Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I came across a townhall column written by Dan Holler. He's basically saying that the GOP should avoid a grand bargain that greatly reduces the deficit because it would help Obama politically. What happened to country before party?
I came across a townhall column written by Dan Holler. He's basically saying that the GOP should avoid a grand bargain that greatly reduces the deficit because it would help Obama politically. What happened to country before party?
That never stopped the GOP before. When the GOP controlled Congress balanced the budget and gave us three years of surpluses in the late-1990s, it helped Clinton politically even though he opposed the GOP plan every step of the way. Apparently the GOP were, at one time, willing to put country before party. It remains to be seen whether they still consider the benefit of the country first these days.
I am responding to your comment. I could care less about the article.
The German people went along with everything Hitler did leading up to WW2.
The article is from a conservative who said reaching a grand bargain on reducing the deficit would be good for Obama politically, so the GOP should oppose doing so.
The article is from a conservative who said reaching a grand bargain on reducing the deficit would be good for Obama politically, so the GOP should oppose doing so.
What's so hard about reading a short column?
It`s so much easier to compare Obama to Hitler. Saves a person the trouble of thinking and doing all that reading.True wisdom comes from listening to drug addled radio talk show hosts.
The article is from a conservative who said reaching a grand bargain on reducing the deficit would be good for Obama politically, so the GOP should oppose doing so.
What's so hard about reading a short column?
I read the column. What I got from it is that if they agree to a "grand bargain", Obama will get credit and will still bash the GOP. The result will be challengers losing in primary fights to more conservative candidates will spend all their money before the general election.
Why should Barack have the upper hand in the negotiations? He does not represent the people. The Congress (specifically the House) does.
The Republicans already compromised and handed Obama huge tax increases in December. It's Obama's minions turn to put something on the table. How about some real, honest, year to year cuts in spending? Not the bogus "cuts in increases" crap we've been hearing about. Or the flat-out ballooning of spending proposed by the senate?
I'm hoping the Rs in the House grow some balls and say no to Obama for once.
I read the column. What I got from it is that if they agree to a "grand bargain", Obama will get credit and will still bash the GOP. The result will be challengers losing in primary fights to more conservative candidates will spend all their money before the general election.
Why should Barack have the upper hand in the negotiations? He does not represent the people. The Congress (specifically the House) does.
Obama just won a national election with a majority. The House GOP have control because of gerrymandered districts.
Now who represents the people?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
