Comments on: The Obama definition of compromise

By: Adrian Day

Adrian Day — Sun, 07 Nov 2010 00:24:54 +0000

The president said that the “message was clear” from voters on Election Day, and that he was also “frustrated” by the sluggish pace of economic recovery. “You’re fed up with partisan politics and want results,” Obama said. “I do too.”

Excuse me Mr. President, I don’t think that was the message we sent!

By: Tom

Tom — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 22:36:43 +0000

A one kilometer-long above-ground tunnel, put up by the USA, so the Won can visit the Ghandhi shrine?? I just wish he were going down, in flames or whatever, sooner. Much sooner.
It is enough for me to wish for a jihadi martyr.

On this trip, he’s gonna be giving up whatever we have left to, you know, show the Indians and the Chicomms what a nice guy he is.

By: Gringo

Gringo — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 20:46:13 +0000

What was that âˆ…bama recently said about Pubs having to sit in the back seat? Which was a heck of a thing for a black President to say, given our history with Rosa Parks and the back of the bus. Did âˆ…bama make that connection when he said it?

Recall what Pelosi said during the writing of the Stimulus Bill. No Pub input allowed. Now they want to compromise.

Yup, “compromise” for âˆ…bama means that you agree to what HE wants.

Heads I win, tails you lose. That’s compromise, âˆ…bama style.

By: RickZ

RickZ — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 20:41:43 +0000

This guy’s going down in flames and he’s ~~staying with the plane~~ taking the country with him. That was his plan since he was first elected: Obama as suicide bomber.

By: LAG

LAG — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 19:40:40 +0000

Anyone who has watched knows he will not compromise. This guy’s going down in flames and he’s staying with the plane.

By: Tom

Tom — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 18:07:21 +0000

What the LA Times obliquely, reluctantly admits is that Baraq has been fiscally irresponsible.

By: rickl

rickl — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 17:52:43 +0000

Tom:
The LA Times is making the mistake of assuming that Obama wants to right the ship of state rather than scuttle it.

By: Tom

Tom — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 17:39:11 +0000

The Running Dog LA Times piece concludes:

“Obama’s opportunity may lie in making a clearer pivot to long-term fiscal responsibility, endorsing ideas that come from his deficit commission next month and challenging the Republicans – now that they’re in charge in the House – to say what they would cut instead. That’s basically how Clinton succeeded in 1996. But it won’t be easy getting there.”

I just love “pivoting” to long-term fiscal responsibility, don’t you? Good ol’ Baraq will see to it that the Ship of State will have righted itself in, Ooooh, 2025 or something. Or at least be on the correct heading to reach that, maybe by 2050. And how’s the One gonna do that?

Not by cutting Ponzi entitlements or the burgeoning interest on national debt (that alone is inexorably going to become a monstrous number). He’ll cut Defense before cutting anything else. It won’t be enough–nothing will be enough–but it will further his destructive Mugabe-like agenda. There are trillion dollar deficits out there as far as the eye can see.

He surely will not stop taking BILLION dollar trips abroad to read from his TOTUS while Michelle visits with Indian “sex workers”.

Hey, LA Times: Not only will it not be easy, it is mathematically impossible to get there while the Pinhead is Pres. Pivots Aweigh!

By: suek

suek — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 16:58:27 +0000

As someone said…winners don’t compromise. Losers do…