Time for a breather. The President just talked about “compromise” and a news commentator listed all the areas where compromise between the parties would/could occur. The budget/debt crises I am talking about here. Sure Boehner and Obama agreed on a 4.something trillion deficit reduction and the house Republicans killed it by “No Compromise”. The gang of six, and the joint committee earlier both proposed compromises and the house Republicans killed each by “No Compromise”. Many tea partyers went on record saying essentially “let the wheels come off” (don’t extend the debt ceiling). And, oft heard from the Republican side of the isle was “No Compromise on revenue increase.”
So “No Compromise” comes from the Right, while the Left has compromised over and over again. Yes, I know there are hardasses on both sides and ideologues on both sides, but come on now. Every one of you knows that the intransigence of the Right led to the 11th hour “compromise” (read that “Right got 98% of what it wanted” quoting John Boehner, which also means that the Left didn’t get much in the way of compromise, did it?).
And that 11th hour 2.something trillion reduction wasn’t enough. And the process was completely one-sided. Even Boehner was dissed by the Right. How’s that for compromise?
The Tea Party (not a grassroots group at all, but financed quietly by the Koch brothers and other ultra-right billionaires) says that the government should/must be run like a business. I agree. Every business I know focuses on two aspects of operation: One, cut production costs by increasing efficiency and Two, INCREASE REVENUE. So how come the Tea Partyers say “No Compromise” to increasing any revenue at all? Not “One thin Dime”. Huh? Huh? Compromise when I was growing up meant “Give and Take”. Looks to me like the far side of the Right is only interesting in the “Take” part, with “No Compromise” for the “Give”.
http://pschroedcom.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/no-compromise.jpg
So “No Compromise” comes from the Right, while the Left has compromised over and over again. Yes, I know there are hardasses on both sides and ideologues on both sides, but come on now. Every one of you knows that the intransigence of the Right led to the 11th hour “compromise” (read that “Right got 98% of what it wanted” quoting John Boehner, which also means that the Left didn’t get much in the way of compromise, did it?).
And that 11th hour 2.something trillion reduction wasn’t enough. And the process was completely one-sided. Even Boehner was dissed by the Right. How’s that for compromise?
The Tea Party (not a grassroots group at all, but financed quietly by the Koch brothers and other ultra-right billionaires) says that the government should/must be run like a business. I agree. Every business I know focuses on two aspects of operation: One, cut production costs by increasing efficiency and Two, INCREASE REVENUE. So how come the Tea Partyers say “No Compromise” to increasing any revenue at all? Not “One thin Dime”. Huh? Huh? Compromise when I was growing up meant “Give and Take”. Looks to me like the far side of the Right is only interesting in the “Take” part, with “No Compromise” for the “Give”.
http://pschroedcom.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/no-compromise.jpg
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment