When compromise is wrong...

[healthmyths]

Powell incorrectly complained about the Tea Party for "divisive tone" in Washington saying:
"They [Tea party] say compromise is a dirty word, and they try to point to the Founding Fathers and the Constitution."

Colin Powell Blames Media and Tea Party for Divisive Tone in Washington | NewsBusters.org

"Compromise is a dirty word"?

Let's define "compromise"...
A settlement of differences in which each side makes concessions.

So before a compromise is possible each side needs to clearly define the "differences" before making concessions.

Tea Party wants governmental spending cuts.
Non-Tea party does not want to cut spending.

These are the two most apparent "differences".

But when would "compromise" be wrong...
Simple..
You want something that will require me to violate my principles!

That's when it is wrong to compromise.

 

[8537]

Was Reagan wrong when he compromised with Democrats on taxes? On SS reform?

 

[konradv]

Powell incorrectly complained about the Tea Party for "divisive tone" in Washington saying:
"They [Tea party] say compromise is a dirty word, and they try to point to the Founding Fathers and the Constitution."

Colin Powell Blames Media and Tea Party for Divisive Tone in Washington | NewsBusters.org

"Compromise is a dirty word"?

Let's define "compromise"...
A settlement of differences in which each side makes concessions.

So before a compromise is possible each side needs to clearly define the "differences" before making concessions.

Tea Party wants governmental spending cuts.
Non-Tea party does not want to cut spending.

These are the two most apparent "differences".

But when would "compromise" be wrong...
Simple..
You want something that will require me to violate my principles!

That's when it is wrong to compromise.

What's so special about YOUR principles? From what I've seen it's merely an excuse to not to have to think. Rather than use their brains, some would merely consult their "principles" checklist!!!

 

[peach174]

The TEA Party? Really?
The house has passed many bills with Democrat votes.
It's Harry Read who won't allow those bills to be discussed let alone brought up for a vote.

 

[healthmyths]

Was Reagan wrong when he compromised with Democrats on taxes? On SS reform?

Did Reagan compromise his principles?
It would help if you listed Reagan's principles and then cross reference to the elements of the "compromises you mentioned.

 

[Defiant1]

Was Reagan wrong when he compromised with Democrats on taxes? On SS reform?

Different time, different era.

 

[8537]

Was Reagan wrong when he compromised with Democrats on taxes? On SS reform?

Did Reagan compromise his principles?

Yes, on numerous occasions. He increased taxes a number of times, he expanded SS and he created deficits.

If you are not aware of the above compromises, please do a bit of research.

 

[8537]

Was Reagan wrong when he compromised with Democrats on taxes? On SS reform?

Different time, different era.

same principle (or lack thereof)

 

[Jackson]

The TEA Party? Really?
The house has passed many bills with Democrat votes.
It's Harry Read who won't allow those bills to be discussed let alone brought up for a vote.

This really demonstrates the fear the Dems have for an honest debate and vote. Sometimes a compromise isn't efficient when the country has such large deficits and cuts are so desperately needed. Reid, we need to vote!

 

[candycorn]

Powell incorrectly complained about the Tea Party for "divisive tone" in Washington saying:
"They [Tea party] say compromise is a dirty word, and they try to point to the Founding Fathers and the Constitution."

Colin Powell Blames Media and Tea Party for Divisive Tone in Washington | NewsBusters.org

"Compromise is a dirty word"?

Let's define "compromise"...
A settlement of differences in which each side makes concessions.

So before a compromise is possible each side needs to clearly define the "differences" before making concessions.

Tea Party wants governmental spending cuts.
Non-Tea party does not want to cut spending.

These are the two most apparent "differences".

But when would "compromise" be wrong...
Simple..
You want something that will require me to violate my principles!

That's when it is wrong to compromise.

So if you compromise, you have no principles?

Given the mission of government during peacetime....would you agree that if you are so principled as to not wishing to compromise, you should not seek a job as a public servant where voting up or down on bills is part of the job?

 

[candycorn]

The TEA Party? Really?
The house has passed many bills with Democrat votes.
It's Harry Read who won't allow those bills to be discussed let alone brought up for a vote.

This really demonstrates the fear the Dems have for an honest debate and vote. Sometimes a compromise isn't effecient when the country has such large deficits and cuts are so desperately needed. Reid, we need to vote!

I totally agree; every bill passed by either house should get a vote in the other house of Congress. Maybe not immediately but definitely during the same congressional 2 year term. What the Democrats are doing in the Senate is shameful and should be illegal.

Every Presidential nominee that requires Senatorial approval should get a vote as well.

This is why people hate Congress. Makes one wonder why we keep electing them.

We get the government we deserve.

 

[Truthmatters]

here is your problem cons.

This government was set up by the founders to work on compromise.

you are the minority party in the three branches.

NOT compromising with the majority is anti American

 

[healthmyths]

Was Reagan wrong when he compromised with Democrats on taxes? On SS reform?

Did Reagan compromise his principles?

Yes, on numerous occasions. He increased taxes a number of times, he expanded SS and he created deficits.

If you are not aware of the above compromises, please do a bit of research.

You are assuming Reagan's principles were:
1) NO tax increases and 2) no expanding of SS.

I don't KNOW what Reagan has to do with the premise of this thread because again.. the premise is Compromise is wrong if it violates principles!
For example what kind of compromise can be done on the death penalty or Roe V Wade?

In other words how can one compromise on the principle that life is not to be taken yet you approve of abortion and I don't approve AS A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE!

DON YOU UNDERSTAND? Compromise just to get along or because it makes you feel good is wrong!
That's where most people seemingly have a problem understanding that most true conservatives have principles liberals/progressives don't as it is clear from much of the comments actions..(OK to defecate on police cars right?) that the liberals/progressives support. It's OK to forge ballots because the ends justify the means.

There are more examples where liberal compromises have created more problems and the lack of principles provide NO GUIDANCE to the greater good!

 

[Greenbeard]

I totally agree; every bill passed by either house should get a vote in the other house of Congress. Maybe not immediately but definitely during the same congressional 2 year term. What the Democrats are doing in the Senate is shameful and should be illegal.

Does that mean Obama's jobs bill can get a vote in the Senate?

 

[8537]

Did Reagan compromise his principles?

Yes, on numerous occasions. He increased taxes a number of times, he expanded SS and he created deficits.

If you are not aware of the above compromises, please do a bit of research.

You are assuming Reagan's principles were:
1) NO tax increases and 2) no expanding of SS.

I'm not assuming that. I'm stating that to be the case - because I was alive when Reagan ran, I remember what he said and I remember his actual actions.

I don't KNOW what Reagan has to do with the premise of this thread because again.. the premise is Compromise is wrong if it violates principles!

and I DO know what Reagan has to do with the premise of this thread - because, again, even conservative idols such as Reagan understood that failure to compromise wasn't sticking by principle, it was simply being a rigid fuck and acting against the best interests of the nation.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Powell incorrectly complained about the Tea Party for "divisive tone" in Washington saying:
"They [Tea party] say compromise is a dirty word, and they try to point to the Founding Fathers and the Constitution."

Colin Powell Blames Media and Tea Party for Divisive Tone in Washington | NewsBusters.org

"Compromise is a dirty word"?

Let's define "compromise"...
A settlement of differences in which each side makes concessions.

So before a compromise is possible each side needs to clearly define the "differences" before making concessions.

Tea Party wants governmental spending cuts.
Non-Tea party does not want to cut spending.

These are the two most apparent "differences".

But when would "compromise" be wrong...
Simple..
You want something that will require me to violate my principles!

That's when it is wrong to compromise.

"As Sullivan rightfully asked here, just how many more minority groups does the GOP have to alienate and piss off before they have a real problem where they cannot just be the party of white angry men any more."

Andrew Sullivan Wonders​

​

 

[healthmyths]

Yes, on numerous occasions. He increased taxes a number of times, he expanded SS and he created deficits.

If you are not aware of the above compromises, please do a bit of research.

You are assuming Reagan's principles were:
1) NO tax increases and 2) no expanding of SS.

I'm not assuming that. I'm stating that to be the case - because I was alive when Reagan ran, I remember what he said and I remember his actual actions.

I don't KNOW what Reagan has to do with the premise of this thread because again.. the premise is Compromise is wrong if it violates principles!

and I DO know what Reagan has to do with the premise of this thread - because, again, even conservative idols such as Reagan understood that failure to compromise wasn't sticking by principle, it was simply being a rigid fuck and acting against the best interests of the nation.

So exactly what kind of compromise would be in the "best interests of the nation"?
For example YOU think raising taxes back to 39.6% for anyone making over $1m will solved the deficit??
Would generating $33 billion more a year that would be used for example to
sending $4 billion to foreign countries to develop their oil and then tells them we'll be their best customer?
- $2.6 million training Chinese prostitutes to drink more responsibly on the job
- funds a university study of how much alcohol college freshmen women require before agreeing to sex!
- The Association Between Penis Size and Sexual Health Among Men Who Have Sex with Men, at least $9.4 million went to a ten-year study that included the penis-size research.
GOV’T WASTE: $900,000 SPENT ON GAY MEN PENIS SIZE STUDY. « GILL REPORT – The official website of the Steve Gill Show
would constitute "good compromise"?

Of course you probably think all of that is justified spending of tax dollars but with the average $1M or more tax return already paying near 5 times the taxes as the rest of Americans idiots like you think that is fair.. NOT realizing that the $33 billion represents: over $40 billion in economic benefits but yea.. spending on prostitutes is good!

 

[8537]

You are assuming Reagan's principles were:
1) NO tax increases and 2) no expanding of SS.

I'm not assuming that. I'm stating that to be the case - because I was alive when Reagan ran, I remember what he said and I remember his actual actions.

I don't KNOW what Reagan has to do with the premise of this thread because again.. the premise is Compromise is wrong if it violates principles!

and I DO know what Reagan has to do with the premise of this thread - because, again, even conservative idols such as Reagan understood that failure to compromise wasn't sticking by principle, it was simply being a rigid fuck and acting against the best interests of the nation.

So exactly what kind of compromise would be in the "best interests of the nation"?
For example YOU think raising taxes back to 39.6% for anyone making over $1m will solved the deficit??

No, and no one ever said it would solve the deficit. It would reduce the deficit by an estimated 700B over 10 years.

 

[occupied]

Principals? What the hell is that? Is that something like a commandment that will land you in hell if you break it? Quit treating political ideals the same as religious orthodoxy, quit making everything black and white, all or nothing. I have watched the tea party, they tend to issue ultimatums and then dig in, there is no compromise with zealots like that who put their principals above everything and everyone else. Narcissistic self centeredness is not a virtue in anyone's book.

 

[healthmyths]

Principals? What the hell is that? Is that something like a commandment that will land you in hell if you break it? Quit treating political ideals the same as religious orthodoxy, quit making everything black and white, all or nothing. I have watched the tea party, they tend to issue ultimatums and then dig in, there is no compromise with zealots like that who put their principals above everything and everyone else. Narcissistic self centeredness is not a virtue in anyone's book.

You realize that "principles" have nothing to do with "religious orthodoxy"!

Obviously then if you REALLY don't know because I PRINCIPALLY IGNORE idiots who don't KNOW the difference between "principal" someone you evidently know very well from being in the office frequently...
and "Principles"

Since you don't know the difference in spelling you definitely have none!
"Principles" distinguish controlled behavior that advances civilization and
the dog eat dog world you live in and will be a very good "darwinian" candidate!

So since ALL this goes WAY over your head I will ignore you as a principle that wasting my time with trying to educate you!