Letters to the Editor

Compromise needed

November 3, 2010


To the editor:

During this midterm election there have been many politicians who have stated that they “will never compromise or cross party lines.” In fact many now consider it a litmus test of political purity.

Those individuals who are not disturbed by this language should consider that living in a democracy is a compromise. The Constitution of the United States of America starts, “We the People.” It does not say “we the people who believe like me,” and the Constitution’s evolution has been towards including all the people in this country of ours.

We live in a country where our government obtains its strength through being able to compromise, to include all people regardless of their sex, race, religion, national origin and yes, even their sexual orientation. If we lose the ability to compromise we have lost our nation and all for which it stands.

Bruce W. Johanning,



cato_the_elder 7 years, 7 months ago

The only compromising Obama has done is with certain members of his own party, Republicans being removed from the equation. He's too much of a committed ideologue to change now. Moreover, his far-left base would disown him. He'll talk about "working together," but he never will.

Gridlock it is.

MyName 7 years, 7 months ago

Umm I think you're confused. The way it works is "I'll change the bill if you want to vote for it after the change" the Republicans said "I'll not vote for it under any circumstances" and so nothing they wanted got put in the bills.

Abdu Omar 7 years, 7 months ago

That is not true Cato! He gave in to many issues to get the healthcare bill passed and when the Republicans said "NO" he said, "OK what is your plan". Read the congressional reports on this and you will see.

But what you say is the course of a president who had a 70% mandate and the R's decided to just say "NO". and they did.

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

"He gave in to many issues to get the healthcare bill passed"

And just as cato said, that was giving in to members of his own party. He couldn't even sell the public option or abortion funding to his fellow Democrats. He didn't need any cooperation at all from the Republicans, and didn't compromise with them in the slightest bit. (He did buy a couple of them off, though, to give the appearance of bipartisan support.)

"when the Republicans said "NO" he said, "OK what is your plan"."

Then perhaps you'd like to explain what the president was talking about when he vowed to incorporate some of the Republican proposals (which, of course, he later reneged on)? Are you calling the president a liar?

monkeyhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

Where are the boozo merrills? Surely their astute insight can help us nutjob, weirdo, gun toting, God loving, gold hoarding idiots cope with the election results.

I hope cato is right. I would hate to see BO turn into a hypocrite. It would be as embarrassing as all these calls from the real "enemies" to be nice and play along now. Besides, it has been a real eye opener watching this administration turn into their own version of the former three amigo's Lawrence.

BO and the bunch (as well as the boozo merrills) need to have the freedom to keep on being who they are.

jafs 7 years, 7 months ago

Are you at all interested in having them try to fix our financial mess, or deal with terrorist threats, etc.?

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

"Too bad Reid's still around"

Best of both worlds, Tom. The Republicans have the power to stop the Dems from doing any more damage, but the Democrats will still get at least half the blame if things don't work out.

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago


You seem even more bitter than usual today, aggie.

Bad night last night or something?

Oh, we'll get around to fixing things soon enough. Like after the next election, when the Senate and White House follow the House of Representatives. Until then, it's enough to be able to keep the Democrats from screwing it up any worse.

johnks 7 years, 7 months ago

Do you suppose Nancy will turn over the keys of her Boeing 757 willingly of will they have to pry them out of her cold, dead hands.

beatrice 7 years, 7 months ago

Even on an apparently good day, some miserable people are still miserable. Nice to see you haven't changed Tom.

cato_the_elder 7 years, 7 months ago

Tom, look for Sebelius and key others to be subpoenaed and forced to testify regarding what really happened with Obamacare, starting with whether the legislation was actually fully written when it was passed.

monkeyhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

.... "whether the legislation was actually fully written when it was passed."

You really caught my attention with that one. Could you please elaborate?

cato_the_elder 7 years, 7 months ago

There was a great deal of talk when Obamacare was finally passed that it had never been completely finished and that what Obama signed was not fully in existence when it was voted on by the Senate and then hypocritically rubber-stamped by House Democrats (which many of them had said earlier that they would never agree to do, because all spending bills are supposed to originate in the House). For example, the legislation does not contain a severability clause, the reasons for which Obama's handlers have tried to cover up but which leads one to believe is evidence of the haste in which the final version was put together. One also recalls Pelosi's comments to the effect that "Let's get it passed first and then we can find out what's in it later." You can bet your bippy that House Republicans will now investigate this fully.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 7 months ago

Of course it wasn't completed. All "Obamacare" does is to tweak the existing system, which happens to be the most complicated and most expensive in the world.

No single piece of legislation was going to comprehensively implement even these modest reforms to the convoluted system we have in place (it hardly even qualifies being called a "system.") The bulk of the implementation was left to the various agencies to flesh out, because only they had the expertise and manpower to do it.

cato_the_elder 7 years, 7 months ago

Bozo, I'm talking about the legislation sent to and signed by Obama, not regulations. Congressional investigations will determine whether what Obama signed was ever in the complete form in which he signed it after it passed both houses, or instead underwent further drafting and revision and/or completion after it was passed and before it got to him, which would be illegal.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 7 months ago

Sounds like another one of the wackosphere urban myths to me. But if you're right, the Republicans will be too tied up with witch hunts to doing any actual legislating.

How convenient.

cato_the_elder 7 years, 7 months ago

Bozo, it sounds like the grapes are quite sour and will be for some time. Perhaps therapy of some sort would be helpful.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 7 months ago

The results of this campaign are clearly a step backward. But given that Obama and the Democrats were governing largely out of the corporate playbook, anyway, having the Republicans control the House isn't really going to change the political landscape all that much.

The dangerous aspect of this election is that instead of taking a few baby steps in the right direction, as Obama has done up to now, we'll just fester amongst a lot of very serious problems that need solutions now, not later.

Sadly, when the scheisse you and and yours have created really hits the fan, I, like everyone, will be struggling too hard just to survive to say "I told you so."

cato_the_elder 7 years, 7 months ago

Whoa - Just the Lies has crawled out of his cave again. Look like his grapes are as sour as Bozo's.

Maddy Griffin 7 years, 7 months ago

Jeez, so you "conservative" folks are okay with all the social security you've paid into being handed over to Wall Street? And all those with pre-existing conditions to be kicked back out of insurance? I hope you're happy with what you got.I'm still going to support Obama, and you can't stop me.

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

Let us know how that works out for ya', gram.

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

This is one of the biggest Republican falsehoods ever made up to scare Americans. Social Security has run a surplus since it began, has a trust fund in the trillions and cannot legally borrow so cannot contribute to the deficit . What is hurting Social Security is that the trust fund can only be invested in non marketable US Bonds. In other words the trust fund has been spent by the US government and consists of a bunch of IOUs. The fact that SS taxes have gone up since the 1980s isn't because the fund can't support itself, it's because the US Government can't pay it back. Now that, sir, is a scheme that any corporate raider would be proud of.

fancy80 7 years, 7 months ago

that sounds like fear mongering to me. all that has happened is that the power to shove bills down our throats has been removed, and that is a good thing. Now, maybe some compromise will take place. we all know it was NOT taking place when the Republicans were locked out of meetings...

BorderRuffian 7 years, 7 months ago

Hmmmmmmm. For the past two years, it has been, "Yes we can" do it all our way. Yes we can - shove it down their throats. Yes we can - screw the Republicans and make them sit at the back of the bus. Now it's "let's compromise" now that We The People have risen up in outrage. Hmmmmm. Guess where YOU can sit, you bleeding heart Demolibs?

mbulicz 7 years, 7 months ago

Are you really still prattling on about this "back of the bus" nonsense?


In any case, I'm hoping that this new arrangement in Congress leads to some sensible bipartisan solutions for once.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 7 months ago

Obama and the rest of the Democrats tried that the last two years. What makes you think that Republicans will want to compromise now?

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

"Obama and the rest of the Democrats tried that the last two years. "

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Whew! Thanks, bozo, it's always good to have a clown around.

fancy80 7 years, 7 months ago

how much "prattle" would there have been had the Republicans told President Obama and his administration, that they could sit at the back of the bus? It amazes me that the President even used that terminology, given how offensive of a comment it is. Especially at this point in time, with all the political correctness that is demanded. It sure sounded like a comment that was intended to energize a portion of his base. Now, quite possibly he didn't mean it to sound the way it sounded, but with all the speech writers at his disposal and as intelligent as President Obama is, I'm pretty sure it was intentional.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 7 months ago

Well, the gloating of the uncompromising wackobloggers here tell me that the only compromise that may happen is when their progrom against anyone not of their ilk happens, they may spare the really young kids (as long as they look white enough.)

Scott Drummond 7 years, 7 months ago

And what will the memory of today be in two years?

Shattered tea party memories, no doubt, recalling what might of been before the party elders used them for electoral energy and then promptly threw them away like a $2 ......well, you know.

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

I have one thing to say about yesterday's election; the Right won it. Now the Right better bring it. And when I say "bring it", I mean: Jobs Health Care Help for the 99ers (people whose 99 weeks of unemployment have run out and still can't find jobs) Help for people facing foreclosure on their homes. Cut the deficit (without cutting the services above) Stop getting people's children killed in Iraq and Afghanistan

The real truth is people across this entire country are hurting. In fact they are so hurt that they are angry and that anger is sustained. The Republicans took that anger, rightfully aimed at them, and deflected it at the Democrats. As Scott says above, "...the party elders used them for electoral energy and then promptly threw them away..." The Right has been handed somewhat of a mandate. Now it's time to put up or shut up. If I'm not allowed to whine about George Bush, you aren't allowed to whine about Obama. You've been handed the tools to go around him. Now, roll up your sleeves, go out there and get your A$$ to work. And it darn well better be for the people of this country, not the Koch brothers.

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

What you gave was no real answer to what I said. The "race to bankruptcy" on a national level won't stop until the "race to bankruptcy" on a personal level stops. What you gave me was Republican obfuscation at it's best. Historically, government has always been tied to jobs and their availability. Don't believe me? Look it up. Bottom line, if the Republicans do not get this country working again the back lash will make the Tea Party look like, well, a tea party. This country has turned into a country of haves and have nots. Except what the haves have got are jobs. Do not think that the Republicans doing nothing but protecting your job is going to go over well with those that do not have one. And do not think that companies and corporations that do massive layoffs to move jobs overseas will be tolerated by the jobless electorate when they fund candidates. It's just not going to happen.

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

"You've been handed the tools to go around him. "

Um, you understand how this three-branches-of-government (one of which is a bicameral legislature) thing works, cait?

What we are celebrating is that the Republicans are now in a position to keep Obama from doing any more damage. The repairs will have to wait another two years, until the Republicans have the other house of the legislature and the White House, too. But we made a good start last night.

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

No, what you're saying is that your party made promises it's butt can't cash. And yes, you do have a majority in the House now. You have the means to over ride a veto. To quote Scott, "Shut up and deliver." (Although I will be generous enough to wait until January when the next Congress is sworn in.)

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

Sooooo, you really don't understand how this form of government works.

Um, cait? Two-thirds of 435 is 290. While there are still a couple of races being counted, there's no way to get to 290 when the Democrats already have around 190 of them.

And remember that little reference to the bicameral legislature, cait? Legislation doesn't even make it to the president's desk unless it passes in both chambers of Congress.

Might I suggest a copy of the Constitution as a reference source, or perhaps a return to high school civics (assuming you've gotten there yet)?

Oh, and the Republicans are quite capable of doing exactly what they promised - to stop Obama.

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

So you're saying that the Republicans still can't stop a Democratic agenda? You've already proven by numbers they can't. So why all of the rejoicing? It is or it isn't nota. Make up your mind.

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago


Okay, let's take this very slowly. Please try to follow along.

With control of one-half of one of the three branches of the federal government, a party can stop the agenda of the other party. But they do not have the power to implement their own agenda, since the other half of their branch and at least one of the other two branches are still controlled by the other party.

In other words, cait, neither party has the power now to implement their agenda without the cooperation of the other. Which is fine, for now - the Republicans can stop Obama from doing any more damage, and in a couple of years, when they get more control, they can begin the work of repairing that damage.

Got it yet, or do I need to find some way to make it even simpler for you?

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

Soooo what you're saying is that the Republican Party is still the "Party of No".

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

Are you just slow on the uptake, or are you just desperately trying to find a way to twist what I say into something that fits your delusions?

Effectively, both parties are the 'parties of 'No'' now, since both have the power to stop the other side, and neither has the power to force things through by themselves. (Hence LTE's like the one above, opinion pieces like Leonard Pitts' current one, etc.) The Republicans will be happy to assume the role of being able to implement their agenda, as soon as the rest of the Democrats are out of the way.

You really should try to learn a little bit about the political process.

fancy80 7 years, 7 months ago

so now, all of a sudden, the right is supposed to fix Jobs, HealthCare, Unemployment, Foreclosures, cut the deficit and stop the war. Bring it, and bring it now. Please explain what were the Democrats waiting for. And don't insult my intelligence with the whole "well, see we inheireted this mess bs." Here's what worries me, the dems still don't get it. When President Obama says that he is willing to compromise on taxes, but not Obamacare, it pretty much told me, he still doesn't GET IT. When Harry Reid says, that maybe now the Republicans will compromise, he doesn't GET IT. After the "we have to pass the bill to know what is in it" comment, I can't even stomach listening to Nancy Pelosi. But I'm pretty certain that she doesn't get it. The real truth is that the American public did not like having the Healthcare bill shoved down our throats, and THAT is where the anger came from. Your comment is so interesting on so many levels. Where was that attitude when Unemployment was rising each and every week and American men and women were being killed and the only thing this administration and the Liberal Elite Democrats were worried about was passing Obamacare?

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

"so now, all of a sudden, the right is supposed to fix Jobs, HealthCare, Unemployment, Foreclosures, cut the deficit and stop the war."

In a word, yes. Because people vote for what effects them. And frankly, as I said before, if the Republican Party doesn't do those things there will be a backlash that will make the Tea Party look like a tea party. You won because you screamed the Democrats weren't fixing it. You wanted it. You got it. Now fix it. And fix it in such a way that people don't get hurt. Seems just a little scary now, doesn't it?

fancy80 7 years, 7 months ago

no, it doesn't seem a little scary now, especially given the last 18 months. The Republicans didn't win because I screamed. The Republicans won because the Independents and the smart Democrats realized that a little balance was necessary.

You failed to explain why the Democrats didn't fix all the things you listed.

All you've done is repeat the mantra from MSNBC of Bring it and bring it now.

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

By the way, my last post is what I hope. It's not what I foresee. What I foresee is this country sliding into the deepest depression we've had since the Great Depression. In the three and a half years from the time of Black Friday, October 29th, 1929, to the time that FDR took office in March of 1933, Herbert Hoover cut taxes and cut taxes and cut taxes. It didn't work. Hoover was a Republican and cutting taxes in the face of a down turning economy is a Republican thing to do. It didn't work then and it won't work now. In fact, it may even be worse now than it was then. Enriching and empowering corporations now will do nothing to solve the problem of jobs going off shore. I believe this country is facing it's worse crisis since it's very inception. If we don't compromise and work together and figure a way out of it we face the possibility of losing this country and actually have the potential to slide into outright civil war. People are getting angrier by the day. This past election proves that. And with anger comes the danger that people will express it violently. I think I have every right and reason to be very afraid.

jafs 7 years, 7 months ago

I am also afraid of a variety of things domestically and internationally.

But, we have made it through some tough times before - remember the atomic bomb drills in schools during the Cold War?

Maybe we'll get through this one as well, in our usual muddled fashion.

If one is inclined to be at all religious or spiritual, I would urge them to pray that we find the right path, or meditate on that, etc.

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

I pray for this country on a daily basis. Not for myself. I'm an old woman and my years are limited. But I have children and grandchildren. And the prospect of what they face breaks my heart. My youngest is 17 years old. He was a "change of life" child and my only son. Due to birth complications he was born with a screwed up leg. He has had surgical reconstruction and can walk, run and function without difficulty. But he will never be fit for military service. Please pardon me that, as his mother, there is a part of my heart that is relieved for that. I have no wish to have my son's life sacrificed on the altar of some old man's hubris and greed.

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

"It didn't work."

Pssssst - cait: This isn't 1929.

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

That's supposed to mean we aren't meant to learn from past experience? Oh wait! I guess history doesn't mean squat to you.

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

I've been meaning to ask your advice on something, cait. What do you think would be the best tactics to use to finish up the war in Afghanistan? Should the soldiers dig long trenches, stand there firing across the no-man's land, before tightening up their spats and fixing bayonets, then donning their gas masks to charge through the mustard gas and the barbed wire? How far off should the dirigibles be hovering for reconnaissance? And do you think the armor on our battleships will stand up to the Afghan navy's 12-inch shells?

I'm saying, cait, that many of the conditions that, if not contributed to, at the least enabled and supported the events of 80 years ago are vastly different today. And that if you expect events to unfold the same way they did 80 years ago, and for the same interventions to modify those events in the same way as they did 80 years ago, you're going to wake up and find out you're in a whole new century real fast.

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

The war in Iraq has lasted for over 8 years. WW I lasted for 4 years. Maybe they were on to something.

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

Of course, I was talking about WWI, which was a little closer to the time frame under discussion. But if WWII is your preference, you're saying we should mobilize about 16 million troops (with the realization that several hundred thousand won't be coming home) and finish up by nuking Iraq?

fancy80 7 years, 7 months ago

where was the desire to compromise a week ago. Now everyone is shouting that from the mountain tops, but when the Democrats ran the whole show (house and senate) they sure were not interested in compromise. Now all of a sudden, like a light bulb, wow, we've got to compromise, but it's all up to the Republicans. The hipocracy is hilarious!!!

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

I'm not asking anybody to compromise about anything. All I'm saying is that you guys wanted the power, now you say you have it. OK. So fix it. Here's a "for instance". Sam Brownback was elected Governor. Our schools are going down the toilet to the extent that school children are writing major corporations asking for grants to buy PENCILS. To date, Sam Brownback has still not said how he intends to fix education and school funding in this state. Just to let you know there are a ton of people in this state that have kids.

think_about_it 7 years, 7 months ago

"school children are writing major corporations asking for grants to buy pencils"

c'mon cait, you made that up. Just this morning I saw a 100 pack of pencils on ebay for $2.

I don't know how many decades it has been since you had kids in school but mine are responsible for providing their own.

I think $10,000+ per student per year is more than enough to educate a kid and provide a pencil or two if need be.

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

Actually, I didn't make it up. Although I apologize because this didn't happen in KS but in Los Angeles. I wasn't aware of that at the time I made the statement. (I do have sources if you're curious about the pencil donation story though.) California spends an adjusted cost of about $7500/pupil on education. I'm curious to know you're source of the 10,000+/student cost in KS. May I have a link please? And by the way, I am willing to apologize if I make a mistake in my sourcing. That's more than some people around here will do. Parents of most children in the country are responsible for their school supplies, although I do know people who had things like crayons, paste, pencils and paper provided when they were growing up. A lot of classroom supplies now actually fall to the teacher to provide out of their salary with no compensation from the school or the district. I suggest that you talk to a teacher or two about that.

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

"school children are writing major corporations asking for grants to buy pencils"

Seriously - do you think that was the idea of the kids themselves, or a shameless publicity ploy by the teachers?

jafs 7 years, 7 months ago


In KS you're quite right - Republicans control both houses and the governorship.

They should be completely responsible for any and all legislation that is passed and the effects of those on KS.

Unfortunately, naj is correct about the situation in Washington - with Democrats in control of the Senate and Republicans the House, neither party has the power to unilaterally pass legislation if they don't work together.

I think he's mistaken if he thinks that all voters want is to obstruct the Obama/Democratic agenda, though. Most want some real solutions to our problems.

fancy80 7 years, 7 months ago

It's very evident that you don't really understand what happened on Tuesday, let alone WHY it happened. The Republicans don't have the power. What was accomplished was the ability to stop the Democratic Administration (Pres. Obama and his staff), the Democratic controlled House, and the Democratic controlled Senate from ramming bills the American public didn't want. The Dem Admin is still in control, as well as the Dem Senate, so please explain how the Republicans have "control".

The results of Tuesday's election guarantees that the Administration and the Senate will be forced to compromise. When the Dems had control of all three, there was no need to compromise, and they didn't. They might say they tried, but when you lock the Republicans out of Healthcare Reform meetings, how is that compromising?

fyi....the Republicans don't even have enough seats in the House to override a veto, so to say that the Republicans have the power now is simply not true.

fancy80 7 years, 7 months ago

thought I should clarify that my response above was to Cait.

Also, maybe someone can answer this question. Since the kids in CA. are asking for pencils, what is the breakdown of Dems vs. Repubs in the CA. state house.

jafs 7 years, 7 months ago

It runs both ways.

The party in power doesn't feel a need to compromise, and wants to further their agenda.

As soon as they become the minority, they want to compromise and work together.

Richard Heckler 7 years, 7 months ago

An estimated $4 billion was spent on the election. An estimated $3 billion went to the media. No wonder the media never checks campaign ads for truth.

As far as I'm concerned Washington D.C. democrats have been too busy compromising and trying to build bridges that have not been there to build for 30 years or more.

I'd say they shot themselves in the foot.

They could have moved forward in 3-5 different areas instead they worried about filibusters. And they kissed the butts of the medical insurance industry who then turned around and financed republican wins.

Republicans will not change and the country will only see more stonewalling against jobs and a strong economy,will waste a ton of time undoing Obamacare and try to keep the multi trillion dollar war going.

Oh yes keep a close eye on financial institutions because repubs have an established pattern of financial institutions being involved in fraud under their watch. Remember Reagan/Bush and Bush/Cheney. Big time negative impact on jobs,retirement funds and the overall economy.

gl0ck0wn3r 7 years, 7 months ago

Hurrah! A new cut-and-paste from Merrill... although I notice the inability to use a comma remains.

Flap Doodle 7 years, 7 months ago

Heck, the Campaigner in Chief probably sucked up a billion in untraceable cash and foreign donations in 2008. The sky's the limit for 2012.

fancy80 7 years, 7 months ago

wow Merrill, seriously WOW! "Democrats have been too busy compromising." Seriously?? Seriously? And it wasn't the butts of the insurance industry they were kissing, it was the big Drug companies behind those closed door meetings. btw...could you repost your Regan/Bush and Bush/Cheney spam? I haven't seen those in the last 15 minutes.

Scott Drummond 7 years, 7 months ago

Here's my take on the election returns. Elections are not fine instruments. More like an axe than a scalpel, they reflect thousands and millions of American's efforts to achieve the changes they want through votes on local races.

Rather than the storyline the corporate media have been feeding us about this being a repudiation of President Obama and the Democrats, a perfectly sensible alternative read of last night is that Americans were sickened by the republican's refusal to participate in our government over the last two years and said, "Nope, you don't get to just sit on the sidelines and carp. Get in there and start working!"

And whether that was the intent or not, that is the result. Time to produce republicans. Time to shut up and deliver.

Day One, by the way, appears to have passed with no such effort.

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

Congress aside, you do realize that to date, Brownback has still not said how he intends to deal with school financing.

jafs 7 years, 7 months ago

That's simply untrue.

Once they had a large enough minority to filibuster, they used it quite a bit.

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

Dateline 2008:

"Rather than the storyline the corporate media have been feeding us about this being a repudiation of President Bush and the Republicans, a perfectly sensible alternative read of last night is that Americans were sickened by the Democrats' refusal to participate in our government over the last two years and said, "Nope, you don't get to just sit on the sidelines and carp. Get in there and start working!""

That alternative make sense on your planet, scottie?

fancy80 7 years, 7 months ago

my God, are you ever out of touch. Hmmm, let me guess...you were watching Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow last night weren't you?

one other thing...day one doesn't start until January, idiot! I'm more convinced than ever that Liberals and Conservatives are not from the same planet. How you got that pile of crap above out of the election results is beyond me, but clearly you live and breathe MSNBC. You should get out and talk to some REAL people and ask them why they voted they way they did. I talked to at least 10 Democrats and Independents that voted for Republicans because: #1 Healthcare, #2, didn't like the direction the country was going. #3 didn't like the agenda or policies of President Obama, Harry Reid, Pelosi and the rest of the liberal elites.

independent_rebel 7 years, 7 months ago

The highlight of the night was what I didn't see: life-long moochers jumping around proclaiming that they no longer need to worry about paying their electric bills, buying gas for their cars, health insurance, etc. because the President was going to take from the producers who earn it and give it to the moochers who are born, raised, and die completely dependant on the rest of us.

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

You didn't see it when Obama was elected either. If you say you did I will call you a liar to your face.

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

You're right, of course, cait.

They didn't wait until election night:

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

OK nota, you now owe me a computer monitor from the ice tea I just spewed all over it. I can match you video for video of dumbs**t stuff said by people caught up in the throes of a rally. The Tea Party has been a particularly wealthy source of humor. And heck, unlike Christine O'Donnel, this woman wasn't even running for office!

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

And, of course, there's the classics. Two words:

"Obama money."

think_about_it 7 years, 7 months ago

Obama money from his stash. That's awesome!

fancy80 7 years, 7 months ago

I did see that and don't bother calling me a liar to my face, since we're ONLINE!! Maybe they didn't show that clip on MSNBC...

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

I'm not willing to get into a peeing match with you guys over videos. That's stupid. I can match you video for video with Tea Party rally attendees saying stupid stuff too. You want funny and dumb, there's humor and stupidity to be found in all sides of it. "The only two things that are infinite are the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not so sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

Give us the videos showing what independent_rebel was talking about not happening, please.

fancy80 7 years, 7 months ago

yes, but your comment was, and I quote "You didn't see it when Obama was elected either. If you say you did I will call you a liar to your face."

It did happen. It's not a peeing match Cait. I'm just saying.

I'll agree with your point of both sides have idiots that say idiotic things.

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

Um - where did Bachmann 'talk about' making any cuts to Medicare or Social Security? Oh, that's right - she didn't. And did she say she wanted to look at changing eligibility requirements for those programs?

"Later in the interview, in an apparent reference to Social Security and Medicare"

Apparent to who? I hate to break this to you, but there's nothing in the eligibility for Medicare or Social Security that's based on percentages. Seems like if Bachmann had been referring to Medicare and Social Security, she would have said something about increasing the eligible age by a year or two, not what she actually said, which was "Eligibility levels may be too high. We may need to cut them down by a percentage [point] or two." Sounds much more likely that she was talking about some other federal program like Section 8, cash assistance, food stamps, or Medicaid, where eligibility is determined by a percentage of median income or the poverty level.

Sorry, vertigo, the story you linked to just looks like the good Mr. Cooper was trying real hard to goad Ms. Bachmann into saying she'd cut Medicare and S.S., but she didn't bite.

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 7 months ago

www.ssa.gov/pubs/10003.html There. I fixed the hyperlink for you. I have a feeling it's the only fixing that's going to get done around here. Seriously, Verti, let them make the cuts. The old and the disabled vote too. They will join the rest of the chorus screaming at the top of their lungs, "You wanted it so damn bad, now fix it!"

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

"“What we need to do is reform the system" = political speak for making cuts."

Why don't you use the whole quote, vertigo? “For the sake of the most vulnerable people in the country, we have to reform Social Security so it’s solvent." Maybe she was talking about changing the way it's invested in federal securities. Maybe she was talking about something you and the rest of the liberals should love, increasing the payroll tax. Again, except in what you think she said, she didn't say "cuts", did she?

""We need to look at eligibility levels. Eligibility levels may be too high. We may need to cut them down by a percentage [point] or two" = political speak for making cuts and kicking people off the program."

And again, while that may be true, there is nothing about eligibility for Social Security (retirement or disability) or Medicare that has anything to do with percentages. You qualify by age or by being disabled. Period. It's kind of hard to express a person's age in terms of a percentage of their life since, before they die, we don't know what the denominator of that fraction is. And the age is a constant, not the age of a percentage of the population.

As for income, it affects the premium a person might have to pay for Medicare, not their eligibility. It doesn't change eligibility for retirement benefits, and for disability, it's a cutoff level, not a percentage (i.e., if you exceed the income threshold, you no longer qualify because you're not disabled). On the page you linked to, did you see a single item expressed as a percentage of anything?

Even for people getting SSI, which is completely different than OASDI, it's a dollar-for-dollar tradeoff; your benefit amount is reduced according to how much you made (since SSI is supplemental income). In short, there's nothing that can be done to adjust eligibility for Social Security of Medicare "by a percentage [point] or two".

"Not answering a direct question and instead pushing the focus to something entirely different = yes I am in favor of doing that but I can't say that"

Ah. So if you don't know what the answer is, then that 'proves' the answer was what you claim it is. Gotcha'. Sorry again, vertigo, but other than how it plays to those with the usual anti-Republican paranoia, Ms. Bachmann didn't say anything at all about favoring cuts to Social Security or Medicare. Keep trying, though.

verity 7 years, 7 months ago

Obama abandoned his base---the people who voted him into office. He should have started on day one working on unemployment and the mortgage situation. That is what is affecting most people.

Despite what the right/Republicans are saying, he compromised way too much and didn't speak out enough.

Also, the Democrats will not stick together the way the Republicans do, and they have been sabotaging each other. Pelosi and Reed did not do their job and were both a big disappointment.

That being said, I like the Republicans even less.

notajayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

"He should have started on day one working on unemployment and the mortgage situation."

Um, he did. His "stimulus" package was passed one month after he took office. I thought that's what it was supposed to do?

whats_going_on 7 years, 7 months ago

Simple and to the point, and I wholeheartedly agree


barlowtl 7 years, 7 months ago

I had hoped after the elections we would have at least a few weeks of civil discourse. Do they still have so much money left that they must throw rocks instead of getting to work. Grow up! before it's too late, we need some adult supervision. Call us when you are ready to do something useful, till then quit all the noise, we need a time of respite from all the hate we've been bombarded with. Just looking at some of these postings though, I think I'm expecting too much.

jafs 7 years, 7 months ago

Unfortunately, many on these comments seem unable to post without insults and personal attacks.

I suggest the rest of us simply stop responding to them if they continue in this vein.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.