What Fresh Hell Is This?

November 5, 2010

Compromise, Civility??


Huffingtonpost has some analysis:
Barely an hour after President Barack Obama invited congressional Republicans to post-election talks to work together on major issues, the Senate's GOP leader had a blunt message: His party's main goal is denying Obama re-election.

In a sign that combat and the 2012 elections rather than compromise could mark the next two years, Sen. Mitch McConnell on Thursday called for Senate votes to repeal or erode Obama's signature health care law, to cut spending and to shrink government.

"The only way to do all these things it is to put someone in the White House who won't veto any of these things," McConnell said in a speech to the conservative Heritage Foundation.

The Senate Republican leader's confrontational tone was in sharp contrast to the posture Obama took Wednesday in the face of a new GOP-controlled House and Republican gains in the Senate. Obama followed up Thursday morning by inviting Republican and Democratic congressional leaders for talks on Nov. 18 and challenging his own Cabinet to make Washington work better.
Look at who's being compromising and who's being civil. As it had been for two years.

And look where it's got the Democratic Party.

Meanwhile:
[Tom Donohue, President and CEO of the Chamber of Commerce] intends to spend his new political capital by reconfiguring the country's economic policies the same way that large corporations have always wanted to: by cutting taxes, slashing regulation, forging trade deals with foreign countries, and reducing the deficit.

He'd like to start by chipping away at the President's legislative achievements such as health-care and financial reform, which must still be implemented at the regulatory level. In short, the battles between the chamber and the White House are far from over. "Oh, hell no," Donohue laughs. "They are in the second inning."
How does Obama compromise with a party that wants nothing more (and nothing less) than to see him out of office in January, 2013? A party where 4 out of 10 think he's Constitutionally ineligible to be President in the first place?

They're not gonna compromise, Mr President. You may want to live according to Luke 6:27-31, but they're treating you according to Psalm 109.8.

7 comments:

rich10e said...

sniff, sniff, whine, sigh

Conservative Mountaineer said...

How do you compromise with someone that called for a meeting at the White House to discuss the ObamaCare legislation.. puportedly for the purpose and hearing and considering Republican ideas.. and then passing Obamacare (what?) the next day or so after that? Whatever.. passage was very quick after that sham meeting.

Answer? You don't.

Actually, Obama should be going to Capitol Hill... *if* he were serious about compromise. Obama wants to meet on his turf.. becuase there is no way he will compromise.

Maria said...

Even Republicans admit that they had input.

Piltdown Man said...

Con Mountain -

The reality is, Obama, along with the Democratic House and Senate, were elected (presumably) because the majority of American's supported their platforms -- not those of the GOP. So tell me, why wouldn't/shouldn't they forged their own legislative agenda?

I mean, I realize it's basically pointless to discuss things with you, but that's the truth. If the tables were turned, would the GOP be "reaching out?' Hardly!

Conservative Mountaineer said...

@Piltman.. Sorry to bust your little bubble, but this last election refutes your position. Conservatives/Republicans won. Convincingly. In the House. In the Governorships. In State Legislative bodies. I would even argue the outcome in the Senate was fairly decent.

Now, I don't say this to gloat. Rather, I believe the voters clearly repudiated the Obama/Reid/Pelosi agenda. That means Obama should (not that he, the narcissist will) compromise with the Republicans. I have *no* problem with the Republicans taking a hard stance.

Did the Pelosi/Democrats allow Republicans to offer amendments to ObamaCare? No.

The Obama/Reid/Pelosi was focused on funneling money to States.. to be used to fund Union payrolls. The voters essentially said "No more." Let's hope the Republicans hold their ground and wait for Obama to blink - not that he may, though. He is that self-centered. He's the 'Messiah'. In his mind.

As for your final point, I seem to recall GWB trying and actually reaching out and compromising with Democrats. Can you say TARP? I knew you could.

How about McCain? McCain/Feingold. (Barf.) How about Lindsey Grahamensty?

The 'old-guard' GOP has reached out and compromised a good bit. No more.

EdHeath said...

CM, 420 bills are held up in Senate by Republicans that were passed in the House.

The reason
Republicans/conservatives won big in this elections is because they lied to independents. For exampe, good healthcare/insurance is actually good for business. But you will/do say that the bill passed is not good healthcare. Except you offer no alternative. You simply want poor peple to suffer illness and bakruptcy.

So you are saying that public employee unions should be broken? You think that the police and fire persons should be paid less to risk their lives for the rest of us? I guess you are saying that state governments should be starved for funds, so they stop paying public workers and retirees so much. Except that what the state governments do is cut social services, public transportation and highway maintenance funding.

So for the last four years the Reublicans held up huge numbers of bills in the Senate, and then the Repulbicans lied about what was happening in government. Now you want the Democrats in the Senate to surrender control to Republicans. And you want to tell us that the Bush spending will not return?

Piltdown Man said...

@Con Man -

The just-completed election does nothing to make my point null and void. When Obama was elected, along with a Democratic Congress, it was (do I have to say this again?) because people SUPPORTED his agenda -- and that is why he and the Congress set out to enact legislation which was part of their platform. They didn't pull health care reform out of their collective butts -- it was clearly something which candidate Obama had spoken of repeatedly and which was supported across a huge swath of American's, who are being drained dry by the likes of the "non-profit" UPMCs and so many others.

So was the recent election a repudiation? No, I think not. It was a vote of anger and fear and impatience. In a nation of "I need my cookie instantly" people, there is little hope that people won't just vote with a fiery finger. They used those fingers to "throw the bums out," but the GOP offers NOTHING by way of staunching job losses and the downward spiral of America - short of continued tax cuts for their rich enablers.

As to TARP? That wasn't a compromise, that was an absolute necessity. Even W got it. Of course, now you and your conservative buddies blame TARP for everything from whooping cough to stink bugs...