaks, subsidies, etc…) that is available.

  6. old_benjamin says:

    I acknowledge Obama’s bad behavior and find him unworthy of respect. He must earn it, regardless of the hat he wears. We would still be subjects of Her Majesty the Queen if we were so easily enthralled with the trappings of office.

  7. Excellent letter and observations Dan. You need go no further than these blogs here in the TNT to prove Dan’s observations are true.

    Nasty comments, personal attacks, reused stereotypes are all too common from the hard-nosed party-loyalists here on these blogs. Just look at the very first two comments on this topic! Neither acknowledges the real subject of Dan’s letter, because both simply use this as an opportunity to again attack President Obama. Talk about “closed agendas.” And closed minds as well!

    Yes Dan, sorry to say, but you are absolutely correct that some people are indeed, “incapable of articulating [their] opposition to ideas without attacking individuals personally when their ideas differ from [someone else's]” They are, as you suggest, “attack dogs”. (My apologies to real canine dogs who are far more intellectually stimulating to talk to.)

    I wish we could have objective discussion, with intelligent people who can think for themselves, and would really like to discuss the issues, as opposed to the uninspired parroting or party line talking points spoon fed to them by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Fox News and others of that ilk.

  8. For decades, there had been a below the radar battle between the left and the right, and the right has been losing. The reason is that normal Americans had been perfectly happy with the USA, while the angry left’s goal has always been to topple the capitalist financial system that they see as unfair. When you’re satisfied, you’re not angry, and so are more tolerant of fringe characters. The water has been getting warmer around the frogs, and it has come to this head. There’s still time to jump out before it boils, but it has to be now. With cable news, talk radio, and the internet as alternate sources of information, normal Americans have become far more aware of what’s going on, which has accelerated the lefts agenda, which in turn repulses more people, and so here we are.

  9. lanq, saying that the right “are more tolerant of fringe characters.” is absolutely one of the most hilarious things I have ever read on any of these blogs. Funny! Funny! Funny! But, sad too.

    According to lanq…

    The right is so tolerant that the right-wing Florida Family Association forced Lowes Home Improvement Stores to withdraw their advertising from a cable show that simply showed ordinary everyday Americans, who happened to be Muslims, because the show did not include Muslim Terrorists.

    The right is so tolerant that its Pro-Life movement has produced people who bomb abortion clinics and kill doctors who perform abortions, killing one doctor while he was in his church at Sunday services. They kill people because they are so Pro-Life and so tolerant.

    The right is so Pro-Life that most of them are also Pro-Capital Punishment, and want to kill prisoners rather than incarcerate or try to rehabilitate them. It just seems so tolerant of fringe characters when all you can think of doing is killing them, even when you profess to be Pro-Life!

    The right is so tolerant that they have religious leaders in their ranks who claim that God caused Hurricane Katrina to destroy New Orleans for their wicked Gay ways, because the right is so tolerant of people with different lifestyles than theirs.

    I could go on, but I don’t need to. The fact is that the right is far more INTOLERANT in every respect than the left, and anyone with a functional brain knows that.

    This is a big problem with the whole concept of being able to discuss issues objectively, which could lead to the art of compromise.

    When the right lies about itself, to itself, and believes its own lies so completely, it just cannot open up and admit that it might be wrong and reconsider any other options. The right lies itself into a corner, like a poor floor-painter paints himself into a corner, and there is just no way out. They won’t admit they are wrong, even when they know in their heart that they are wrong!

  10. LarryFine says:

    “Excellent letter and observations Dan. You need go no further than these blogs here in the TNT to prove Dan’s observations are true.

    Nasty comments, personal attacks, reused stereotypes…”

    … as if you are above the fray, pure and clean. LMAO. You and bB share a common trait.

  11. LarryFine says:

    For an example of unsupported hyberbole that illustrates Dan’s (the letter writer) point perfectly, see the 5:19 pm post.

  12. muck, the funny part is that you don’t even realize that you’re a tool. Lowes? Big deal. I’m sure that over on the Kos and dem underground, your puppetmasters got you pretty riled, but it’s called the free market. Lowes can advertise or not anywhere that their money is good. And this coming from a guy whose philosophical compatriots are so tolerant that they’re responsible for removing “Merry Christmas” from the business lexicon. And abortion clinic bombers? Please, homes, yer killin’ me! I wonder what huge percentage of conservatives have ever bombed a clinic? Like, 0.00000000000000000000001%? Stop it! :)

  13. menopaws says:

    This letter writer wasn’t talking about Obama or Bush……He was talking about the ugliness of the American people. We have behaved like intolerant pigs for a very long time. Since 9/11, we have turned our fear into vicious anger and treat Muslims, immigrants and anyone who is “different” like they are prey and we are the attack dogs. We boo gay soldiers, don’t care about people dying because they can’t afford health care and love thy neighbor is just a joke………..We have nothing to be proud of—even our patriotism is mean-spirited: our black President had to show his “papers” to prove he is a citizen. We are nothing to brag about…….My husband works with many people from other countries—they always ask him “What happened to Americans? why are they so angry?” This letter writer nailed it……..Quit whining about politics and go take a look in the mirror…..we don’t set any standards for good behavior anymore. Most of the world just feels sorry for us—we look suspicious and weak.

  14. Now see, there you go again lanq, a perfect example. You call me a “tool”. Name-calling, the last refuge of one who has no valid arguments to offer.

    In my 5:19 post I offer valid, verifiable examples of right wing intolerance, and all you can do in reply is call me a name. Perfect example of what’s wrong with the right. I didn’t do any name calling, did I?

    As regards the number of abortion clinic bombers and doctor killers, that number is not that relevant. A more important number is the number of right wing anti-abortion advocates, who like to call themselves Pro-Lifers, who were complicit in creating the situation that caused those bombers and killers to take the actions that they did. A much, much higher number.

    Now, if you can’t come back with a valid argument, then please just don’t come back by calling me another name. Have some self-respect for yourself. Don’t allow yourself to sink that low, okay?

  15. menopas: “We have behaved like intolerant pigs for a very long time.”

    And then brings up ignorant cookie cutter talking points aimed at the right like an intolerant pig.

  16. Nice try muck, now, would you like to address my total beat down of your ignorant hyperbole?

  17. menopaws, some of us here in America do what you describe in your post and what I described in my 5:19 post above. Not all of us do those things.

    I’m sure you will find far more tolerance and acceptance and true desire to discuss, debate and compromise among the Independents, and then among the Left/Liberals than you will ever find in the bitter Right Wing Republican Conservatives led by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck.

  18. menopaws, Do you see how lanq immediately confirms everything I wrote?

  19. Rollo_Tomassi says:

    Muckidr,

    Your two posts at 3:17pm and 5:39pm are absolute poetry. You’re a wonderful writer. But what cracks me up the most is the way the 3:17pm starts and finishes…

    “Excellent letter and observations Dan. You need go no further than these blogs here in the TNT to prove Dan’s observations are true.”

    “I wish we could have objective discussion, with intelligent people who can think for themselves, and would really like to discuss the issues, as opposed to the uninspired parroting or party line talking points spoon fed to them by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Fox News and others of that ilk.”

    Almost as the letter writer predicted, your prose starts pleasant enough, but then ends with a a nasty jab.

    It’s like a little miracle.

  20. I notice that too about his style lately… he’ll pretend to be having a conversation at the dinner table but under the table he is kicking your ankles and pretending it’s someone else.

  21. No miracle Rollo_…, just like Joe Friday said in Dragnet, “Just the facts!”

    The fact that I agree with the letter writer is perfectly consistent with my comments to the letter writer. Thanks for complimenting my writing!

    As Walter Cronkite might say, “And that’s the way it is; December fourteenth, two thousand eleven.”

    Or Edward R. Murrow, “Good Night, and Good Luck!”

  22. T-B-G,
    The President has reached across the aisle so often it’s a miracle that he still has a hand.

    And it’s not the President who boasts about getting 98% of what he wanted.

    Old_Ben, people respect the President because he is spot on about the Rpot plans, and has a singular ability to express it in terms even the brain dead right wing base can understand.

    And we all know that the pure right wingers would never act so disgracefully as to pass out bribes on the floor of the house.

    To bust your bubble, we would still be subjects of the Queen had the conservatives (ie the Torires) won.

    The American Rebals were liberals.

    Dave, it is not just the money in the budgets, but includes the money spent to bribe public officials.

    Lanq, I see you are still hanging in there as a perfect inverse truth meter.

    0.00000000000000000000001% is 10 times higher than our truth rating.

    L_F – to bad most of those nasty comments, personal attacks, and reused stereotypes are posted by right wing blogers.

    Your problem with the 5:19 post is that the truth hurts those who belive only Fox Spews is truth.

  23. Rollo says:
    ”Almost as the letter writer predicted, your prose starts pleasant enough, but then ends with a a nasty jab”

    Muckibr says:
    ” The fact that I agree with the letter writer is perfectly consistent with my comments to the letter writer. Thanks for complimenting my writing!”

    Do you really think he is complimenting you muckibr? Honestly, I am not so sure.

    ‘…absolute poetry.’ Hmm… ;)

  24. ”When the right lies about itself, to itself, and believes its own lies so completely, it just cannot open up and admit that it might be wrong and reconsider any other options. The right lies itself into a corner, like a poor floor-painter paints himself into a corner, and there is just no way out. They won’t admit they are wrong, even when they know in their heart that they are wrong!”

    mucky – do you really believe that this is just a right side of the sandbox thing. You need to get out more…

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/msnbc-reports-mitt-romney-used-ku-klux-klan-rallying-cry-keep-america-american/

    First –this is but one example of the vile rhetoric that passes for news, NEWS people, from an established network that clearly is ‘friendly territory’ for the left. I say this because ‘you’ too need to look in the mirror.

    Two – So as not to draw the ire of our beloved bb, I am not justifying a dang thing here, but like a drug addict or alcoholic, in order to fix the problem, we have to acknowledge the problem. This is from a mainstream network, not some fringe group that no one heard from in the outer crust of the internet netherworld.

    Three – Before we go patting ourselves on the back that tingle man, Chris Matthews apologized on behalf of the network, do you not have to ask yourselves WTF were they thinking in the first place to actually let this make it on air? Who are you in your soul to think this is a what passes for news, for discourse? Who do you think you are talking to that wants to hear this stuff?

    The left is not so innocent my friend. You wanna ‘discuss issues objectively’ then give it a shot…

  25. harleyrider1 says:

    People that built America always put Country first, party second. They knew America had faults, but loved this Country. They didn’t tear it down. They had been to other countries, had fought in other countries, and nothing compared. They believed in work ethic, hard work, and giving your neighbor a hand. Not a hand-out.

    Country first. Party second.

  26. harleyrider1, now is the time in our nations’ history that we really need more of the people you have described, and a lot less of the other kind who are putting self and party ahead of all others.

    Country first, Party last.

  27. You and bB share a common trait.

    I didn’t know that the word “trait” was a synonym for “stalker”.

    ;-)

    Wasn’t pointing fingers, wasn’t claiming that I am “above it all”, just made an observation about the nature of the threads here. And somehow you found that worthy of insult.

  28. menopaws says:

    Thank you–country first, party second………Wonderful!!!! My so-called “talking points” are just an expression of weariness with all the ugly rhetoric and divisive behavior. I believe that Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh are the problem with the Republican party…….I used to vote Republican and even now, there are Republicans I truly respect like Olympia Snow, Susan Collins……John Huntsman. The bomb throwers with their ugly mouths shouldn’t represent any serious group of people. And, as long as they do, Republicans will have problems. Even Boehner knows that this “radical right” is not good for the party…….I don’t watch Fox and I don’t watch MSNBC…….I like my news to be news and don’t need propaganda to form my opinions…..Spend some time talking to our soldiers—they represent what America should be about…….The talking heads just flap their mouths for money—in the old days, there was a precise word for their profession and it wasn’t a nice one. Media blank (editing my language here) will say anything to make a buck and push up ratings…….Don’e you get tired of being played? Country first–if we don’t pull together—the jerks win.

  29. I think the internet is responsible for some of the mudslinging among the common folks. We get information today that common citizens weren’t always privvy to and it’s turned us into cynics at the very least. No one really seems to trust anyone.

    At this juncture, I believe that the president should stand on what he’s accomplished and not campaign on any more promises. He HAS been guilty of defying his own mandate (the one he sent out after the AZ shooting, and it isn’t helping in the war between left and right). What’s he done and how’s he done it?

    Be wary of a president who goes on the attack in order to win a second term. I pray he will be man enough to own his first term and let the voters decide whether they want more of the same or something else.

  30. hans… “This says it all.
    If you are offered poop and you don’t want it, why compromise?”

    Okay hans… let’s extend your premise.

    Let’s say you want gold, but all your trading partner has to offer you is “poop”. Fair enough?

    So, let’s say that down the road there is this guy who is busy digging the rocks out of his ground so he can plant a garden, and most of the rocks are laced with gold, but what he really wants is fertilizer (poop).

    Let’s bring the third guy in an trade the second guy’s poop for his gold laced rocks. Then the second guy can trade his newly acquired gold laced rocks for whatever it is you have that he originally wanted.

    Have you got a problem with that scenario?

  31. menopaws, I certainly hope that you did NOT take any personal offense at anything I wrote, especially my 6:24 and 6:25 PM posts from yesterday.

    I agree with you about Beck and Limbaugh, and I also do like Huntsman from what I know of him so far. I also kind of like Ron Paul, but don’t think the Republican Party will ever give him a fair chance and certainly not the nomination.

    I don’t like the bomb-throwers and foul mouths (foul keyboarders) either, but I can understand where they get that, because I really believe they are being played and used, but just won’t admit it.

    And, I do know about soldiers. Having been one during Vietnam.

    Country first, party last!

    Take care menopaws!

  32. sozo, I’m not sure I follow you on the :mandate (the one he sent out after the AZ shooting,”

    Could you add some further explanation to that?

  33. If you are offered poop

    As a colleague once pointed out to me, you sometimes need a lot of fertilizer to grow a beautiful flower.

    (and why is it there have been some many posts recently that refer directly to excrement? And why have those come from posters who are on the Right?)

  34. hansgruber says:

    muckibr-lets muddy the waters even more by bringing 435 house members and 100 senators and a President.

    Some of these folks are willing to meet behind close doors with…lets say the Senate Majority Leader and that leader gives that senator a Medicade wavier for his state in order to secure his vote.

    Have you got a problem with that scenario?

  35. Hans: here’s an example of Republican compromise: We’ll support closing that tax loop hole only if you support cutting taxes so the people who lose the loop hole won’t have to pay more in taxes.

    “and that leader gives that senator a Medicade wavier for his state in order to secure his vote” That is not compromise, that is vote selling..

    Sozo – would love to see the Rpots in congress run on what they actually accomplished as well.

  36. They have accomplished quite a bit, just ask Harry Reed, the bills are piled up in his IN box at the office.

  37. hans… I have NO IDEA what your so called scenario is about, except to duck-out of directly responding to my original question.

  38. hans… Why don’t you just answer my question rather than sidestepping it?

  39. Pacman33 says:

    “Rpots in congress run on what they actually accomplished as well.”

    Effectively bringing Obama’s destructive agenda European-Style-Socialism to a screeching halt. Exactly what the TEA Party and the American people said loud and clear with a 63 seat swing in the House of Reps for the Party of Know. In addition the success of congress was the second part of the TEA Party’s goal, thus finalizing a complete success for the movement preventing any additional $1 trillion radical leftist debt busting legislation.

  40. old_benjamin says:

    xring, yes, the American rebels were liberals–not Progressives. The difference is like that between Bill Buckley and Nancy Pelosi. Go and learn it.

  41. sandblower says:

    Wow, pacman is still at it and still wrong ……. again.
    The nastyness began back around 1994 with Newt’s “Contract for America” campaign according to a recent source I saw. Some want to get him back in the fray thinking he will solve their problems. It’s easy to discern how successful his mode of operation was by where the right’s monologue is now. Pandering anyone?

  42. sandblower says:

    Bill Buckley a liberal? Somebody else has something to learn.

  43. old_benjamin says:

    That would be you, blower. Do some homework on the meaning of classical liberalism. That’s the variety that the Founders practiced.

  44. old_benjamin says:

    xring, here’s a link to the National Center for Policy analysis
    on said topic:

    http://www.ncpa.org/pub/classical-liberalism-vs-modern-liberalism-and-modern-conservatism

  45. “if you are offered poop ..”

    Seems this went right over the heads of the progs who’re patting themselves on the back for their cute wit. The left doesn’t know compromise, they just throw immature little temper tantrums in the streets and chant as though they’re following the bouncing ball on the Wunda Wunda show. This from the party of a president whose response to his lack of compromise was simply, “I won”. And then lefties wonder why so many normal people despise the guy.

  46. sandblower says:

    ben, I know all that, but you wrote liberal, period. And I am still quite certain that Buckley was more conservative in the modern sense than the classical liberalists were.

  47. sandblower says:

    Finally, before I go have lunch, truthyguy in the very first post misrepresents the President’s statement, “I won,” by taking it out of context, which is the only way some on the extreme right can make their ridiculous points.

  48. For decades, there had been a below the radar battle between the left and the right, and the right has been losing.

    Someone was in a cave from 2001 to 2007, to say the least.

  49. “The National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) is a non-profit American conservative think tank whose goals are to develop and promote private alternatives….”

    Need we go further?

  50. rw – another poster presented a site to support a position. I am curious…

    do you have an issue with the site?

    you quoted this partial sentence, is their an issue with it being a ‘conservative think tank’?

    are their positions ‘extreme’ in your view?

    go no further if you wish, but why close yourself off.

  51. hans… I don’t have a clue as to what you’re getting at with your Medicade (actually Medicaid) waiver thing, except that it could be a form of compromise, as in “If you do me a favor and vote for this thing, then I will do you a favor and get you a waiver.” That is, in fact, a form of negotiated compromise. Yah, it really is!

    But, regardless, how about we get back to the original scenario you started with…

    “This says it all.
    If you are offered poop and you don’t want it, why compromise?”

    Simply refusing to accept “poop” has nothing to do with “compromise”. That is a binary decision. Do you want “poop”? Yes or No? No compromise.

    Compromise is the process of negotiating for an alternative.

    It takes two willing participants to negotiate a compromise. If one party simply says, “No” and ends it there, then there is no room for any negotiation or compromise.

    As a real-life example, when one party says “I don’t care what you offer. I am not going to ever allow you to end the Bush Tax Cuts!” Then there is no negotiation or compromise.

    When one party says, “I don’t care what else YOU want to do, all I want to do is make sure Obama is a one term president regardless of anything else. And, in fact, I will make sure you can’t pass any bills into law in order to make sure Obama looks bad.” Then you again have no room for negotiation or compromise.

    So, I have to ask, who is offering who the “poop”?

    Would you be interested in a few rocks with some gold in them?

  52. muckibr In a really goood speech, the president asked that we tone down the rhetoric. But he doesn’t take his own advice. old ben provided this example, but there are others if one wants to go a-googling.

    “The Republicans’ plan, Obama says, boils down to this: ‘Dirtier air, dirtier water, less people with health insurance.’”

    I find the president to be snide, angry and arrogant behind the mask of care and compassion. In that respect, he reminds me of many liberals who presume they are kinder, gentler and tolerant when in fact they are not kind, not gentle and certainly not tolerant.

  53. old_benjamin says:

    xring, it stands to reason that the Founders were liberals of the classical variety, since that’s the only kind there were at the time.

    As for Buckley, he would have been quite at home with Washington, Adams, and Jefferson. Pelosi, on the other hand, would be quite at home with the Pinch Sulzberger of the New York times.

  54. mucky – neither party is interested in furthering the position of the other, both parties are offering perceived poop to the other party.

    The Democrats want to spend more money, tax more, and continue policies that have shown not to work.

    The Rupublicans want to control spending, focus on the private sector for jobs, tax the same, and not be a party to policies that have not worked.

    One man poop is anothr mans gold…

  55. sozo, I think it’s interesting that you use “kinder and gentler” to describe the “liberals” when those words were the famous tag line of none other than President George H.W. Bush when he was describing his vision for America.

    From what I have seen, read and heard, I believe President Obama is exactly correct about the Republicans plans.

    I find Mitch McConnell, John Boehner and Eric Cantor, just to name a few, to be “snide, angry and arrogant” without any mask to disguise it.

    So you have your opinion and I have mine. Doesn’t make any of it fact.

    And, let’s not even go into the “tolerant” issue. If you want my views on who is NOT tolerant, just see my DEC 14 post above at 5:19 PM.

    You are entitled to your opinion sozo. I just happen to think you are wrong about a few things.

  56. hansgruber says:

    Muckilr-Medcaid, yes that is what I meant, thanks.

    I find it odd that you say you don’t have a clue then you except that it could be a form of compromise. Of course is a form of comprise, a compromise of the senator’s integrity. He was opposed to his own party’s plan till he was basically exempted from it.

    Not only do I not like poop, I don’t like poop with medicine, I don’t like poop with rocks, I don’t like poop with my drink or on my shoes or in my hair or in my house or at my work. I do not like poop.

    I do like my medicine and all the other things without poop. Take the poop out and I can compromise. You can keep your poop.

    I can compromise, but it cannot have poop in it. If you cannot take the poop out then there will nothing to compromise. Remember the Reykjavík Summit was a summit meeting between U.S. president Ronald Reagan and Secretary-General of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union Mikhail Gorbachev, held in the famous house of Höfði in Reykjavík, the capital city of Iceland, on October 11–12, 1986?

  57. “Not only do I not like poop, I don’t like poop with medicine, I don’t like poop with rocks, I don’t like poop with my drink or on my shoes or in my hair or in my house or at my work. I do not like poop.

    I do like my medicine and all the other things without poop.”

    So, if I’m to understand, Hans supports the enforcement of laws concerning adequate, working septic systems and would want to make sure that other environmental laws are intact.

  58. ““The Republicans’ plan, Obama says, boils down to this: ‘Dirtier air, dirtier water, less people with health insurance.’”

    I guess the President could have watered down his rhetoric and said that “the GOP is opposed to supporting clean air, clean water or making health insurance more available” – but I’m guessing the conservatives would whine about that also.

    Meanwhile, they’ll remind you that Limbaugh and Beck are entertainers.

  59. qq – if you want a partisan opinion, go to a partisan website. You’ll get exactly what you are seeking.

    How about an independent comparison on liberalism versus conservatism?

  60. hansgruber says:

    @ RW98512-Sorry, you do not understand

  61. rw – duh, when I want a partisan opinion I do go to a partisan site. I then go to another ‘partisan’ site and access the analysis from both sites.

    how about an indepedent analysis, how about a liberal analysis and yes, how about a conservative analysis…

  62. hans…, were you quoting Dr. Seus? “I don’t like poop. Not in my soup, not with my goop, or near my troop.” Just kidding! But seriously, let’s move beyond poop okay?

    You wrote: “I find it odd that you say you don’t have a clue then you except that it could be a form of compromise. Of course is a form of comprise, a compromise of the senator’s integrity. He was opposed to his own party’s plan till he was basically exempted from it.”

    Just for clarity, it should be accept, rather than except. And, I think you meant “It is a form of compromise” rather than comprise. But, like I have said before, I’ve made typos too on these blogs, so don’t sweat it.

    I really didn’t get what you were saying, I just took a shot, and got lucky.

    But, I still don’t get what your issue is with a senator’s integrity. Deals are cut ever day, and waivers do not undercut one’s integrity. That’s why waivers are allowed.

    What hurts a senator’s integrity is taking money from lobbyists and doing what they want him/her to do rather than he/she doing what the people he/she represents sent him/her to do. But, that goes on with both sides of the aisle.

    But you wrote, “If you cannot take the poop out then there will nothing to compromise.” Back to the poop again. Oh well!

    So. let us make part of the compromise the removal of the poop. We will compromise together that we will replace the poop with manure. Okay? And if that’s not okay, then we agree to compromise some more and replace the manure with something else. That’s called negotiation, but it takes two to tango. You know what I mean?

  63. hansgruber says:

    Muckibr-Come on man! Did I underestimate you? I thought you were smarter than this?

  64. Harley – actually the Founding Fathers originally preferred that there be no parties. But that did not last.

    Pacman – and bringing the country to the brink of default and bankruptcy, and defending us from Sharia law.

    Qq – maybe the bills are piling up because the besotted Rpot Leader of the House believes compromise means His way or the highway?

    Old_ben – What we have here is a failure to educate.

    In today’s parlance:
    Liberals focus on using taxpayer money to help better society.

    Progressives focus on using government power to make large institutions play by a set of rules.

    To attempt to use “classical liberalism” is like saying that some classical conservatives wore white hoods and robes and road around beating, bombing, and lynching people/.

    One person Buckley would not have been at home with is Bush 2 and most of today’s so called conservatives.

  65. RW… Have you noticed that when hans… can’t come up with a good response he either tries to change the subject, or simply writes something like “you don’t understand” or says he’s smarter than you. Then he runs away from a debate. Kind of a gutless m.o. isn’t it?

  66. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Muck- with every passing day your comments become more immature and you contribute less.

    I enjoyed your banter when you places your bias on the table and acted like an adult. Why the shift to the irrational?

  67. LarryFine says:

    Kooky… muck called another poster “gutless”.
    BTW, what happened to that post where muck was calling people “teabaggers” along with a few other names ?

  68. “Classical Liberalism”

    “Jumbo Shrimp”

    “Compassionate Conservative”

  69. Actually though, if one is honest, the whole idea that the workers and unions forged an alliance with the liberals is kinda bizarre. I mean, the “classical” liberals put property rights above human rights. Remember that the Founders were OK with slavery, indentured servitude, suffrage only for landholders (of which women could not be).

    aislander, terming himself a “classical” liberal is pretty accurate.

  70. LarryFine says:

    muckibr says:
    Dec. 14, 2011 at 6:20 pm Now see, there you go again lanq, a perfect example. You call me a “tool”. Name-calling, the last refuge of one who has no valid arguments to offer.

    ……..

    muckibr says:
    Dec. 15, 2011 at 4:53 pm

    You’re not just young ZoeH. You’re young and dumb.

    and here’s a couple from just the past day or two “Republican/conservative automatons, teabaggers, naive fool, elitist snob, bigot, elitist snobbery”
    ………

    LMAO! Hey muck… say hi to “toyotaman” for me.

  71. LarryFine says:

    muckibr
    Dec. 15, 2011 at 5:16 pm
    … Heartless goons!

  72. “aislander, terming himself a “classical” liberal is pretty accurate.”

    you just love picking fights… the funny part is you pick fights you can’t win…

  73. qq – who am I to dispute a label someone has given himself?

  74. I prefer a man, or woman, who does not hide behind masks. It’s called integrity, muckibr.

    Duplicity is dangerous. Barrack Obama bears the mark of duplicity.

  75. That’s your opinion sozo and you are welcome to it. I don’t believe President Obama has been hiding behind any mask, and I do believe President Obama has more integrity in his little finger than all the Republican Party Members combined.

  76. this would be an issue of perspective bb, your version of a label vesus another.

    Like I said… keep writing those checks?

  77. ItalianSpring says:

    Look at the great job Obomba is doing.

    4 more years! 4 more years! 4 more years! 4 more years! 4 more years!

    Not.

  78. I prefer a man, or woman, who does not hide behind masks. It’s called integrity

    The most popular President for Conservatives was a professional actor. There are no successful politicians who don’t hide behind masks. Integrity in politics is a fantasy.

  79. qq – talk about loving to pick fights! Yow! Hello pot, my name is kettle.

  80. @Obama

    “He is determined to make the election a contest between two policy alternatives, deliberately omitting the issue of competence. He wants all the votes his point of view will permit him to garner despite his obvious incompetence in implementing it.

    He’s like an incompetent employee hoping to save his job by advocating a broad-based shift in his corporation’s philosophy in the hopes that his bosses will ignore his own poor performance.”

    Guess who the ‘boss’ is…

  81. I am not picking a fight with you, I just love watching aislander kick your a

  82. One sees what one chooses to believe is true.

  83. Italian,,,. the correct spelling of The President’s name is “Obama”.

    Go Newt Go! Let’s all support Newt Gingrich so he gets the Republican nomination, because that will absolutely guarantee FOUR MORE YEARS for PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA!!

    I am willing to COMPROMISE with all you right wingers, conservatives, Republicans, whatever you want to refer to yourselves as, and say that when the Washington state Primary Election is held I will cast my vote for Newt Gingrich, even though when the General Election is held I will be voting for President Obama.

    How is that for a COMPROMISE?

  84. We now know your verison of the word ‘compromise’…

    One way or another you will get your way, yep that is what passes for compromise in a liberals world…

  85. LarryFine says:

    If you’re registered as a dem or indi you won’t be voting in the republican primary… kettlemuck.

  86. gonefishin69690 says:

    Well, I guess when the only information we get to go on when choosing a POTUS, is nothing but muckraking, what do you expect? Each candidate spends more time telling us about how bad their opponent is, rather than their own plan for the future. The main reason to resort to tearing down another individual is to try and make yourself look better. This is the choice we are given every 4 years…..The Rock….or the Hard Place. I have a hard time respecting anybody who got where they are, by simply making someone else look worse than they are.

  87. CORRECTION to some Dis-Information that was recently posted on this blog by someone who shall remain nameless:

    Do I have to register with a party to get a ballot?

    No. Our primary system does not change the way voters register to vote. Washington’s registration laws do not require a voter to register by party.

    Read more at http://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/primary_faq.aspx

  88. LarryFine says:

    Partly true toyota… you’ll pick a party ballot. If you choose a republican ballot, you will only be able to vote for republican candidates… therefore you will not be able to vote democrat.
    ……..

    What is a consolidated ballot?

    A consolidated ballot is a single ballot on which voters may pick a party preference (Democratic, Republican or Libertarian) and all of the partisan races are presented in individual sections for each party. Nonpartisan races and ballot measures are listed after all of the partisan races. All voters may vote on the nonpartisan races and issues even if they do not pick a party and vote on the partisan section of the ballot.

    What is a separate ballot?

    Physically separate ballots will consist of a separate ballot for each party (Democratic, Republican or Libertarian) that contains all partisan races as well as all of the nonpartisan races and issues. A separate nonpartisan ballot will also be provided to voters. Voters will be asked to select one of the partisan ballots, or the nonpartisan ballot if they do not wish to vote on a partisan ballot.

    If my county is using physically separate ballots, how many ballots will I receive?

    In counties using separate ballots, each voter will receive three ballots: Democratic, Republican and Nonpartisan. Nonpartisan races also appear on the Democratic and Republican ballots. The voter may pick only one party ballot. Thus, if the voter picks a Democratic ballot, the voter may vote for Democratic candidates for partisan office and also vote for nonpartisan candidates on that same ballot. If a voter elects to not choose a party ballot, the voter may select and vote the nonpartisan races.

  89. Larry… Just admit you were wrong. Man up!

  90. LarryFine says:

    Yep.
    So, will you be forfeiting voting for democrats just to give the newt one more vote ?

  91. bB et al
    Bush2 did not hide behind a mask.
    He just acted naturally.
    And look what he left us.

    Qq,
    ‘who’s the boss’ – I more interested in who the author is.

    AI kicks so much hind end he needs a therapeutic foam donut to set on.

    “my way or not at all” is the right wing ideal of compromise.
    After all they are doing His work, and to compromise would be a sin.

    L-F,
    Only Rpots get to vote in their primary, but can run as Democrats in Wisconsin Primaries.
    Kooky!

    IT’S BUBBLE BUSTING TIME – there will be no Democratic Primary this year.

  92. xring… good comments all, but I especially liked that last one. Very nice!

  93. LarryFine says:

    So not one democrat is running for any office ? I did not know that.

  94. The real Ronald Reagan served as president. He used his acting skills when needed, but you had no problem knowing where he stood. I haven’t a clue what Obama stands for except his own ego, and a misguided notion of how a true republic should operate.

  95. sozo, except that when it came to the Iran-Contra Hearings, Reagan used his Alzheimer’s skills. “Well, I don’t recall that.” I think almost everyone had a problem where he stood in that scenario.

    Ronald Reagan was a third rate actor (Bedtime for Bonzo) who got lucky in politics.

    Barack Obama was a Harvard Law Review student, practicing lawyer, community organizer and Constitutional Law Professor, among other things. Don’t you think he might have some notion as to how a republic would work after that specific range of experience? I sure do. Come on, give the guy a break and be a little honest will you please?

  96. Larry, Larry, Larry – We were talking about Presidential Preference Primaries. President Obama is the one and only Democratic Canditate – hence no Democratic Presidential Preference Primary.

  97. ReadNLearn says:

    Compromise is for those without core values.

    If it’s truly right, then there’s no compromise possible. If it’s truly wrong, then compromise is settling for evil.

  98. ReadNLearn, First of all, Welcome! Have not see you here before.

    Secondly, I really think you need more reading and more learning, because the very very famous old saying is: Politics is The Art of Compromise!

    Try starting here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_as_a_Vocation

    The sad fact of the matter is, that currently in Washington D.C. there are damn few artists!

  99. Who needs to compromise when the Dems will roll-over on anything?

    KXL pipeline is approved, no millionaire tax and the Dems get a two month extension on the payroll tax.

    Meanwhile, whistleblowers claim that the “smart pig” software for monitoring pipelines are intentionally faulty. Gee….that would be just like the Deep Horizon not having the required back-up systems.
    http://www.truth-out.org/whistleblowers-software-monitoring-keystone-xl-pipelines-safety-contains-deliberate-errors

  100. The real Ronald Reagan served as president.

    ROTFLMAO!

    The “real” Ronald Reagan wasn’t close to the myth of Reagan that has been actively created and promoted by right wing idolators.

    What the “real” Reagan was really good at was projecting a folksy, aw shucks persona that let many Americans – both left and right – overlook what he was actually doing.

  101. And, introducing us all to Jelly-Belly jellybeans!!!

  102. LarryFine says:

    Why has Barry repeatedly invoke the Gipper ?

  103. ReadNLearn says:

    Compromise…great historical examples:

    Let’s see…compromise led to human beings being counted as fractions of a person.

    Compromise led to the some British guy saying we’d have ‘Peace in our time’ after a pre war talk with Hitler.

    Compromise is for the weak. Vision and direction matched with action is more important. One doesn’t compromise one’s morality or intelligence. One compromises when something doesn’t matter in the big picture as in “OK, we can have the string beans. I really don’t care what is next to my porter house.”

  104. concernedtacoma7 says:

    If BHO gets kicked out of the People’s house next year, do you think dems will be talking about him with the support republicans give Reagan today?

    And over-land pipelines work nothing like Deepwater Horizon. Nice fearmongering.

    Oh, and all the class warfare made great rhetoric but even the dems know it does not translate into policy.

  105. Ronald Reagan is dead. How much “support” does he need today anyway? BRILLIANT!!!

  106. Muckibr – the sad fact is that ReadNLead has correctly stated the right wing philosophy of compromise.

    And then RNL doubles down with ‘only the weak compromise’.

  107. The irony of conservative inflexibility is that our Constitution is known as ‘The Great Compromise’!

  108. Compromise led to the some British guy saying we’d have ‘Peace in our time’ after a pre war talk with Hitler.

    Actually, that would be appeasement that Chamberlain is most often demonized for, not compromise.

    Appeasement, when you give in to demands in order to avoid conflict, is hardly compromise, which is a process where both sides make concessions to craft a stance that is a hybrid of both viewpoints.

  109. ReadNLearn says:

    The funniest aspect of this thread is those who so proclaim compromise is a great, wonderful, fantastic thing, won’t give an inch!~

    I’m going to print this out, highlight it and save it.

    Typical Liberal hypocracy!

  110. And when you HIGHLIGHT passages about INFLEXIBILITY ReadNLearn, don’t forget to HIGHLIGHT this one…

    “Compromise is for those without core values.
    If it’s truly right, then there’s no compromise possible. If it’s truly wrong, then compromise is settling for evil.”

    Which YOU posted on the 17th at 6:57 AM, and is, without question, the MOST inflexible “won’t give an inch” statement written in this entire blog.

    Typical ReadNLearn hypocrisy!

    Just saying man, when you talk about hypocrisy, go look in a mirror.

  111. Muckir – similar yes, but less intellectual.

    RNL –
    Dems in the Super Committee put Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid on the table.

    The Rpots refused to even discuss putting tax cuts on the table.

    Yet the Rpots blame the Dems for not compromising.

    There is a vast difference between being stong and being inflexable.

  112. ReadNLearn says:

    When someone becomes dirty and corrupt, it’s often said they’re ‘compromised’ and they ‘compromised their values’.

    Those with Integrity and Honor don’t compromise, they continue the fight for what is right. Too many Germans compromised with the Nazis when they shouldn’t have given and inch. We’re not in that desperate a situation, but this country compromised over slavery as well and that was bad.

    When we didn’t compromise, like when we declared war on Japan and Germany, we were doing right.

  113. ReadNLearn says:

    ‘given an inch’ is a correction to a typo.

    We don’t vote in people to compromise. We vote them in to correct things, like the ones who will tear down this horrible health care plan atrocity.

  114. Last word:

    Politics is The Art of Compromise.

    That’s just the way it is. The current players just are not very good at it.

  115. R-N –L, You are entitled to your own opinions, but not to your own facts.

    The US declared war on Japan on 8 December 1941, the day after the Japan attacked Perl Harbor.

    Germany and Italy declared war on the US on 11 December 1941, which prompted the US to declared war on Germany and Italy that same day.

    These two facts invalidates everything you said in your 19 Dec, 7:45 PM post.

  116. Compromise = an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.

    Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) agreed to a 60-day extension of an expiring payroll tax cut for 160 million workers and end a stand-off with Democrats that threatens to undercut a fragile U.S. economic recovery. However, Speaker of the House John Boehner has apparently refused to accept the compromise.

    A compromised was reached, then blocked, but a compromise was reached!

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0