Alan Simpson Slams Fellow Republicans For Unwillingness To Compromise

auditor0007

Gold Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,566
2,265
255
Toledo, OH
Alan Simpson Slams Fellow Republicans For Unwillingness To Compromise

Former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-Wyo.) lashed out at members of his party on Sunday, slamming them for their unwillingness to compromise on proposed tax increases.

In his characteristically colorful style, Simpson told CNN's Fareed Zakaria that Republicans' rigid opposition to new tax revenues has hampered productivity and diminished the chances of reaching an agreement with Democrats on debt reduction.

"You can’t cut spending your way out of this hole," Simpson, who was appointed as co-chair of President Obama's Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform in 2010, said. "You can’t grow your way out of this hole, and you can’t tax your way out of this hole. So put that in your pipe and smoke it, we tell these people. This is madness."

Alan Simpson Slams Fellow Republicans For Unwillingness To Compromise

If there were more Republicans like this man, I would still be a Republican. At least he's willing to tell it like it is.
 
Yeah, Simpson is one of those Olympia Snow, Dick Lugar, Lindsey Graham, Arlen Specter kinda "players" who believe in their relevance and their self importance and "ruling like a Senator" rather than responding to their constituents wishes.

aka RINO.
 
Yeah, Simpson is one of those Olympia Snow, Dick Lugar, Lindsey Graham, Arlen Specter kinda "players" who believe in their relevance and their self importance and "ruling like a Senator" rather than responding to their constituents wishes.

aka RINO.

I listened to the Fareed Zakeria show (it's the bomb) and I was very impressed by Alan Simpson. This country needs more politicians like him. What we don't need is a bunch of politicians groveling before Grover Norquist.
 
Yeah, Simpson is one of those Olympia Snow, Dick Lugar, Lindsey Graham, Arlen Specter kinda "players" who believe in their relevance and their self importance and "ruling like a Senator" rather than responding to their constituents wishes.

aka RINO.

From the article;

"I guess I'm known as a RINO now, which means a Republican in name only, because, I guess, of social views, perhaps, or common sense would be another one, which seems to escape members of our party," Simpson said. "For heaven’s sake, you have Grover Norquist wandering the earth in his white robes saying that if you raise taxes one penny, he’ll defeat you. He can’t murder you. He can’t burn your house. The only thing he can do to you, as an elected official, is defeat you for reelection. And if that means more to you than your country when we need patriots to come out in a situation when we’re in extremity, you shouldn’t even be in Congress."

:clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2:
 
Yeah, Simpson is one of those Olympia Snow, Dick Lugar, Lindsey Graham, Arlen Specter kinda "players" who believe in their relevance and their self importance and "ruling like a Senator" rather than responding to their constituents wishes.

aka RINO.

If an elected representative was supposed to govern based on "the wishes of their constituents", how are they supposed to know the what their constituents want? Public polling?

If this country was designed to be governed via popular polling, why aren't we a direct democracy?
 
In 1950 individual taxes were very low, so low that, after deductions, most Americans paid no income tax to the federal government.

Now, after 62 years of 'compromise' we see the government at all levels taking the majority of our income.

How did we get into this condition?

Because of asswipe RINOs like Simpson compromising whenever the Democrats came up with a new excuse to take our money from us!

When a theif comes up to you and demands your money in your wallet, it is NOT compromise to give him only half.

It is a compromise when you dont shoot the son of a bitch.
 
No new taxes until this bloated Government shows it can cut spending..

They can start by reducing all CongressCritters salaries to show us they are serious. As for Mr. Simpson, he is a FORMER congresscritter..so we don't care what he has to say
 
Last edited:
No new taxes until this bloated Government shows it can cut spending..

They can start by reducing all CongressCritters salaries to show us they are serious. As for Mr. Simpson, he is a FORMER congresscritter..so we don't care what he has to say

Well they are..

WASHINGTON, Jan 26 (Reuters) - The Pentagon unveiled a 2013 budget plan that would cut $487 billion in spending over the next decade by eliminating nearly 100,000 ground troops, mothballing ships and trimming air squadrons in a bid to create a smaller, agile force with a new strategic focus.

The funding request, which includes painful cuts that will be felt across the country, comes at a historic turning point for the military as it winds down 10 years of war in Afghanistan and Iraq and shifts its strategic focus to the Asia-Pacific region and the Middle East.

The budget plan, sharply criticized by some lawmakers, sets the stage for a new struggle between President Barack Obama's administration and Congress over how much the Pentagon should spend on national security as the country tries to curb its trillion-dollar budget deficits.

"Make no mistake, the savings that we are proposing will impact all 50 states and many districts, congressional districts across America," Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told a news conference at the Pentagon on Thursday.

"This will be a test of whether reducing the deficit is about talk or action."

Panetta, previewing a budget to be made public Feb. 13, said he would ask for a $525 billion base budget for the 2013 fiscal year, the first time since before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that the Pentagon has asked for less than the previous year. That compares with $531 billion approved this year.

Panetta said he would seek $88.4 billion to support overseas combat operations, primarily in Afghanistan, down from $115 billion in 2012 largely due to the end of the war in Iraq and the withdrawal of U.S. forces there at the end of last year.

Congress ultimately controls the Pentagon's purse strings and regularly intervenes to change the size and detail of military spending as it sees fit. The Defense Department's budget accounts for about 20 percent of total federal spending.

Republican lawmakers who oversee military affairs on Capitol Hill sharply criticized the plan.

Military Budget Cuts: Pentagon Unveils 2013 Plan

Republicans..don't want the cuts.

Go figure. :eusa_shifty:
 
No new taxes until this bloated Government shows it can cut spending..

They can start by reducing all CongressCritters salaries to show us they are serious. As for Mr. Simpson, he is a FORMER congresscritter..so we don't care what he has to say

Well they are..

WASHINGTON, Jan 26 (Reuters) - The Pentagon unveiled a 2013 budget plan that would cut $487 billion in spending over the next decade by eliminating nearly 100,000 ground troops, mothballing ships and trimming air squadrons in a bid to create a smaller, agile force with a new strategic focus.

The funding request, which includes painful cuts that will be felt across the country, comes at a historic turning point for the military as it winds down 10 years of war in Afghanistan and Iraq and shifts its strategic focus to the Asia-Pacific region and the Middle East.

The budget plan, sharply criticized by some lawmakers, sets the stage for a new struggle between President Barack Obama's administration and Congress over how much the Pentagon should spend on national security as the country tries to curb its trillion-dollar budget deficits.

"Make no mistake, the savings that we are proposing will impact all 50 states and many districts, congressional districts across America," Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told a news conference at the Pentagon on Thursday.

"This will be a test of whether reducing the deficit is about talk or action."

Panetta, previewing a budget to be made public Feb. 13, said he would ask for a $525 billion base budget for the 2013 fiscal year, the first time since before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that the Pentagon has asked for less than the previous year. That compares with $531 billion approved this year.

Panetta said he would seek $88.4 billion to support overseas combat operations, primarily in Afghanistan, down from $115 billion in 2012 largely due to the end of the war in Iraq and the withdrawal of U.S. forces there at the end of last year.

Congress ultimately controls the Pentagon's purse strings and regularly intervenes to change the size and detail of military spending as it sees fit. The Defense Department's budget accounts for about 20 percent of total federal spending.

Republican lawmakers who oversee military affairs on Capitol Hill sharply criticized the plan.

Military Budget Cuts: Pentagon Unveils 2013 Plan

Republicans..don't want the cuts.

Go figure. :eusa_shifty:

We have potential war with half a dozen countries and that makes them uneasy.

I dont blame them though I dont know why we still have troops in most places we have them.
 
Funny thread!

Harry Reid won't even permit the Democrats to do their Constitutional duty and pass a budget because of their refusal to compromise.

Worst Compromisers, Ever.

Fail.
 
I am so glad Obama does not get it.

The second he slams Bowles Simpson plan onto the table and orders the GOP to vote for or against is the moment the election contest is over. If they vote for it, he wins. If they vote against or refuse to vote, he wins.

Sooner or later, I am afraid, this is exactly what Obama is going to do.
 
Yeah, Simpson is one of those Olympia Snow, Dick Lugar, Lindsey Graham, Arlen Specter kinda "players" who believe in their relevance and their self importance and "ruling like a Senator" rather than responding to their constituents wishes.

aka RINO.

I listened to the Fareed Zakeria show (it's the bomb) and I was very impressed by Alan Simpson. This country needs more politicians like him. What we don't need is a bunch of politicians groveling before Grover Norquist.

Simpson knows the backlash that will inevidably follow this simple minded gop strategy the party of no has dreamed up.

The light has shined on Grover, he would have done better if he had stayed in the shadows but his ego has taken over without much support for it.
 
You all can obsess over Grover all you want, IT's the Amercian people telling this Goverment, No damn new taxes until you show us some REAL Government cuts...and not just from our Military as the Progressives love to hit FIRST.
 
I am so glad Obama does not get it.

The second he slams Bowles Simpson plan onto the table and orders the GOP to vote for or against is the moment the election contest is over. If they vote for it, he wins. If they vote against or refuse to vote, he wins.

Sooner or later, I am afraid, this is exactly what Obama is going to do.

The sooner the better.

It's time that this nonsense ends.
 
Sallow, what some of the far right on my side have a hard time understanding (and some of you libs do, too) is that Obama is a corporatist. Sooner or later, though, I am afraid he is going to demand an up and down vote on the plan, and when he does, the election is over.
 

Forum List

Back
Top