An Open Message To The "New" Republican Leadership

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Brother Jim

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
May 25, 2008
Messages
135
Reaction score
0
Location
Mannford
Hmmm, I heard it come from his own mouth.

Okay, what you gonna believe, your lying ears or what I told you he said or meant to say? Seems as I get older my hearing keeps failing me and I have to be told I really didn't hear that and what I was supposed to hear was...! Yeah that old Fox network sure can work wonders with that video editing... even when the teleprompter tells him to say it, they can change what was said. This technology just leaves me behind, being an old dumb redneck from the fly over states.
 

Hobbes

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
8,737
Reaction score
749
Location
The Nations
So you post a vid of him saying exactly what you said Fox made up and still say they made it up? Nice!

:rollingla

No, that's not what he did.

If you saw the entire clip, as Faux must have, O was droning on ad nauseum with his metaphor of the republicans driving the economy CAR into a ditch and then asking for the keys back when the dems got the car back out of the ditch.

His entire speech was about a car in the ditch and republicans having to ride in the back seat of the CAR cause they can't drive worth a flip.

It was fox noise that turned a car into a bus.:screwy:
 

VitruvianDoc

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Aug 21, 2010
Messages
883
Reaction score
0
Location
Tulsa
So you post a vid of him saying exactly what you said Fox made up and still say they made it up? Nice!

:rollingla


Did you watch the whole thing, or the spin? seriously, never take Fox at face value. I recommend listening the the phrase in question in its context... anything taken out of context can be widely misunderstood.
 

criticalbass

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Messages
5,596
Reaction score
7
Location
OKC
I would have to disagree.
If you are talking about bi-partisanship because both sides agree on something, then I agree with you.

But if you are talking about both sides compromising their positions just for the sake of bi-partisanship that's a problem. All it does is dilute both sides into being non-effective in delivering to their constituents what they were sent to deliver.

The latter is what is generally thought to be proper today, and it's why I utterly detest the term.

Edit to add:
The message sent yesterday was not for "all to get along". It was "change the way you do things and get the hell out of my life, or else". Kinda exactly what the O/P posted.

Not sure which part you disagree with. I'll try to outline main points and maybe we can determine where we differ.

*Dems were able to accomplish almost nothing because of Repub stonewalling.

*We need a bipartisan approach to government.

*Dems know after Tuesday that most Americans think they want less gov't.

*Opportunity now exists for a few non-disastrous changes

*With Repub control of the house, stonewalling is an image Repubs can no longer afford.

I did not use the word "compromise," and did not intend to suggest that it should be anyone's policy. However "my way or else" isn't a good place to be either.

So, if you wouldn't mind, which of the points do you disagree with, and what do you think needs to happen now that the House has changed majorities? CB
 

ruckerduck

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jun 22, 2007
Messages
819
Reaction score
41
Location
Tulsa
What we need is less government! Unfortunately, we will not get that from either side. How about at least 1/2 of the current spending? Not a chance in hell from dems or repubs. So basically it makes very little difference. Besides, it's the fed that is f@cking us, and they aren't controlled by either side.
 

cktad

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Sep 25, 2007
Messages
1,381
Reaction score
457
Location
Claremore
OK, let's put the shoe on the other foot. If a white Republican had said the exact same thing Obama did wouldn't it have been reported to be racist, as he was really implying "back of the bus". Obama is African-American when he says "sit in the back of the car" don't you think he knows what that will be interpreted as meaning due to his race.

And things will not change, new boss same as the old boss.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom