Tag Archives: Compromise

NEWS FLASH: Lindsey Graham is a “top conservative”!

Jonathan Karl, Richard Coolidge, Gregory Lemos and Sherisse Pham, part of the collective, useful spokes-tools employed by ABC News and the “progressive” Party Pravda’s online misinformation outlet known as Yahoo News are at it again.

To begin with, this “progressive” misinformation’s “headline” is pure, pre-fabricated nonsense that reads:

“Top conservative says read my lips: Don’t sign ‘no new tax’ pledge”.

This “headline” is garbage.

First of all, save for his consistently patriotic support for the United States military and for American troops, Senator Lindsey Graham is about as moderate as Republicans come. Some Conservatives might characterize him as a “progressive” Republican. Even more may openly label him a RINO. The thought of his being a “top conservative” comes from the minds of institutionalized “progressive” leftists, not reality. Secondly, not once in the interview does Graham ever utter the words “read my lips”. Again, readers are witnessing fabricated “progressive” wishful fiction, not fact. Furthermore, never did he say “don’t sign the ‘no new tax’ pledge. Not even once. Not ever.

The entire headline is a total lie. It’s a complete falsehood. The “news” presented in this “headline” is “progressive” fabrication that goes light years beyond the outer limits of “spin”.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/power-players-abc-news/top-conservative-says-read-lips-don-t-sign-101721355.html

Thanks to a “headline” that’s contains not one ounce of truth, the article is automatically discredited in the minds of informed voters, those who are obviously not the target audience of Karl, Coolidge, Lemos and Pham.

What Graham did say is that he is willing to be flexible on applying one fourth of revenue collected by the IRS through elimination of tax loopholes and subsidies towards reducing the nations nearly $16 trillion in debt. The other three fourths would continue to follow the No New Tax Pledge’s formula for applying such revenues solely towards tax cuts. For Graham to accept this compromise, Democrats would be required to respond in kind to work in a bipartisan fashion towards reducing the national debt via “entitlement” program reforms.

That such inaccurate “reporting” could be considered, even for a fleeting moment, as real journalism, that these liars are actually getting paid to propagandize pure fiction as fact shows how low are today’s standards for journalistic integrity. This “headline” is going to give a large number of low-information, “sound bite news voters” a completely incorrect image of reality. It’s not even close to being true. All visible evidence points to clear intent to mislead misinform and indoctrinate masses of online readers.

How about giving this story a more objective headline, a headline that reflects the truth while accurately respects the content of the story? One more like: Graham Willing to Discuss Tax, Entitlement Compromise.

How difficult was that?

Perhaps for self imagined, self-appointed members of the “progressive” intellectual elite, it’s just too simple for their brilliant minds.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/06/12/news-flash-lindsey-graham-is-a-top-conservative/

A Difference of Definition

 Have you noticed the difference in the definitions used by Washington D.C. and those that are found in the dictionary?

 com·pro·mise

[kom-pruh-mahyz]  Show IPA noun,verb, -mised, -mis·ing.

noun

1.

a settlement of differences by mutual concessions; anagreement reached by adjustment of conflicting or opposingclaims, principles, etc., by reciprocal  modification of demands.

From this viewpoint, there are two different definitions coming out of D.C. Let’s take a look at these two definitions.

Compromise according to Republicans– To hold out until the last minute then buckle to the wants and demands of the Democrat Party; To lose the spine you once spoke of on the campaign trail when you promised to fight for America.

Compromise according to Democrats– The act of waiting long enough on issues that the Republicans give in to your demands and holding daily news conferences demonizing Republicans.

We have seen multiple examples of these definitions play out over the past year or so.  A couple such examples are the federal shutdown can they continue to kick down the road little by little, and the recent payroll tax extension. The Republican Party has played right into the hands of the Democrat Party each time and let the liberals hold our nation hostage. They’ve allowed the Democrats to threaten the American people with suspension of the Medicare benefits for the elderly, increased taxes and even the suspension of pay for our fighting men and women, all while the pay of Congress was insured.

The “compromise” the Republicans have demonstrated on such issues has been nothing but embarrassing to Conservative Republicans of this great nation. With their actions, they have proven they too must be voted out and replaced with someone that is willing to stand up and fight for what is right. Their constituents hired them to do a job and they are not performing up to standards.

The time is pass due for We the American People to hand everybody in Congress and the President their pink slips and send them packing. Our nation fought the Revolutionary War to end tyranny and to free the people of this great nation. The first Revolution our patriots fought with guns, swords and cannons. Today’s revolution will be fought with votes at the ballot box. As the old saying goes:

 “ The pen is mightier than the sword.”

We must make our mark in history with our pens in November 2012. We patriots do not have an official war cry, but for now, “Remember the Constitution” sounds quite fitting!

______________________

For those of you that own firearms, train hard and well and teach those that do not know how.
Be good stewards of the right to bear arms, for we are the last line of defense against tyranny.
-Benjamin Wallace

Follow Benjamin Wallace on Facebook

Advice From Newt Gingrich

Back in the mid-1980s I had the opportunity to spend a brief amount of time with Speaker Newt Gingrich.

He offered some fascinating advice to those of us present (A group of only fifteen people nationwide that were training to become congressional campaign managers).  He said in essences “The responsibility of a Congressman is not to explain Washington to the voters, but rather to represent the voters to Washington DC.”

The implications of that comment are very insightful when thought about.  It demonstrates why Newt Gingrich is never really out of the race for president.  But that is another story.

I receive, on a regular basis, communications from federally elected officials.  I also am friends with some on various social networking sites on the internet.  I monitor the Senate and House members that represent the State of Utah, as well as few others.

Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah is on Facebook and frequently makes posts that convey to the conservative wing of the Republican Party (about 65% of the total membership) his relentless efforts to carry the conservative message to Washington.  This effort may be intensified by the fact that for years he was more moderate, like Senator Bennett who was unceremoniously ousted by the right wing even before the primary in 2010.  Senator Hatch needs to earn back their trust.

To many of the Senator’s posts I have responded to him stating that he simply isn’t getting what the people are looking for.  He is still a regulationalist at heart.  That means his answer to every challenge, problem or difficulty is resolved with yet another regulation being imposed.

Before I continue I must make a confession.  In my mind Senator Orrin hatch is the most moral man in the US Senate.  On a personal level I trust him beyond any other US Senator.  In terms of personal character, in my mind, he overshadows all the rest.  That means a great deal to me, yet not my vote.

Today on Facebook Senator Hatch, speaking of the Yuan Bill, posted this “Before the Senate moves forward, it’s imperative that Congress have a full understanding of the Administration’s views on this legislation.”  At first blush this looks absolutely reasonable.  At any level, having a clear understanding of the issues, is a reasonable thing to do.  However…

At the second consideration, where wisdom joins with first impressions, this says something quite different.  When the President has made it abundantly clear that he has no intention of ever working in a cooperative manner with the Congress I genuinely question the logic of waiting for it to be forthcoming on this issue.

Secondly, what Senator Hatch is doing is subtly proposing is that there is a means to “compromise.”  Compromise to accomplish part of a goal can sometimes work for the greater good.  Unfortunately with Congress, particularly the Senate, compromise has not been to move toward a greater good  but rather toward a greater personal satisfaction among individuals dependent upon popularity, to remain popular.

In short, given Senator Hatch’s, and the entire senate’s reputation, his comment translated for accuracy should read “We need to know where the president is at so we can accommodate his wishes with our future popularity.”  That sounds harsh, but it appears to be the means by which the senate works.

In the original Constitutional Convention the delegate were firm and pounded home views with force and resolve.  Yet, in the end the Constitution was adopted because the compromise was for a better nation, not better poll ratings.  Today’s Congress should be no less.

I return to the advice of Speaker Gingrich.  These men are not sent to Washington to later come home and explain Washington to their voters.  They are to represent the people and then be “Statesmen” capable of wise decisions rather than popular assent.

Band Jockeying

Paul Ryan’s solution for our debt solution held up only with the Conservative segments of the Republican coalition. Reid’s plan only appealed to Democrats and the remaining plans garnered support or disdain from many different factions within Congress, but none of them had the votes to pass.

Now, 11th hour negotiations have been happening in the offices of Congressional leaders and at the White House to find an 11th hour deal that can get the 60 votes needed in the Senate and the 214 votes needed in the house.

Debt Ceiling Plans and Caucuses

With prior plans appealing only to left or right segments of Congress, the current negotiations look to be forming a plan that will focus on creating a large coalition of members of Congress. It will however leave out the far-left and far-right.

By pandering to the middle, Congressional leaders can garner the number of votes that they need without kowtowing to the staunchest factions in their parties. They are actually writing off a portion of their base to achieve the end goal – a debt ceiling deal.

As expected, the Tea Party Conservatives and the Progressive Caucus won’t vote for the compromise. As long as they can keep enough of their centrist factions together, a coalition made up of both parties can pass a negotiated deal.

Compromise is a good thing!

Compromise can be a good thing,  but let me tell you what I thought yesterday about the happenings on the Hill.

I still wondered why Speaker Boehner, who was on the Sean Hannity show a few days ago, stated, “The Mack Penny Bill was worth looking at” had done absolutely nothing with regard to that bill? Even the media is saying very little about it. Why is that?

Instead of Cut, Cap and Balance or the Mack Penny Bill, Speaker Boehner’s bill passed. If compromises were made, then surely the essentials of cut, cap, and balance or even parts of Mack’s Penny bill were in the bill – or not.

Like many others, I had just assumed that the compromise would bring parts of all the different legislation into a bill that would garner support. Seeing what actually passed – he sold-out.

I felt bad for Speaker Boehner, and all he is going though. But, isn’t that what he is paid to do? Talking with Democrats is a necessary part of creating legislation, but NOT doing what the American people have hired him to do is unacceptable.

Yes, it is hard to take a stand. No one said it would be easy, but deal with it Boehner! This entire issue is about the deficit and more specifically .. spending.

2012 is not that far away, Mr. Speaker –  time to get to work!