Bush scolds balking GOP Again
President Bush yesterday renewed his attack on Republicans who oppose his immigration bill, again charging that they are trying to "frighten people" and calling on supporters to rally around the compromise.
The president pleaded with senators to "show courage and resolve" to withstand outrage from voters in their districts.
"It is right to argue for what you believe and recognize that compromise might be necessary to move the bill along. And it is right to take political risk for members of the United States Congress," Mr. Bush said in his second impassioned plea this week on the issue and the second time that he has accused Republicans of trying to scare voters by labeling provisions in the bill an "amnesty."
There are a lot of republicans that are still angry at Bush for this. Whether you agree or disagree with his position is another topic altogether but this is clearly an example of leadership.
It's the weekend of the fourth. How does crow do on the barbie?
And I wonder why Obama has NEVER criticized the left
White House unloads anger over criticism from 'professional left
Oh when will Obama criticize someone on the left? And will the haters recognize his leadership when he does criticize the left?During an interview with The Hill in his West Wing office, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs blasted liberal naysayers, whom he said would never regard anything the president did as good enough.
“I hear these people saying he’s like George Bush. Those people ought to be drug tested,” Gibbs said. “I mean, it’s crazy.”
The press secretary dismissed the “professional left” in terms very similar to those used by their opponents on the ideological right, saying, “They will be satisfied when we have Canadian healthcare and we’ve eliminated the Pentagon. That’s not reality.”
I suspect not
From the article in the OP:
Translation: "Our way or the highway. Compromise is for pussies."“That way he can hear directly from Republicans why what he’s proposing won’t pass,” McConnell said. “And we can start talking about what’s actually possible.”
I wouldn't go either. They are obviously not interested in having a real discussion. Hell, even if he had no prior engagements at all I wouldn't blame him for not going. Watching paint dry would be more productive.
“I am such a partisan hack that I would rather see the United States crash and burn than accept a deal that didn’t include a tax hike”.
Care to explain how productive his meeting was with Hugo Chavez?
Has anybody thought about the possibility that they invited him knowing he'd decline, thus making some cheap political hay?
I'm not sure that he would have gotten the invite if the GOP thought there was any possibility of him coming
Rule #1 of negotiation: Everything is negotiable.
If you being the discussion with "not on the table", you've already failed at negotiation.
The President and Democrats proposed nearly $2 trillion in cuts over the next decade. Republicans offered no give on increasing revenues.
The one who fails at negotiating is the one who gives nothing. Republicans don't want to give anything to the negotiation, so why bother with negotiating with them.
Trying to close the deficit with spending cuts alone would be a disaster for the people who actually have to live in this country. There is no doubt we need spending cuts, and I don't see anyone sane denying that.
But why go to a "talk" where the people who want to talk are unwilling to listen?
I don't know, and it doesn't matter. Just about anything would be more productive than that lunch he was invited to.
I can give you an example of his leadership but it’s way more fun to watch liberals squirm and try to think of an example on their own.
By the way, criticism is not leadership.
I would have a lot more respect for Obama if the fund raiser was to be applied to the national debt.