Read the Bills Act Coalition

Monday, January 26, 2009

Bipartisan politics out the window if you disagree

To state "I won" as a way to squash an opposing opinion, is the equivalent of a parent using the tried and true method with a child of "because I said so", it neither works or addresses the issue at hand. Compromise is the key to moving an agenda forward in a democracy....From the New York Post:

President Obama warned Republicans on Capitol Hill today that they need to quit listening to radio king Rush Limbaugh if they want to get along with Democrats and the new administration....."You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done," he told top GOP leaders, whom he had invited to the White House to discuss his nearly $1 trillion stimulus package.....One White House official confirmed the comment but said he was simply trying to make a larger point about bipartisan efforts....."There are big things that unify Republicans and Democrats," the official said. "We shouldn't let partisan politics derail what are very important things that need to get done." ....That wasn't Obama's only jab at Republicans today.....In an exchange with Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) about the proposal, the president shot back: "I won," according to aides briefed on the meeting. "I will trump you on that." .... Republicans say the $825 billion price tag is too big a burden for a nation crippled by debt and that it doesn't do enough to stimulate the economy by cutting taxes. ..."You know, I'm concerned about the size of the package. And I'm concerned about some of the spending that's in there, [about] ... how you can spend hundreds of millions on contraceptives," House GOP Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) later said. ..."How does that stimulate the economy?" ...But White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs countered: "There was a lot of agreement in that room about the notion that we're facing an economic crisis unlike we've seen in quite some time ... that we must act quickly to stimulate the economy, create jobs, put money back in people's pockets." ...Gibbs disagreed with those who called the meeting window dressing. ..."The president is certainly going to listen to any ideas," he said. ..."He will also go to Capitol Hill the beginning of next week to talk to Republican caucuses and solicit their input and their ideas."




Read Here: http://www.nypost.com/seven/01232009/news/politics/prez_zings_gop_foe_in_a_timulating_talk_151572.htm

5 comments:

Flashy said...

It's as though he has a "mandate".

Remember that word?

Tom Sanchez Prunier said...

I already handled this with Michael over at "Write Side of My Brain." That's some pretty shoddy journalism.

"... according to aides briefed on the meeting." is not a person.

And Even if President Obama was perturbed, he would not lose his composure in such a Cheneyesque fashion and blurt out a bushism.

Rumor. Falsehood.

As I urge all neoconservative (or classically conservative) bloggers, let's start looking for ways to solve the problems that face us, not argue nonexistent issues and run with accusations of things that didn't happen.

Jody L. Wilcox said...

Wow Tom, you're self righteous indignation is on great display today. There is a difference in working toward the common good of the country through compromise and selling out your core beliefs. Principles should always be tightly held and not thrown out by the empty rhetoric of “bi-partisanship....and I doubt you "handled" anything with Mike, since your opinion would mean little to the right side or left side of his brain..

Tom Sanchez Prunier said...

Jody, I don't run with rumors. And while the "I won" comment may actually have been made, it was done at a moment of levity (thus reversing my premature declaration of "falsehood" - I may have been wrong).

Here, the statement is being addressed much more severely than "that one" or the bandying about of the term "elitist" by the Republicans during the campaign - the first being the height of self-righteous indignation and the second being a glaring display of hypocrisy.

I agree there is a difference between working toward the common good and selling out core beliefs. Problem is, conservatives of all stripes seem to be searching for beliefs since bush and cheney perverted the neoconservative movement into a postmodern military industrial complex.

Maybe I didn't "handle," but I certainly addressed this with Mike and here as well. I'm pointing out that seizing upon these little straws and using them as cause to declare the end of the universe as we know it is a bit of a stretch. And to see verbatim posts like this, as though NOTHING else were going on Washington, much less the world, makes me wonder why anyone would support such lemming-like opinions.

The American electorate finally got its voice heard. They want the country to move in the righ-- er, correct -- direction.

Principles are fine, so long as they don't become blind ideology based on falsehoods and innuendo - or, in the case the contemporary conservatives, what will get their people elected in the next cycle.

Your pipe, put that in, smoke it.

Jody L. Wilcox said...

It's not the conservative Ideal that needs altering, it is electing conservatives that both hold there conservative ideals steadfast AND work for the greater dood of the country....Both liberals and conservatives should work together to forge a better future...most of the time that involves compromise but sometimes it means holding your ground....as the House REPS did and the Senate REPS look to be doing on the stimulus package....as a liberal you should know..smoking is bad for you (unless it's a good cuban cigar) :)