Quotes of the day

posted at 10:41 pm on June 11, 2012 by Allahpundit

“Ronald Reagan would have, based on his record of finding accommodation, finding some degree of common ground, as would my dad — they would have a hard time if you define the Republican party — and I don’t — as having an orthodoxy that doesn’t allow for disagreement, doesn’t allow for finding some common ground,” Bush said, adding that he views the hyper-partisan moment as “temporary.”

“Back to my dad’s time and Ronald Reagan’s time – they got a lot of stuff done with a lot of bipartisan suport,” he said. Reagan “would be criticized for doing the things that he did.”

Bush called the present partisan climate “disturbing.”

“It’s just a different environment left and right,” he said of “this dysfunction.”

***

Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, in a break with his party, said he could support tax increases to help reduce the federal government’s budget deficit…

“If you could bring to me a majority of people to say that we’re going to have $10 in spending cuts for $1 of revenue enhancement — put me in, coach,” Bush told the House Budget Committee. “This will prove I’m not running for anything,” he said, prompting laughter from lawmakers and the audience…

Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican, declined to comment on Bush’s remarks.

***

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said he supports both a path to citizenship or legal residency for the more than 11 million people living in the United States illegally.

“You have to deal with this issue. You can’t ignore it, and so either a path to citizenship, which I would support–and that does put me probably out of the mainstream of most conservatives–or … a path… to residency of some kind,” he said during an interview last week with Charlie Rose on CBS…

Bush said he agreed with Romney on the need to secure the border and the importance of raising the number of work visas available for high-skilled workers. But he warns that the tone of the immigration debate among Republicans is “shortsighted.”

“It sends a signal,” Bush said. “We want your support, but you can’t join our team.”

***

“I’m not sure what Jeb’s referring to,” Gingrich said on CNN’s “John King, USA.” “We just had a pretty grueling campaign, which had a fair amount of disagreement, a pretty wide range of views from Ron Paul to say Tim Pawlenty.”

He continued: “In that framework, you see us come together as a party. I think there’s plenty of room in the Republican Party for a wide range of candidates.”…

“I would argue in many ways we have a more diverse party today than the Democrats. It’s much easier to be of a different view as a Republican, without having the kind of pressure you would have if you were a pro-life Democrat,” he said.

***

Barack Obama made a similar point back in April, arguing that “[Reagan] could not get through a Republican primary today.”…

But it is also worth asking this: Could liberal icons such as Franklin Delano Roosevelt or John Fitzgerald Kennedy get through a Democratic primary today?

I very much doubt it.

There are some similarities, of course, but the political landscape is very different today than in 1980. The same can be said between now and the 1960s and the 1930s. That fact says less about the modern party than a simple reflection of changes in the country and electoral reality. Taking away any other lesson is a waste of time and energy.

***

Both men [Clinton and Jeb Bush], by virtue of their family’s standing in their respective parties, have a nearly un-matched political pulpit from which to express their views. And they’re using it more and more these days.

Both men also seem to see their party drifting away from what’s important. For Clinton, he wants a more close examination of the two sides’ visions for the future rather than a muddy bar fight, and for Bush, he wants his party to work with the other side more on issues like illegal immigration and the budget.

It also just so happens that both could be hurting their parties’ brands heading into the fall election.

Republicans have already used Clinton’s words — with great gusto — against President Obama. And we would expect the same on the GOP side, with Bush’s words being used against Romney and congressional Republicans.

***

To understand what Bush is saying, you need to anticipate how the party might diagnose the causes of a loss in 2012, and then you can see how he is setting himself as the cure. Bush has been publicly urging Republicans to moderate their tone toward Latinos and to embrace immigration reform. Here is the one issue where Republicans, should they lose, will almost surely conclude that they need to moderate their party stance. The Latino vote is both growing in size and seems to be tilting ever more strongly toward the Democrats, a combination that will rapidly make the electoral map virtually unwinnable. Indeed, the body language of the Romney campaign suggests it already regrets the hard-line stances on immigration it adopted during the primary…

If you try to imagine the Republican consensus after a potential losing election, it will look like this. It will recognize that its harsh partisan rhetoric turned off voters, and will urgently want to woo Latinos, while holding on to as much as possible of the party’s domestic policy agenda. And oh, by the way, the party will be casting about for somebody to lead it.

***

Consider the mini-exodus of moderates from the Republican Party, who have ditched the right over a perceived lurch toward Tea Party politics. This has precipitated endless media hand-wringing about the rapid closing of the conservative mind. While there is a certain degree of truth to the charge, it’s a lament not evenly applied (i.e., it’s a partisan complaint). Remember that when the hawkish former Democrat Joe Lieberman, an aggressive supporter of President George W. Bush’s foreign policy, defected from his party, or when Newark Mayor Cory Booker said the Obama campaign’s attacks on private equity “nauseated” him, only to be forced into a humiliating mea culpa, these were not viewed as portents of a closing liberal mind. Likewise, former President Bill Clinton’s recent argument in favor of extended the Bush tax cuts were quickly followed by a groveling apology for breaking party discipline. For Lieberman, it was good riddance to a neoconservative who had long ago forsaken Democratic unity — and the attacks on Booker and Clinton indicated not partisanship, but the necessary correction of an election-season gaffe…

Yes, in times of political tumult, American voters polarize, lining up behind their parties as “yea” and “nay” votes on opposed and irreconcilable ideas about health care policy or deficit reduction or national security. The only way to “heal the partisan divide,” then, is to prevent politicians from taking any remotely controversial positions in the first place. Which is as impossible as it is undesirable.

Because politics is not — despite all clichés to the contrary — about compromise. It’s about making the other guy compromise. And, failing that, it’s about telling any and all who will listen that the country is being torn asunder by boneheaded partisans.

***


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6

Flora Duh on June 12, 2012 at 7:06 AM

Mornin’, y’all!

kingsjester on June 12, 2012 at 7:09 AM

No..they could not…and Jeb Bush is right in that Ronald Reagan’s willingness to compromise would be frowned on…but then again Reagan was not dealing with a whole party of people like Pelosi or Obama.

Terrye on June 12, 2012 at 7:03 AM

You make a good point. Tip O’Neill was a liberal SOB but he was an SOB that was willing to make the deal instead of Pelosi or Reid’s strategy of legislative gridlock.

Happy Nomad on June 12, 2012 at 7:09 AM

Jeb is a grown up. It is a sad time when it takes courage to utter what is the blindingly obvious truth about our politics. We are more entrenched and hard lined than I have ever seen. It’s taken a good 20 years for us to get here. Debate is no longer allowed, instead discourse is 2 sides shouting past each other.

Democracy IS compromise. From the founding of our nation. It was a terrible thing that our Constitution made some people 3/5′s of a person. However, without that compromise we would have no nation to go on and correct that fault later.

America is in precarious shape. We are being sustained principally because other places are beating us to the bottom, but even though they may get there sooner, we are well on our way unless we learn how to stop and reverse the momentum. That is not going to happen by outshouting the other side. It will only happen by seeking out those who are left on both sides that are willing to honestly work to find solutions.

MJBrutus on June 12, 2012 at 7:11 AM

From the second quarter of 2007, i.e., the first full quarter of a Pelosi-Reid dominated Congress and a politically weakened President Bush, to the second quarter of 2009 when President Obama assumed office, government spending skyrocketed to 27.3% of GDP from 21.4%. It was the largest peacetime expansion of government spending in U.S. history.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303753904577450910257188398.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:05 AM

thanks…will read it in a little bit..pelosi-reid CONGRESS

INFURIATING…it’s the president’s fault who has an R next to his name and it’s the congress’ fault where the president has a D next to his name

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 7:11 AM

Flora Duh on June 12, 2012 at 7:06 AM

morning! indeed

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:07 AM

blech

morning KJ

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 7:13 AM

jeb bush all the time on morning joe…

cripe…morning joe is just loving this…

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 7:14 AM

RE: John Bryson accident!

I guess he was slurring words,at his Commencement Speech,at Pasedena Poly Tech University!

Commerce Secretary Bryson faces tests after hit-and-runs

Obama Cabinet official puzzled the audience with lapses during a high school graduation speech Thursday, then crashed into two cars Saturday before being found unconscious.
12:42 a.m. CDT, June 12, 2012
******************************

John Bryson returned to Pasadena’s Polytechnic School last week as a proud father and a dynamic figure in state and national politics. His own daughters had graduated from the highly regarded school. Now he had been invited to deliver the commencement address, with a remarkable story to share — the ascent of the son of a sawmill operator to the elite ranks of both the environmental movement and big business, then confirmation as President Obama’s secretary of Commerce.

On Thursday evening, in front of more than 1,000 people, Bryson urged Poly’s 91 graduates to stay curious and to be good stewards of the world. But his passion and eloquence was tempered by mistakes and lapses, students and parents said. Several times, Bryson, a polished public speaker, appeared to lose his place in his remarks. He mispronounced words without correcting himself.
(more…..)

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/la-me-commerce-crash-20120612,0,3468887.story

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:14 AM

Jeb Bush is kind of a dick. Put an egg in your shoe and beat it, Jebbie!

Naturally Curly on June 12, 2012 at 7:15 AM

jeb bush all the time on morning joe…

cripe…morning joe is just loving this…

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 7:14 AM

cmsinaz:Yup,and we get to see the insight into their mindsets,
haha,ahem!:)

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:16 AM

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:16 AM

yepper….he just said that jeb’s republican party is the future of the gop

huh? i don’t think so

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 7:17 AM

Mornin’, y’all!

kingsjester on June 12, 2012 at 7:09 AM

kingsjester:

Morning KJ,I do hope,you have a verbal unmolested morning,
in comparison to yesterday!:)

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:18 AM

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:16 AM

yepper….he just said that jeb’s republican party is the future of the gop

huh? i don’t think so

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 7:17 AM

cmsinaz:I wonder if they calculated in the Tea Party!:)

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:19 AM

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 7:13 AM

Mornin’, ma’am!

Jeb Bush is an appeaser and,apparently, a Country Club Moderate.
That is not what is needed now. We have acquiesced to the Dems’ wishes for too long, and have darned near lost our country as a result.

Stand for something, or you’ll fall for anything.

kingsjester on June 12, 2012 at 7:20 AM

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:18 AM

Thank you, my friend.

kingsjester on June 12, 2012 at 7:21 AM

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:05 AM

thanks…will read it in a little bit..pelosi-reid CONGRESS

INFURIATING…it’s the president’s fault who has an R next to his name and it’s the congress’ fault where the president has a D next to his name

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 7:11 AM

cmsinaz:I`ve got it saved,I was doin the news round up,
for todays news!

The spin is starting…on the economy,and the Left are
h*ll bent,on blaming GOP…ugh!:)

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:23 AM

By the way…we are a Free Republic. Not a democracy.

Our citizens vote for the representatives whom they feel represent their views.

Now is not the time for a Neville Chamberlain.

kingsjester on June 12, 2012 at 7:24 AM

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:19 AM

they don’t give them second thought…

kingsjester on June 12, 2012 at 7:20 AM

amen KJ….amen

compromise according to the dems is to do things their way…enough!

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 7:24 AM

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:23 AM

just about the last card they can play along with race

so every gop talking head has to respond to jeb’s quotes this am….cripe…acknowledge, move on

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 7:27 AM

Mika and co keep bemoaning the the dysfunctional state of the GOP. It’s the dysfunctional state of BOTH parties, you bubble heads!

MJBrutus on June 12, 2012 at 7:27 AM

From the second quarter of 2007, i.e., the first full quarter of a Pelosi-Reid dominated Congress and a politically weakened President Bush, to the second quarter of 2009 when President Obama assumed office, government spending skyrocketed to 27.3% of GDP from 21.4%. It was the largest peacetime expansion of government spending in U.S. history.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303753904577450910257188398.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:05 AM

Not that I’m excusing GW for his role in the expansion of government spending (was he unfamiliar with the word veto), but, from 2007 to 2009 we were fighting 2 wars, hardly what I would call “peacetime.”

Flora Duh on June 12, 2012 at 7:28 AM

MJBrutus on June 12, 2012 at 7:27 AM

the illinois rep is doing a good job against her and the illinois gov

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 7:29 AM

Compromise always yields $10 in spending increases for every dollar in “revenue enhancement.” This is why the Tea Party exists.

Candyass RINOs have no memory of past compromises.

Valiant on June 12, 2012 at 7:30 AM

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 7:29 AM

He is exposing Daley’s hypocrisy. Daley’s a perfect example of one of these clowns who loves to cry about how bad the other side is but can’t bring himself to look at his own with the same objectivity.

MJBrutus on June 12, 2012 at 7:32 AM

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:18 AM

Thank you, my friend.

kingsjester on June 12, 2012 at 7:21 AM

Kingsjester:Some people,aren’t the morning type!!

Heres a heads-up,Obama has two appointments
on the go!:)
=========================

Despite odds, Obama nominates two for key U.S. appeals court
Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:29pm EDT
***************************

One of his nominees, Caitlin Halligan, general counsel in the Manhattan District Attorney’s office

The other, Srikanth “Sri” Srinivasan, the principal deputy U.S. solicitor general, has drawn praise from former solicitors general,

If he were confirmed, Srinivasan, who was born in Chandigarh, India, and grew up in Lawrence, Kansas,
(More…)
==========

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/11/us-obama-court-nominees-idUSBRE85A1IZ20120611

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:33 AM

MJBrutus on June 12, 2012 at 7:32 AM

Oops. I said Daley, but it was Quinn the clown this hour.

MJBrutus on June 12, 2012 at 7:33 AM

good for adam schock, he wouldn’t take the 10 to 1 spending cuts to revenue increase just the reasons that were brought up here….everytime there has been a compromise the dems got their increases and the gop did not get any of their decreases

good for adam!

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 7:36 AM

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:23 AM

just about the last card they can play along with race

so every gop talking head has to respond to jeb’s quotes this am….cripe…acknowledge, move on

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 7:27 AM

cmsinaz:

That is exactly what I’m thinking,the MSM and DNC,are
gonna dog Jeb Bush’s comments for the rest of the week!:)

****************** DISTRACTION *******************

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:36 AM

MJBrutus on June 12, 2012 at 7:32 AM

yepper…that gov couldn’t compete

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 7:37 AM

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:05 AM

Not that I’m excusing GW for his role in the expansion of government spending (was he unfamiliar with the word veto), but, from 2007 to 2009 we were fighting 2 wars, hardly what I would call “peacetime.”

Flora Duh on June 12, 2012 at 7:28 AM

Flora Duh:Well put!!:)

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:38 AM

****************** DISTRACTION *******************

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:36 AM

yes indeedy

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 7:44 AM

Did anyone else catch them pretending that they’ve been covering Fast and Furious for lo these many months? I guess they can’t avoid it now that Holder may be held in contempt of Congress. “Give us a quick recap, Mike Allen of Politico!” You can probably catch it in the 8:00 rerun segment.

Imagine those lo info voters at home wondering what the hell they’re talking about.

Naturally Curly on June 12, 2012 at 7:50 AM

Naturally Curly on June 12, 2012 at 7:50 AM

You mean…this story?

kingsjester on June 12, 2012 at 7:52 AM

“Revenue enhancements”? Why not just say what you’re really talking about, Bush? Increased taxes and fees. Say it. If you believe it’s the right thing, why use silly euphemisms?

“Hello, I’m Jeb Bush and I support higher government taxes and fees.”

See, that wasn’t so difficult, now was it?

AZCoyote on June 12, 2012 at 7:55 AM

Did anyone else catch them pretending that they’ve been covering Fast and Furious for lo these many months? I guess they can’t avoid it now that Holder may be held in contempt of Congress. “Give us a quick recap, Mike Allen of Politico!” You can probably catch it in the 8:00 rerun segment.

Imagine those lo info voters at home wondering what the hell they’re talking about.

Naturally Curly on June 12, 2012 at 7:50 AM

October 11th, 2011

According to TV Eyes, the phrase “Fast and Furious” has been mentioned a sum total of 550 times [on FOX News] in the last three months. The same search for CNN reveals 93 mentions, while the phrase has been stated on MSNBC a paltry 29 times. In full disclosure, the method for this research relies on sometimes rough transcripts, and makes no distinction on context; it is entirely possible that Fox News decided to promote the hell out of the latest in the Fast and Furious film franchise, but that’s almost certainly not the case. Source

Flora Duh on June 12, 2012 at 7:58 AM

You mean…this story?

kingsjester on June 12, 2012 at 7:52 AM

Indeed I do. Good take on it, KJ. Your blog never disappoints!

Naturally Curly on June 12, 2012 at 7:59 AM

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:36 AM

yes indeedy

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 7:44 AM

cmsinaz:-:)

canopfor on June 12, 2012 at 7:59 AM

Indeed I do. Good take on it, KJ. Your blog never disappoints!

Naturally Curly on June 12, 2012 at 7:59 AM

2nd that….

good one KJ :)

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 8:01 AM

Flora Duh on June 12, 2012 at 7:58 AM

i believe those numbers

fast and furious…whats that?
-msdnc crew

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 8:02 AM

The biggest bipartisan deal George H.W. Bush agreed to was a tax raise that worked as well as a flaming tire around his neck come reelection time…

No thanks… never again…

Khun Joe on June 12, 2012 at 8:03 AM

Thank you both!

kingsjester on June 12, 2012 at 8:03 AM

fast and furious…whats that?
-msdnc crew

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 8:02 AM

Like Naturally Curly said, “imagine those lo info voters at home wondering what the hell they’re talking about?”

ABC and NBC have rarely mentioned Fast and Furious, and then only in passing. Imagine how angry their viewers are going to be when they find out what’s gone down – and that they’ve been kept in the dark about it for almost 2 yrs?

Flora Duh on June 12, 2012 at 8:12 AM

Flora Duh on June 12, 2012 at 8:12 AM

yepper but then the lsm is proud to report dear leader is awesome in foreign policy …

cmsinaz on June 12, 2012 at 8:17 AM

I guess one thing that always gets me about progressives in the GOP is they rail and rail on Social Conservatives about how they drag the party down by putting efforts into the traditional family issue or abortion and such and they get admonished, “It’s the economy!”

Then they turn around and moan that we need to compromise with the Democrats. On social issues. It’s a dodge.

Don’t let anyone cow you into compromising your believes for theirs. Progressives in the GOP sure don’t.

hawkdriver on June 12, 2012 at 8:42 AM

Do all of you folks who are whining that “no one wants to compromise” not understand that 50 years of compromise is why we got here? Political compromise the past half century has been to give the Left what they want, because no-one had the intestinal fortitude to stand up and explain how giving them what they wanted would damage the Republic.

Thanks to that we are now at a point where giving them anything will speed the destruction of the Republic.

Nathan_OH on June 12, 2012 at 8:48 AM

Moderation? It takes two to be moderate. Maybe Harry Reid and Pelosi and their sycophants should hear this message.

When a ship veers off course to the far left, the captain must make a hard right in order to get back on course. Maybe after the ship of state is back on course and sailing in smooth waters, moderation can return.

iamsaved on June 12, 2012 at 8:49 AM

Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, in a break with his party, said he could support tax increases to help reduce the federal government’s budget deficit…

How about this compromise Jeb? We cut spending first and then we’ll raise taxes later. It’s always worked in the reverse for the Dems in the past. Trouble is, the cuts never came after they got their increase in taxes.

How many times does it take for the Republicans to finally figure it out?

iamsaved on June 12, 2012 at 8:57 AM

Hey, I didn’t bother reading the whole thing, but the reality is a 10:1 ratio of cuts to to taxes isn’t a moderate position. It’s literally, a hugely conservative one. I don’t get how we all can’t agree with that. It’s much better than the original SuperDeal™ before it fell apart…

preallocated on June 12, 2012 at 9:10 AM

Jeb Bush, just another RINO crony capitalism progressive big gov’t., big spending Bush. I’m sick of these people. Jeb, just STFU and that goes for Karl Rove as well. Stick a fork in the Pub. party. It is way past it’s sell by date.

they lie on June 12, 2012 at 9:13 AM

If Jeb Bush really wanted to be the “voice of moderation” in the Republican Party, why didn’t he run for the GOP nomination? During the primaries, we all heard that Romney was the “moderate, establishment” candidate as compared to “conservatives” like Gingrich and Santorum. Since Romney won the nomination as the “moderate”, Jeb Bush should enthusiastically endorse him and support him. If Romney then loses the general election, it would be proof that Republicans should have nominated someone MORE conservative.

Is Jeb Bush now trying to say that Romney is too conservative?

Instead of undermining Romney’s campaign, why doesn’t Jeb Bush do something useful for the Party? He’s still very popular in Florida–let him run for the Senate against Bill Nelson, so that we could have two Republican Senators from that state, and take the gavel away from Dingy Harry.

Steve Z on June 12, 2012 at 9:35 AM

What the hell?!?

Flora Duh on June 12, 2012 at 7:03 AM

I think it’s Haiku- LOL

Night Owl on June 12, 2012 at 10:08 AM

How about this compromise Jeb? We cut spending first and then we’ll raise taxes later. It’s always worked in the reverse for the Dems in the past. Trouble is, the cuts never came after they got their increase in taxes.

How many times does it take for the Republicans to finally figure it out?

iamsaved on June 12, 2012 at 8:57 AM

+1. The cuts must come first or the politicians of both parties (including Ron Paul) won’t keep their word because there is always some voter, somewhere, who doesn’t want a particular item cut and all of the politicians lack the political will to make difficult decisions.

talkingpoints on June 12, 2012 at 10:16 AM

Democracy IS compromise.

Well thank God we’re not a Democracy! Since we’re a Constitutional Republic I can assume we can continue with the business of trying to correct our mistakes instead of doubling down on stupid.

From the founding of our nation. It was a terrible thing that our Constitution made some people 3/5′s of a person.

Actually, it was a brilliant maneuver that even black abolitionists such as Frederick Douglass came to applaud. It limited the political influence of slave owners in the South. Without this limitation, the South would have captured around 25% more House members.

However, without that compromise we would have no nation to go on and correct that fault later.

The 3/5′s Compromise was an early maneuver to limit slavery’s influence and should not be considered a fault, but a tool that was used to accomplish a just end.

MJBrutus on June 12, 2012 at 7:11 AM

dominigan on June 12, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, in a break with his party, said he could support tax increases to help reduce the federal government’s budget deficit…

Good Lord these RINOs are dense! We’re on the other side of the Laugher Curve! Increasing taxes will COLLAPSE tax revenues, not increase them! Talk about being stuck on stupid!

dominigan on June 12, 2012 at 10:29 AM

I don’t have a problem with compromise as long its not to give our money away to somebody’s pal. What I am against is a Bush messing up the Republicans winning 2012 because he wants to give it a go in 2016. This is what some say Clinton is doing.

What Jeb is saying might make sense if Santorum was running but Romney was the most moderate guy and the Republican’s chose him. So this looks to me like faux concern. He’s just trying to mess things up for us in 2012 so he can regain the Bush family throne in 2016. If he does in 2016 I’ll vote Democrat.

magicbeans on June 12, 2012 at 10:32 AM

“Consider the mini-exodus of moderates from the Republican Party, who have ditched the right over a perceived lurch toward Tea Party politics”

I keep hearing about this “exodus” of moderate Repubs, but I’ve yet to be presented any evidence of its actual existence. 2010 actually happened. Wisconsin 2012 actually happened. What the hell are these people smoking?

holygoat on June 12, 2012 at 12:03 PM

Yo, Jebbers …
Your Daddy was NO Ronald Reagan so quit trying to ride a MAN’S coattails.
Beta males make me ill.
Get lost, J Boosh, we’ve already had enough of your wishy-washy, left-leaning preening.
~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on June 12, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Hey, I didn’t bother reading the whole thing, but the reality is a 10:1 ratio of cuts to to taxes isn’t a moderate position. It’s literally, a hugely conservative one. I don’t get how we all can’t agree with that. It’s much better than the original SuperDeal™ before it fell apart…

preallocated on June 12, 2012 at 9:10 AM

A riddle: When is a spending cut not a spending cut?
Answer: When it’s passed by Congress.

First, this 10:1 ratio does not actually exist. You are familiar with Washington accounting gimics? We do not have a revenue problem! The problem is spending (and entitlements, i.e. politician vote buying).

How about this 10:1 plan: Ten parts spending cuts, and one part “baby steps in the right direction to free capital” (e.g. lower capital gains).

RedCrow on June 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM

The republican party is morphing into another version of the democrat party. It’s very telling that even this year’s election is about picking the least offensive of 2 democrats. But then again, all this squishyness does seem to benefit the country club, good old boys club into which you can throw in Bushes, Kerrys, Romneys, Clintons – it’s starting to look as if nothing will ever change. They do keep conservatives around to use as punching bags, though. So you can bet if Santorum and Gingrich didn’t make it this go-around that there’s no chance in hades that there will ever be a Ryan or Rubio presidency. The republican establishment will make sure of that. Hey, how else to keep those young dynasty Bushes and soon to be Romneys employed in the future. Blech!

mozalf on June 12, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Both men [Clinton and Jeb Bush], by virtue of their family’s standing in their respective parties, have a nearly un-matched political pulpit from which to express their views. And they’re using it more and more these days.

So Roger Clinton is giving up political advice?

Or we’re comparing a President to an ex-Governor of Florida as if they’re equal?

Sorry, I want Roger Clinton’s take on this. So he did Coke, so did our current President; so Roger should be eminently qualified to comment, right?

gekkobear on June 12, 2012 at 3:08 PM

Consider the mini-exodus of moderates from the Republican Party, who have ditched the right over a perceived lurch toward Tea Party politics.

Right, it was horrific, which is why 2010 was such a terrible year for the Republicans with massive losses in the House and Senate.

We can’t afford that again, so we cannot afford to go right, we must go left like we did in 2008 when we won huge majorities everywhere.

/End Bizarro World News coverage

gekkobear on June 12, 2012 at 3:12 PM

Democracy IS compromise.

Well thank God we’re not a Democracy! Since we’re a Constitutional Republic I can assume we can continue with the business of trying to correct our mistakes instead of doubling down on stupid.

From the founding of our nation. It was a terrible thing that our Constitution made some people 3/5′s of a person

.

Actually, it was a brilliant maneuver that even black abolitionists such as Frederick Douglass came to applaud. It limited the political influence of slave owners in the South. Without this limitation, the South would have captured around 25% more House members.

However, without that compromise we would have no nation to go on and correct that fault later.

The 3/5′s Compromise was an early maneuver to limit slavery’s influence and should not be considered a fault, but a tool that was used to accomplish a just end.

MJBrutus on June 12, 2012 at 7:11 AM

dominigan on June 12, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Appreciate seeing someone correct the record on the 3/5 compromise. To hear liberals pontificate, the three-fifths compromise meant slaves were only three-fifths of a free man. Of course, the real truth is that the compromise allowed slave states to have representatives both for free men and for 60% of the population of slaves, which gave the slave states extra representation as a reward for .. what? Depriving the slaves of their right to vote?

As an unjust reward to states for practicing slavery, slave states should have had no extra representation at all. The real moral compromise was allowing anything more than zero. If three-fifths was immoral, four-fifths or five-fifths would have been even more so.

But it’s typical of liberalism to feel rather than to think.

There Goes The Neighborhood on June 13, 2012 at 2:11 AM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6