You underestimate my conservatism... :lol:

 

My apologies, sir! :lol:

And here I was getting ready to find the soft pillows and the comfy chair.

 

No! Not . . . THE COMFY CHAIR!

Has there ever been a time in which conservatives felt that the only way to bipartisianship was for liberals to capitulate?

 

Absolutely! This is by no means a one way stalemate.

:thumb:Excellent post. Obama's ultimate target is not Rush but political forces that are like-minded to Rush. There would be no point in trying to discredit a radio talkshow host unless it might serve to discredit Obama's politcal opponents.

 

It's also a sad commentary on the Republican party that a radio talkshow host shows up on Obama's radar screen instead of an elected Republican office holder.

 

I read the response from Limbaugh and made similar points.

So he supported a moderate democrat on one item...hmmm. Seems to me, Obama is right. If we want to move forward, you can't follow Rush's "dig our heels in" example.

 

Good points made above about Rush and ratings...and his choice to NOT run for political office. I'm sure he would win if he decided to run for a variety of offices. If he loves the US so much and knows what is best for it, why not run? $$$$$$$$$$ As a result, he will instead continue to work for ratings. There's nothing wrong with that. We talk about kool-aid all the time. Rush has his own brand, too.

 

The same way James Carville and Bob Shrum urged democrats in a written memo to "dig their heels in" when Bush was elected...

 

This is politics 101 people. The opposition party should act as such on issues where there are fundamental disagreements. If McCain had been elected the left would be doing the same thing...:walk:

You asked and that is one I remember. There may have been more but I would doubt it. How many issues would you have expected a conservative to support Clinton on? How many issues did Air America or Keith Olbermann support Bush on? Wouldn't you say they dug in their heels? It seems that the way to bipartisianship these days is for the conservatives to capitulate.

 

 

Dead on! Since 47% of the country did not vote for Obama, there is no reason for that percentage to all of a sudden start agreeing with his positions...

I can't stand Rush.

The same way James Carville and Bob Shrum urged democrats in a written memo to "dig their heels in" when Bush was elected...

 

This is politics 101 people. The opposition party should act as such on issues where there are fundamental disagreements. If McCain had been elected the left would be doing the same thing...:walk:

 

The "dig in the heels" mantra goes against progress, no matter who promotes it.

The "dig in the heels" mantra goes against progress, no matter who promotes it.

 

We shall see if Obama is truly a "uniter". My guess is that his version of inclusion and uniting is going to be the right changing its view to come in line with his. If he is truly a uniter he will have to compromise on issues, which at this point, he does not appear willing to do. Although I see him as being slightly more capable of compromise than Reid, Pelosi, Frank, Dodd, Durbin, Conyers, Jackson-Lee, Rangel, Leahy, Schumer, Wexler, Feinstein, Boxer, and company. After all, he does have to run again in 4 years. Time will tell.

We shall see if Obama is truly a "uniter". My guess is that his version of inclusion and uniting is going to be the right changing its view to come in line with his. If he is truly a uniter he will have to compromise on issues, which at this point, he does not appear willing to do. Although I see him as being slightly more capable of compromise than Reid, Pelosi, Frank, Dodd, Durbin, Conyers, Jackson-Lee, Rangel, Leahy, Schumer, Wexler, Feinstein, Boxer, and company. After all, he does have to run again in 4 years. Time will tell.

 

I agree with the bolded. I will be disappointed if he does not work for compromise.

The "dig in the heels" mantra goes against progress, no matter who promotes it.

If progress means venturing further from the genius of our Founding Fathers into the inept absurdity of Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Robert Byrd, Robert Reich, et. al. we should have dug in our heels 100 years ago. :lol:

 

Progress is how you define it. I don't see many of the bloated governmental developments of the past 50 years as progress.

I agree with the bolded. I will be disappointed if he does not work for compromise.

 

Either prepare to be disappointed or the leftwing liberals will be disappointed for him compromising with what they see as the bastion of evil in Republicans and conservatives or dare I say Evangelicals.

I agree with the bolded. I will be disappointed if he does not work for compromise.

 

I am still waiting to see Obama "give" one inch in any of his proposals.

Obama is every bit as divisive as Rush.

I beg to disagree. Obama is considered divisive by the portion of the far right that loves to be divisive. Judging from his comments, cabinet choices, etc., he is looking to be tolerant, if not inclusive, of different viewpoints.

 

Rush is nothing of the sort and never has been. The man is a blowhard ...

I beg to disagree. Obama is considered divisive by the portion of the far right that loves to be divisive. Judging from his comments, cabinet choices, etc., he is looking to be tolerant, if not inclusive, of different viewpoints.

 

Rush is nothing of the sort and never has been. The man is a blowhard ...

 

And yet the far left gay activist are upset that they didn't get the first openly gay cabinet position.

 

Obama will be considered divisive cause he can't possibly give into all the far left viewpoints and be effective on getting anything done.

 

He gives into those viewpoints and he has no hope of ruling from a moderate position and bringing compromise to the conservatives.

 

He gives comes from a moderate position and he will disappoint the far left.

 

The man is in the proverbial rock and hard place.