How can the Republicans be accused of being the Party of No, if they are in fact voting as their constituents want them to and rejecting the president's agenda? Doesn't that make us the People of No?
I think the President knows this and would much rather tell us to please just get out of his way because he knows better than we do what we need. But he's cunning enough to realize that might be seen as hubris by the little people, so he goes after the opposition party.
If someone is trying to set a bomb to blow up a building (or an economy, or a nation) then obstruction is what's needed. Compromising doesn't really do the job, sometimes.
2 comments:
Tom, the only problem with your argument is that I don't see the GOP coming up with alternatives. Perhaps they are and I'm missing it, but the Senators and Congressman/women who don't like the plans proposed by the Administration have the responsibility to come up with solutions that solve the problems the country is dealing with. It doesn't mean they have to compromise per se, but they at least owe the "People of No" an alternative solution. Maintaining the status quo helps nobody...perhaps other than the GOP's chances in the mid-term elections (granted its what the opposition party does every time, but it doesn't make it right). Unfortunately, I think most obstruction is for obstruction's sake. Block one idea with another, don't just be intransigent.
At the very least they owe it to the country to engage in dialogue. I think that if either side comes in saying that "any proposal that doesn't look exactly like my proposal is DOA" is doing the country a disservice, breaching their duty to the country and being just plain irresponsible.
Ask and ye shall receive, apparently. This was posted today on the RNC website. I had never visited it before, but it was the first place I thought to look for GOP alternative proposals. And what do you know ...
Post a Comment