Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Compromise is not capitulation. The sooner you guys learn that..the better.
I think what he is saying is the Obama doens't stick to his guns often enough. Honestly the examples are rare.
If you truly beleive your cause is just, there is no need to compromise. Just take it to the people, and let us decide if we agree.
One ex of him sticking to it; It's been over 60 days since we started killing people in Lybia to keep them from killing people. Congress, by law, must have given Obama permission [?] to stay there before the 60 days came up. By continueing to involve us, he's breaking the law, on a cause he thinks is just.
Libya should be like Panama..with one except. Gaddafi must die. And by die..I mean dead.
In all seriousness, I'll tell you why.
Bush stuck to his guns, even when his positions were unpopular.
From Iraq to Amnesty for illegals and TARP, which were epically unpopular with his staunchest supporters, Bush held firm to what he believed was right.
Obama on the other hand, folds like a cheap suit if he takes the slightest bit of heat over his stance on an issue.
From the single payer system to the 1967 borders, the slightest resistance bring about capitulation.
That's why.
Good point here's some of Bush's positions he said on the campaign trial and boy oh boy did he stick to them
1.) reducing spending
2.) reducing the size of government
3.) no nation-building
4.) protecting the borders
He refused to give in on those principles, what a great honest leader.
Thanks to the person next to me for letting me borrow your "Republican blinders" so I could see the world the way they do momentarily.
Now that the blinders are off, here's some reality;
Bush=Obama
Obama=Bush
In the older video he called it single-payer universal health care. It sounds more like he was confused and didn't understand the subtle difference between the two.In all seriousness, I'll tell you why.
Bush stuck to his guns, even when his positions were unpopular.
From Iraq to Amnesty for illegals and TARP, which were epically unpopular with his staunchest supporters, Bush held firm to what he believed was right.
Obama on the other hand, folds like a cheap suit if he takes the slightest bit of heat over his stance on an issue.
From the single payer system to the 1967 borders, the slightest resistance bring about capitulation.
That's why.
Compromise is not capitulation. The sooner you guys learn that..the better.
Single payer flip-flop:
[youtube]k9Rk8H8gl6s[/youtube]
Not comprimise, Obama "clarified" his position...meaning, at the first sign of resistance, suddenly, Obama was no longer a proponent of a single payer system.
Hmmm? Here is the argument that I'm hearing: Democrats are perceived to be more easily swayed by political expediency, therefore they are pussies.
First, I'm not convinced that the perception, if true, accurately reflects reality. And second, even if I agreed on the premise, I don't necessarily agree with the direct linkage between political expediency and being a pussy.
In all seriousness, I'll tell you why.
Bush stuck to his guns, even when his positions were unpopular.
From Iraq to Amnesty for illegals and TARP, which were epically unpopular with his staunchest supporters, Bush held firm to what he believed was right.
Obama on the other hand, folds like a cheap suit if he takes the slightest bit of heat over his stance on an issue.
From the single payer system to the 1967 borders, the slightest resistance bring about capitulation.
That's why.
Good point here's some of Bush's positions he said on the campaign trial and boy oh boy did he stick to them
1.) reducing spending
2.) reducing the size of government
3.) no nation-building
4.) protecting the borders
He refused to give in on those principles, what a great honest leader.
Thanks to the person next to me for letting me borrow your "Republican blinders" so I could see the world the way they do momentarily.
Now that the blinders are off, here's some reality;
Bush=Obama
Obama=Bush
Way to miss the point.
I'm not saying Bush did everything he said he would do or that everything that he did was right IMO.
What I said was he did what HE thought was right and didn't collapse like a Jingo tower at the first hint of opposition.
I know you'll miss the point again, but I tried anyway.
Good point here's some of Bush's positions he said on the campaign trial and boy oh boy did he stick to them
1.) reducing spending
2.) reducing the size of government
3.) no nation-building
4.) protecting the borders
He refused to give in on those principles, what a great honest leader.
Thanks to the person next to me for letting me borrow your "Republican blinders" so I could see the world the way they do momentarily.
Now that the blinders are off, here's some reality;
Bush=Obama
Obama=Bush
Way to miss the point.
I'm not saying Bush did everything he said he would do or that everything that he did was right IMO.
What I said was he did what HE thought was right and didn't collapse like a Jingo tower at the first hint of opposition.
I know you'll miss the point again, but I tried anyway.
No I get your point, what he thought was right on the campaign trail is the opposite of what he thought was right in the oval office, which is exactly what's going on with Obama.
Empty suits, empty rhetoric, Obama=Bush.
But whatever, I don't want to argue this point for the next 400 pages so pffffffffffft!
Hmmm? Here is the argument that I'm hearing: Democrats are perceived to be more easily swayed by political expediency, therefore they are pussies.
First, I'm not convinced that the perception, if true, accurately reflects reality. And second, even if I agreed on the premise, I don't necessarily agree with the direct linkage between political expediency and being a pussy.
Standing up for your beliefs in the face of adversity is the hallmark of courage and character.
By abandoning their beliefs and backpedaling instead of fighting for their principles against public sentiment, they are perceived as lacking intestinal fortitude and backbone. I.E. - pussies.
Hmmm? Here is the argument that I'm hearing: Democrats are perceived to be more easily swayed by political expediency, therefore they are pussies.
First, I'm not convinced that the perception, if true, accurately reflects reality. And second, even if I agreed on the premise, I don't necessarily agree with the direct linkage between political expediency and being a pussy.
Standing up for your beliefs in the face of adversity is the hallmark of courage and character.
By abandoning their beliefs and backpedaling instead of fighting for their principles against public sentiment, they are perceived as lacking intestinal fortitude and backbone. I.E. - pussies.
IMO, not all changes of opinion qualify as abandoning one's beliefs. I think in order to grant any merit to your argument, I would need to believe they do.
Standing up for your beliefs in the face of adversity is the hallmark of courage and character.
By abandoning their beliefs and backpedaling instead of fighting for their principles against public sentiment, they are perceived as lacking intestinal fortitude and backbone. I.E. - pussies.
IMO, not all changes of opinion qualify as abandoning one's beliefs. I think in order to grant any merit to your argument, I would need to believe they do.
Agreed , at one time I was against gays in the military, I have changed my opinion on that, that doesn't mean that my belief that homosexuality is a disgusting perversion has changed.
Hmmm? Here is the argument that I'm hearing: Democrats are perceived to be more easily swayed by political expediency, therefore they are pussies.
First, I'm not convinced that the perception, if true, accurately reflects reality. And second, even if I agreed on the premise, I don't necessarily agree with the direct linkage between political expediency and being a pussy.
Hmmm? Here is the argument that I'm hearing: Democrats are perceived to be more easily swayed by political expediency, therefore they are pussies.
First, I'm not convinced that the perception, if true, accurately reflects reality. And second, even if I agreed on the premise, I don't necessarily agree with the direct linkage between political expediency and being a pussy.
certainly famous dems like mitt romney would disagree.
Hmmm? Here is the argument that I'm hearing: Democrats are perceived to be more easily swayed by political expediency, therefore they are pussies.
First, I'm not convinced that the perception, if true, accurately reflects reality. And second, even if I agreed on the premise, I don't necessarily agree with the direct linkage between political expediency and being a pussy.
certainly famous dems like mitt romney would disagree.
Silly del! Romney is a republican. I bet you feel so embarrassed right now.
But seeing as Romney is indeed a HUGE pussy, it was an easy mistake to make.
Not at all.Hmmm? Here is the argument that I'm hearing: Democrats are perceived to be more easily swayed by political expediency, therefore they are pussies.
First, I'm not convinced that the perception, if true, accurately reflects reality. And second, even if I agreed on the premise, I don't necessarily agree with the direct linkage between political expediency and being a pussy.
Standing up for your beliefs in the face of adversity is the hallmark of courage and character.
By abandoning their beliefs and backpedaling instead of fighting for their principles against public sentiment, they are perceived as lacking intestinal fortitude and backbone. I.E. - pussies.
IMO, not all changes of opinion qualify as abandoning one's beliefs. I think in order to grant any merit to your argument, I would need to believe they do.
