Bipartisan efforts

[Sky Dancer]

Instead of the usual dualistic lib/con name calling fest I thought maybe we could discuss bipartisanship. What do you think? I found this example:


"Identify yourself as a "Democrat" or "Republican," and hardly anybody will accuse you of being a reformer. Party labels of any kind are increasingly -- and correctly -- seen as obstacles to the kind of sweeping change voters want.

That political mindset explains how Democrat Andrew Cuomo wound up on Long Island yesterday, standing with Nassau County Executive Ed Mangano, a Republican. They joined forces to push for an annual 2 percent cap on property taxes, an appealing image of bipartisan support for the popular idea.

It was an unlikely scenario, given that another Long Island Republican, Rick Lazio, is running against Cuomo for governor. And that's the point, especially for Cuomo."

A bipartisan balancing act - NYPOST.com

 

[007]

The only bipartisanship that I've witnessed as of late meant that republicans cave to the dem agenda. Is that what you think bipartisanship should be?

Seems to me that the only time you dems bring this up is when it looks like you can no longer RAIL ROAD your agenda through. Then all of a sudden you need "bipartisanship."

 

[Jarhead]

For any group to believe that the entire country should live the way THEY believe all should live is flat out NOT what America was built on.

As a conservative, my values are there to guide me throiugh life. I do not ask others to live the way I do and I do not ask others to pay for my decisions in life. I do not ask others to take the blame for my bad decisions and I most certainly do not cast the blame in their direction. I do not insist others conduct business with me, alkhough they are always welcome to do so if they wish. I do not expect others to think the way I do for me to conduct business with them. I like diversity and I never judge people based on faith or ideology.

I will not vote against anyones right to do what they want, be it abortion or gay marriage. All I ask is that they not ask me to change MY principles to accommodate their wishes. Likewiase, I ask them NOT to force me to compromise my beliefs and indirectly pay for them to do things that I consider immoral...such as abortion.

I am what my wife refers to as a bi-partisan conservative. I will vote for gay marriage, but I do not agree wth gay marriage per my PERSONAL pricniples. I will vote for abortion although per my PERSONAL proinciples, it is murder. I will always vote AGAINST tax payer funds going towards abortion. But as I said, if people want to abort, UI will not get 8in their way. They have my vote.

Bi partisanship is not hard to acheive.

Sadly, our politicians have the enitre populace wrapped up in things being "the other party's fault" and so the people jumped on the bandwagon......

 

[editec]

Snowe and Collins.

Nuf said?

 

[Jarhead]

Snowe and Collins.

Nuf said?

I prefer Rubio's ideology over Crists....but I admire Crists strength to cast the party aside.

If I were a Floridian, he would have my vote based on non party affiliation alone.

 

[Sky Dancer]

For any group to believe that the entire country should live the way THEY believe all should live is flat out NOT what America was built on.

As a conservative, my values are there to guide me throiugh life. I do not ask others to live the way I do and I do not ask others to pay for my decisions in life. I do not ask others to take the blame for my bad decisions and I most certainly do not cast the blame in their direction. I do not insist others conduct business with me, alkhough they are always welcome to do so if they wish. I do not expect others to think the way I do for me to conduct business with them. I like diversity and I never judge people based on faith or ideology.

I will not vote against anyones right to do what they want, be it abortion or gay marriage. All I ask is that they not ask me to change MY principles to accommodate their wishes. Likewiase, I ask them NOT to force me to compromise my beliefs and indirectly pay for them to do things that I consider immoral...such as abortion.

I am what my wife refers to as a bi-partisan conservative. I will vote for gay marriage, but I do not agree wth gay marriage per my PERSONAL pricniples. I will vote for abortion although per my PERSONAL proinciples, it is murder. I will always vote AGAINST tax payer funds going towards abortion. But as I said, if people want to abort, UI will not get 8in their way. They have my vote.

Bi partisanship is not hard to acheive.

Sadly, our politicians have the enitre populace wrapped up in things being "the other party's fault" and so the people jumped on the bandwagon......

I like your approach, Jarhead. I feel similarly. Someone is always trying to put me in a box with a label. Like you, my views are nuanced too. I am considered liberal. I am personally against abortion for moral reasons, yet I politically support a woman's right to choose because I feel that choice is between her, the father of the child, her doctor and minister. I remember when back alleys abortions and suicide and shame were the only options for an unwanted pregnancy. I do not want to see us return to that time.

I am a legally married lesbian. I married my partner of 25 years in the window when it was legal in California before the LDS and Catholic churches organized for Prop 8. It's made a tremendous difference in my life. I support marriage equality.

I'd like to see an uprising of citizens demanding that our elected officials work in a bi-partisan manner.

We the people, have to let the media know that we won't allow them to divide us.

 

[Jarhead]

For any group to believe that the entire country should live the way THEY believe all should live is flat out NOT what America was built on.

As a conservative, my values are there to guide me throiugh life. I do not ask others to live the way I do and I do not ask others to pay for my decisions in life. I do not ask others to take the blame for my bad decisions and I most certainly do not cast the blame in their direction. I do not insist others conduct business with me, alkhough they are always welcome to do so if they wish. I do not expect others to think the way I do for me to conduct business with them. I like diversity and I never judge people based on faith or ideology.

I will not vote against anyones right to do what they want, be it abortion or gay marriage. All I ask is that they not ask me to change MY principles to accommodate their wishes. Likewiase, I ask them NOT to force me to compromise my beliefs and indirectly pay for them to do things that I consider immoral...such as abortion.

I am what my wife refers to as a bi-partisan conservative. I will vote for gay marriage, but I do not agree wth gay marriage per my PERSONAL pricniples. I will vote for abortion although per my PERSONAL proinciples, it is murder. I will always vote AGAINST tax payer funds going towards abortion. But as I said, if people want to abort, UI will not get 8in their way. They have my vote.

Bi partisanship is not hard to acheive.

Sadly, our politicians have the enitre populace wrapped up in things being "the other party's fault" and so the people jumped on the bandwagon......

I like your approach, Jarhead. I feel similarly. Someone is always trying to put me in a box with a label. Like you, my views are nuanced too. I am considered liberal. I am personally against abortion for moral reasons, yet I politically support a woman's right to choose because I feel that choice is between her, the father of the child, her doctor and minister. I remember when back alleys abortions and suicide and shame were the only options for an unwanted pregnancy. I do not want to see us return to that time.

I am a legally married lesbian. I married my partner of 25 years in the window when it was legal in California before the LDS and Catholic churches organized for Prop 8. It's made a tremendous difference in my life. I support marriage equality.

I'd like to see an uprising of citizens demanding that our elected officials work in a bi-partisan manner.

We the people, have to let the media know that we won't allow them to divide us.

I fear it is too late. And I do not blame the media. I blame ourselves. We allowed the politicians and the media to dictate our thinking as it pertains to those that do not think like us.

The country has been successfully divided. We may be at a point of no return.

I hope I am wrong.

 

[Sky Dancer]

For any group to believe that the entire country should live the way THEY believe all should live is flat out NOT what America was built on.

As a conservative, my values are there to guide me throiugh life. I do not ask others to live the way I do and I do not ask others to pay for my decisions in life. I do not ask others to take the blame for my bad decisions and I most certainly do not cast the blame in their direction. I do not insist others conduct business with me, alkhough they are always welcome to do so if they wish. I do not expect others to think the way I do for me to conduct business with them. I like diversity and I never judge people based on faith or ideology.

I will not vote against anyones right to do what they want, be it abortion or gay marriage. All I ask is that they not ask me to change MY principles to accommodate their wishes. Likewiase, I ask them NOT to force me to compromise my beliefs and indirectly pay for them to do things that I consider immoral...such as abortion.

I am what my wife refers to as a bi-partisan conservative. I will vote for gay marriage, but I do not agree wth gay marriage per my PERSONAL pricniples. I will vote for abortion although per my PERSONAL proinciples, it is murder. I will always vote AGAINST tax payer funds going towards abortion. But as I said, if people want to abort, UI will not get 8in their way. They have my vote.

Bi partisanship is not hard to acheive.

Sadly, our politicians have the enitre populace wrapped up in things being "the other party's fault" and so the people jumped on the bandwagon......

I like your approach, Jarhead. I feel similarly. Someone is always trying to put me in a box with a label. Like you, my views are nuanced too. I am considered liberal. I am personally against abortion for moral reasons, yet I politically support a woman's right to choose because I feel that choice is between her, the father of the child, her doctor and minister. I remember when back alleys abortions and suicide and shame were the only options for an unwanted pregnancy. I do not want to see us return to that time.

I am a legally married lesbian. I married my partner of 25 years in the window when it was legal in California before the LDS and Catholic churches organized for Prop 8. It's made a tremendous difference in my life. I support marriage equality.

I'd like to see an uprising of citizens demanding that our elected officials work in a bi-partisan manner.

We the people, have to let the media know that we won't allow them to divide us.

I fear it is too late. And I do not blame the media. I blame ourselves. We allowed the politicians and the media to dictate our thinking as it pertains to those that do not think like us.

The country has been successfully divided. We may be at a point of no return.

I hope I am wrong.

If a group like the Tea Party can come along, so can others. I think most citizens are sick to death of petty squabbling.

We can't give up just because it looks dismal.

I'm going to give it a try just on this message board. Why not?

 

[G.T.]

Bi-polar with Parkinson's?

 

[Jarhead]

I like your approach, Jarhead. I feel similarly. Someone is always trying to put me in a box with a label. Like you, my views are nuanced too. I am considered liberal. I am personally against abortion for moral reasons, yet I politically support a woman's right to choose because I feel that choice is between her, the father of the child, her doctor and minister. I remember when back alleys abortions and suicide and shame were the only options for an unwanted pregnancy. I do not want to see us return to that time.

I am a legally married lesbian. I married my partner of 25 years in the window when it was legal in California before the LDS and Catholic churches organized for Prop 8. It's made a tremendous difference in my life. I support marriage equality.

I'd like to see an uprising of citizens demanding that our elected officials work in a bi-partisan manner.

We the people, have to let the media know that we won't allow them to divide us.

I fear it is too late. And I do not blame the media. I blame ourselves. We allowed the politicians and the media to dictate our thinking as it pertains to those that do not think like us.

The country has been successfully divided. We may be at a point of no return.

I hope I am wrong.

If a group like the Tea Party can come along, so can others. I think most citizens are sick to death of petty squabbling.

We can't give up just because it looks dismal.

I'm going to give it a try just on this message board. Why not?

And look at how the left, the media, and demoicratic politicians treated the tea partyers. It gives people reason to "stay out of it"........

 

[G.T.]

And look at how the left, the media, and demoicratic politicians treated the tea partyers. It gives people reason to "stay out of it"........

That's because the Tea Party isn't "bi-partisan" in nature, it's Conservative.

 

[Sky Dancer]

I fear it is too late. And I do not blame the media. I blame ourselves. We allowed the politicians and the media to dictate our thinking as it pertains to those that do not think like us.

The country has been successfully divided. We may be at a point of no return.

I hope I am wrong.

If a group like the Tea Party can come along, so can others. I think most citizens are sick to death of petty squabbling.

We can't give up just because it looks dismal.

I'm going to give it a try just on this message board. Why not?

And look at how the left, the media, and demoicratic politicians treated the tea partyers. It gives people reason to "stay out of it"........

What if we just dropped that history. The Tea Party has some good ideas. They are still a loose, uncohesive group trying to find their way.

Hopefully, they won't let the left or right define them.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Amid the partisan bickering and procedural conundrums of the health care bill last week, a small group of senators from both sides of the aisle found common ground in advocating for school choice in the District of Columbia.

An amendment to reauthorize the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program for the next five years was brought to the floor Tuesday evening by Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) and a bipartisan coalition of cosponsors including Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Susan Collins (R-ME), Robert Byrd (D-WV), and George Voinovich (R-OH). Although the Senate voted 42-55 to strike down the amendment, Senators Lieberman, Feinstein, and Voinovich passionately defended the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program.

Senator Lieberman particularly noted the scholarship’s importance to the many students and families currently enrolled in the program and illustrated the necessity of continuing to provide disadvantaged children the opportunity to escape failing public schools.
Bipartisan Senators Support D.C. Opportunity Scholarships | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

 

[Jarhead]

And look at how the left, the media, and demoicratic politicians treated the tea partyers. It gives people reason to "stay out of it"........

That's because the Tea Party isn't "bi-partisan" in nature, it's Conservative.

True. But it was a movement of a group of people and as opposed to applauding them for exercising their right to free speech, many of OUR POLITICIANS ridiculed them and cherry picked a few.....very few....ugly incidents and labelled the enitre movement based on the few.

And yes, it gives reason for people to say "it just aint worth it".

Ironically, those politicians such as Nancy Pelosi, were the protesters of the 60's and they knew dam well how hurtful AND HARMFUL it is when the politicians ridicule you for speaking your mind....

Exactly why do you think she paraded right through the tea partyers with an oversized gavel right after the healthcare bill was passed? Did she really NOT think it would create anger? Did she really think it would not make people feel that their voices mean nothing?

Exactly how do you think the anti war protesters of the mid 2000's would have reacted if, during a large protest, Rove and Cheney along with others marched right through them holding the lines of a Thanksgiving Day parade balloon in the image of an F-18?

 

[Jarhead]

If a group like the Tea Party can come along, so can others. I think most citizens are sick to death of petty squabbling.

We can't give up just because it looks dismal.

I'm going to give it a try just on this message board. Why not?

And look at how the left, the media, and demoicratic politicians treated the tea partyers. It gives people reason to "stay out of it"........

What if we just dropped that history. The Tea Party has some good ideas. They are still a loose, uncohesive group trying to find their way.

Hopefully, they won't let the left or right define them.

We are a country of 300 million. Very few have ever or will ever see a tea party ralley live. They only see what the media shows them and only know what the media and our politicians tell them.

They have already been defined.

Just as the anti war protesters of the 60's were defined as long haired hippie freaks.

 

[G.T.]

And look at how the left, the media, and demoicratic politicians treated the tea partyers. It gives people reason to "stay out of it"........

That's because the Tea Party isn't "bi-partisan" in nature, it's Conservative.

True. But it was a movement of a group of people and as opposed to applauding them for exercising their right to free speech, many of OUR POLITICIANS ridiculed them and cherry picked a few.....very few....ugly incidents and labelled the enitre movement based on the few.

And yes, it gives reason for people to say "it just aint worth it".

Ironically, those politicians such as Nancy Pelosi, were the protesters of the 60's and they knew dam well how hurtful AND HARMFUL it is when the politicians ridicule you for speaking your mind....

Exactly why do you think she paraded right through the tea partyers with an oversized gavel right after the healthcare bill was passed? Did she really NOT think it would create anger? Did she really think it would not make people feel that their voices mean nothing?

Exactly how do you think the anti war protesters of the mid 2000's would have reacted if, during a large protest, Rove and Cheney along with others marched right through them holding the lines of a Thanksgiving Day parade balloon in the image of an F-18?

In fairness, if people were posing that I was evil and wanting to ruin the Country, I'd in-turn have every right to ridicule them in return at every cost.

I also note that Obama made it a point to publicly state that he doesn't find the tea party to be racist.

Aside from all of that, the tea party's not bi-partisan anyways so this is all moot to me.

 

[Jarhead]

That's because the Tea Party isn't "bi-partisan" in nature, it's Conservative.

True. But it was a movement of a group of people and as opposed to applauding them for exercising their right to free speech, many of OUR POLITICIANS ridiculed them and cherry picked a few.....very few....ugly incidents and labelled the enitre movement based on the few.

And yes, it gives reason for people to say "it just aint worth it".

Ironically, those politicians such as Nancy Pelosi, were the protesters of the 60's and they knew dam well how hurtful AND HARMFUL it is when the politicians ridicule you for speaking your mind....

Exactly why do you think she paraded right through the tea partyers with an oversized gavel right after the healthcare bill was passed? Did she really NOT think it would create anger? Did she really think it would not make people feel that their voices mean nothing?

Exactly how do you think the anti war protesters of the mid 2000's would have reacted if, during a large protest, Rove and Cheney along with others marched right through them holding the lines of a Thanksgiving Day parade balloon in the image of an F-18?

In fairness, if people were posing that I was evil and wanting to ruin the Country, I'd in-turn have every right to ridicule them in return at every cost.

I also note that Obama made it a point to publicly state that he doesn't find the tea party to be racist.

Aside from all of that, the tea party's not bi-partisan anyways so this is all moot to me.

See how the media has labelled them?

Most do not call Obama evil and WANTING to destroy the country.

They simply believe that his policies WILL destroy the country.

Look...whatever works for you.

I applauded Cindy Sheehan even though I did not agree with her.

Sadly, for you, one must either think like you or a group must have people in it that think like you for you to give them credibility.

I say that striclty based on this line of your:

Aside from all of that, the tea party's not bi-partisan anyways so this is all moot to me.

If that woirks for you, go for it.

 

[G.T.]

True. But it was a movement of a group of people and as opposed to applauding them for exercising their right to free speech, many of OUR POLITICIANS ridiculed them and cherry picked a few.....very few....ugly incidents and labelled the enitre movement based on the few.

And yes, it gives reason for people to say "it just aint worth it".

Ironically, those politicians such as Nancy Pelosi, were the protesters of the 60's and they knew dam well how hurtful AND HARMFUL it is when the politicians ridicule you for speaking your mind....

Exactly why do you think she paraded right through the tea partyers with an oversized gavel right after the healthcare bill was passed? Did she really NOT think it would create anger? Did she really think it would not make people feel that their voices mean nothing?

Exactly how do you think the anti war protesters of the mid 2000's would have reacted if, during a large protest, Rove and Cheney along with others marched right through them holding the lines of a Thanksgiving Day parade balloon in the image of an F-18?

In fairness, if people were posing that I was evil and wanting to ruin the Country, I'd in-turn have every right to ridicule them in return at every cost.

I also note that Obama made it a point to publicly state that he doesn't find the tea party to be racist.

Aside from all of that, the tea party's not bi-partisan anyways so this is all moot to me.

See how the media has labelled them?

Most do not call Obama evil and WANTING to destroy the country.

They simply believe that his policies WILL destroy the country.

Look...whatever works for you.

I applauded Cindy Sheehan even though I did not agree with her.

Sadly, for you, one must either think like you or a group must have people in it that think like you for you to give them credibility.

I say that striclty based on this line of your:

Aside from all of that, the tea party's not bi-partisan anyways so this is all moot to me.
If that woirks for you, go for it.

You misinterprited me, then. I didn't say a group has to think like me to give them credibility. My point was the EXACT OPPOSITE, in-that the "Tea party" is moot to this discussion because they AREN'T bi-partisan. Meaning, they DO follow an ideaology, so in a discussion of bi-partisanship, they're moot.

If I wanted a group to "think like me," then THAT'S bi-partisan, because my views fall somewhere towards the middle. A "conservative" is not "bipartisan," a "liberal" is not bi-partisan.

 

[Foxfyre]

True. But it was a movement of a group of people and as opposed to applauding them for exercising their right to free speech, many of OUR POLITICIANS ridiculed them and cherry picked a few.....very few....ugly incidents and labelled the enitre movement based on the few.

And yes, it gives reason for people to say "it just aint worth it".

Ironically, those politicians such as Nancy Pelosi, were the protesters of the 60's and they knew dam well how hurtful AND HARMFUL it is when the politicians ridicule you for speaking your mind....

Exactly why do you think she paraded right through the tea partyers with an oversized gavel right after the healthcare bill was passed? Did she really NOT think it would create anger? Did she really think it would not make people feel that their voices mean nothing?

Exactly how do you think the anti war protesters of the mid 2000's would have reacted if, during a large protest, Rove and Cheney along with others marched right through them holding the lines of a Thanksgiving Day parade balloon in the image of an F-18?

In fairness, if people were posing that I was evil and wanting to ruin the Country, I'd in-turn have every right to ridicule them in return at every cost.

I also note that Obama made it a point to publicly state that he doesn't find the tea party to be racist.

Aside from all of that, the tea party's not bi-partisan anyways so this is all moot to me.

See how the media has labelled them?

Most do not call Obama evil and WANTING to destroy the country.

They simply believe that his policies WILL destroy the country.

Look...whatever works for you.

I applauded Cindy Sheehan even though I did not agree with her.

Sadly, for you, one must either think like you or a group must have people in it that think like you for you to give them credibility.

I say that striclty based on this line of your:

Aside from all of that, the tea party's not bi-partisan anyways so this is all moot to me.

If that woirks for you, go for it.

There comes a time though that bipartisanship and tolerance means compromising one's deepest convictions of value, virtue, and principle. Once we do that, we are but reeds blowing about in the wind, unbroken, but unable to support or sustain anything.

If one cannot defend one's convictions, then one has no convictions. Those without convictions stand for nothing.

Who is not familiar with Edmund Burke's famous line: "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

He also said:

"The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion."

"Whenever a separation is made between liberty and justice, neither, in my opinion, is safe."

So where is the line drawn between tolerance and abdication of one's values and principles?

If you believe abortion is murder, how do you vote to allow it without reservation, restraint, or controls? Can you stay silent while a healthy baby, hours before a normal delivery, is killed in the womb? Or are some controls such as Roe v Wade intended to allow in order?

If you believe pedophilia is wrong, do you acquiesce to those who believe it is fine?

If you believe beating children or wives should be illegal, do you choose to allow it because some people hold religious convictions requiring it?

At what point do you say enough? I cannot bend one inch further without breaking?

And at what point do you resist inequity when bipartisanship requires that one side acquiesce totally to the other?

 

[Sky Dancer]

Do you see any value in working with the other side, Foxfyre? Does the opposition exist only to be ground to dust?