Eric Cantor, R-Va has finally given all of us the Republicn definition of compromise. From Fox News.....

Cantor also made clear that if there's going to be any compromise, it's going to have to come from Obama, who has said he is willing to work with Republicans. Cantor, however, said that Republicans will work with Obama only if he agrees with them 100 percent.

My point is this does not bode well for any of us......

Originally Posted by cologal

Eric Cantor, R-Va has finally given all of us the Republicn definition of compromise. From Fox News.....

Cantor also made clear that if there's going to be any compromise, it's going to have to come from Obama, who has said he is willing to work with Republicans. Cantor, however, said that Republicans will work with Obama only if he agrees with them 100 percent.

My point is this does not bode well for any of us......

Obama doesn't know the meaning of compromise. His arrogance is blind to such things. He looks down his nose at people.

Why is it that the only times the Democrats talk about compromise is when Republicans have the majority? Where was the call for compromise the last two years by you? Compromise? When Obama moves right we'll maybe talk about it, maybe.

Originally Posted by cologal

Eric Cantor, R-Va has finally given all of us the Republicn definition of compromise. From Fox News.....

Cantor also made clear that if there's going to be any compromise, it's going to have to come from Obama, who has said he is willing to work with Republicans. Cantor, however, said that Republicans will work with Obama only if he agrees with them 100 percent.

My point is this does not bode well for any of us......

you are so right cologal! i am guessing that a failure to deal with anything substantial is going to be the definition of our new stability! that might turn out to be a good thing?

i am hoping the both obama and the republicans are blustering - for now. i don't think either wants to show their hand while a lame duck congress has yet to deal with anything. if i were boehner or mcconnell or demint i would not commit to anything at this time either.

and where ajack posted "Obama doesn't know the meaning of compromise. His arrogance is blind to such things. He looks down his nose at people." ... well, in my opinion, john boehner is anything but humble! he has shown his arrogant side, too [do you think his tears were real the other night? i figure they're as real as his tan!]...as did mcconnell when he said his only job was going to be to make sure obama only served one term! no one is showing that they have caught on to the will of the people!

the new cast of political characters is driving me as crazy as the campaigns did - i am switching my television viewing to the hallmark, hgtv and lifetime channels - i can figure out the endings to most of those shows - and they are happy endings!

Originally Posted by cologal

Eric Cantor, R-Va has finally given all of us the Republicn definition of compromise. From Fox News.....

Cantor also made clear that if there's going to be any compromise, it's going to have to come from Obama, who has said he is willing to work with Republicans. Cantor, however, said that Republicans will work with Obama only if he agrees with them 100 percent.

My point is this does not bode well for any of us......

Lets be clear. If you are going to go this route...ie., stirring up things out of context, fine but do not be offended when I question your motives.

You are PARTIALLY correct. The conversation in which this statement took place was in context concerning the Bush tax cuts...which you did not mention.

He DID, however, continue and say what you are saying.....IN THE CONTEXT of the liberal agenda being pursued by Obama

"First and foremost, we're not going to be willing to work with him on the expansive liberal agenda he's been about, but if he is serious about working with us on things like earmarks, for instance -- which he said he would work with me on that -- I'm absolutely hopeful we can do that. I hope he calls Harry Reid the first thing to get the Senate to go along with the House position."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/1..._n_780029.html

The quote you attribute to him, in my opinion and the way I read it was all about the Bush tax cuts...

"I would say, Chris, it's as much his responsibility," said Cantor in response to a question from Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace about who will be to blame for a government shutdown or a default on the debt. "In fact, he is the one who sets the agenda as the chief executive and as the president of this country."

Cantor also made clear that if there's going to be any compromise, it's going to have to come from Obama, who has said he is willing to work with Republicans. Cantor, however, said that Republicans will work with Obama only if he agrees with them 100 percent.


When you read the entire article, you find that the most damning are in conversation about the Bush tax cuts..this in fact is the headline..

"Eric Cantor Opposes Compromise On Extending Bush Tax Cuts, Says Government Shutdown Will Be Obama's Fault "

I implore you if you want to discuss things, keep it in context and dont just say stuff ! PLEASE

As far as if it bodes well for us, why dont you wait and see. The country has told this President that they dont like his health care bill, that they dont like the progressive agenda and he has IGNORED them. Perhaps it is time to stand tall and say that you have to listen !

I hope that in the future should you want to post something like this you will post it in its entirety and in context so that folks can see what is really going on instead more of the left leaning rhetoric which has already begun. The same thing goes for both sides, by the way but this is post of yours is pretty far away from the facts in this case. When someone, even you, says something and it is quoted, it should be placed in some context, or if you dont agree, I will post a great many of Obama quotes on liberalism, socialism, communism, etc, but out of context is not fair,now is it ?

Originally Posted by RichieLion

Why is it that the only times the Democrats talk about compromise is when Republicans have the majority? Where was the call for compromise the last two years by you? Compromise? When Obama moves right we'll maybe talk about it, maybe.

Cantor said what he said...and that has been the way it has been for a long time. The Dems did try and compromise with Grassley on Healthcare and I think financial reform and Snow on Healthcare but in the end no deal.

My point again is what good does gridlock do any of us?

Originally Posted by Bucco

Lets be clear. If you are going to go this route...ie., stirring up things out of context, fine but do not be offended when I question your motives.

You are PARTIALLY correct. The conversation in which this statement took place was in context concerning the Bush tax cuts...which you did not mention.

He DID, however, continue and say what you are saying.....IN THE CONTEXT of the liberal agenda being pursued by Obama

"First and foremost, we're not going to be willing to work with him on the expansive liberal agenda he's been about, but if he is serious about working with us on things like earmarks, for instance -- which he said he would work with me on that -- I'm absolutely hopeful we can do that. I hope he calls Harry Reid the first thing to get the Senate to go along with the House position."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/1..._n_780029.html

The quote you attribute to him, in my opinion and the way I read it was all about the Bush tax cuts...

"I would say, Chris, it's as much his responsibility," said Cantor in response to a question from Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace about who will be to blame for a government shutdown or a default on the debt. "In fact, he is the one who sets the agenda as the chief executive and as the president of this country."

Cantor also made clear that if there's going to be any compromise, it's going to have to come from Obama, who has said he is willing to work with Republicans. Cantor, however, said that Republicans will work with Obama only if he agrees with them 100 percent.


When you read the entire article, you find that the most damning are in conversation about the Bush tax cuts..this in fact is the headline..

"Eric Cantor Opposes Compromise On Extending Bush Tax Cuts, Says Government Shutdown Will Be Obama's Fault "

I implore you if you want to discuss things, keep it in context and dont just say stuff ! PLEASE

As far as if it bodes well for us, why dint you wait and see. The country has told this President that they dint like his health care bill, that they dint like the progressive agenda and he has IGNORED them. Perhaps it is time to stand tall and say that you have to listen !

I hope that in the future should you want to post something like this you will post it in its entirety and in context so that folks can see what is really going on instead more of the left leaning rhetoric which has already begun. The same thing goes for both sides, by the way but this is post of yours is pretty far away from the facts in this case. When someone, even you, says something and it is quoted, it should be placed in some context, or if you dint agree, I will post a great many of Obama quotes on liberalism, socialism, communism, etc, but out of context is not fair,now is it ?

It was NOT out of context....he said what he said. They will compromise only if Obama agrees to 100% of what they want. They whole premise of compromise is each side gives a little.

I will agree that Obama and his team has been out of touch. However, I still believe the Healthcare bill is not as bad as the Repubs have made it. For example can we agree that were never any "Death panels"? The bailout of the car companies and cash for clunkers have begun to pay off....in part due to Toyota's Lean Quality Process....but that is another discussion.

Originally Posted by cologal

It was NOT out of context....he said what he said. They will compromise only if Obama agrees to 100% of what they want. They whole premise of compromise is each side gives a little.

I will agree that Obama and his team has been out of touch. However, I still believe the Healthcare bill is not as bad as the Repubs have made it. For example can we agree that were never any "Death panels"? The bailout of the car companies and cash for clunkers have begun to pay off....in part due to Toyota's Lean Quality Process....but that is another discussion.

How do you know there won't be death panels in the future?

Despite the concerted smears by the media and the Obama regime,Toyota still makes a better vehicle then GM (IMHO). I just bought a brand new Toyota RAV 4 and my only other choice was Ford.

Originally Posted by cologal

It was NOT out of context....he said what he said. They will compromise only if Obama agrees to 100% of what they want. They whole premise of compromise is each side gives a little.

I will agree that Obama and his team has been out of touch. However, I still believe the Healthcare bill is not as bad as the Repubs have made it. For example can we agree that were never any "Death panels"? The bailout of the car companies and cash for clunkers have begun to pay off....in part due to Toyota's Lean Quality Process....but that is another discussion.

1. He did say what he said, as you report, BUT NOT IN GENERAL as you posted. He was speaking of the Bush Tax cuts when he said it and you did not report that fact, which is quite important to the message you tried to deliver.

2. PLEASE, if you like the health bill, WHAT PART OF THE BILL ADDRESSES HEALTH CARE COSTS ? I can answer, the bill does not address health care COSTS, but our President ran on what....cutting health care costs ! Health care is beginning to skyrocket in cost for everybody AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THE NEW BILL !

The american people did not want it..never did, but an entire year was totally wasted in back rooms, paying off folks to get the bill.

The stimulus bill was simply and admittely a bunch of social programs and nobody even read it...was ready to go with NO discussion.

DO NOT PREACH the party of no...DO NOT PREACH no compromise. This WH is just about the absolute worst we have ever seen for the backroom deals etc. ALL which our President campaigned against....and that can be added to the HEALTH CARE COSTS he ignored on the list of things that he flat out lied about ! A great talker, but watch what he is doing

World spending. Who is going to pay. When will fiscal sanity return?

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/...bal-borrowing/

Originally Posted by Ajack

How do you know there won't be death panels in the future?

Despite the concerted smears by the media and the Obama regime,Toyota still makes a better vehicle then GM (IMHO). I just bought a brand new Toyota RAV 4 and my only other choice was Ford.

Just the facts please......no Death Panels in the orginial bill...no matter what Sarah Palin or Glen Beck said.

Originally Posted by cologal

Just the facts please......no Death Panels in the orginial bill...no matter what Sarah Palin or Glen Beck said.

How do you know? Did you read the bill? When you ration operations and treatment, you essentially have long delays which result in premature deaths. Call it what you please, but "death panels" fit the description.

Originally Posted by cologal

It was NOT out of context....he said what he said. They will compromise only if Obama agrees to 100% of what they want. They whole premise of compromise is each side gives a little.

I will agree that Obama and his team has been out of touch. However, I still believe the Healthcare bill is not as bad as the Repubs have made it. For example can we agree that were never any "Death panels"? The bailout of the car companies and cash for clunkers have begun to pay off....in part due to Toyota's Lean Quality Process....but that is another discussion.

when you say that there are no death panels you should have said there are no death panels in the medical bill. The death panels may have been hidden someplace else.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HnkxIh62dQ[/ame]

See how liberals and progressives work. Be Proud.

Cologal, is this what you support?

Yoda

Originally Posted by cologal

Just the facts please......no Death Panels in the orginial bill...no matter what Sarah Palin or Glen Beck said.

AND no health care costs as promised !!!

Originally Posted by cologal

It was NOT out of context....he said what he said. They will compromise only if Obama agrees to 100% of what they want. They whole premise of compromise is each side gives a little.

I will agree that Obama and his team has been out of touch. However, I still believe the Healthcare bill is not as bad as the Repubs have made it. For example can we agree that were never any "Death panels"? The bailout of the car companies and cash for clunkers have begun to pay off....in part due to Toyota's Lean Quality Process....but that is another discussion.

If the government is going to ration, deny or engender lengthy waits for healthcare services; that will be by practice death panels of a sort. Right now my health care is between my doctor and me. My health insurance might not have the provision for the treatment I desire, but I can always pay for it myself, if I can, and explore that treatment. Obamacare would deny me that option outright.