BIPARTISANSHIP

by Two Sisters From The Right

Like most Americans, we have been following the debate in Washington regarding the so called "Bush Tax Cuts." We believe, as do many of our peers, that the discussions often become too complex, leaving us feeling that a degree in economics or finance is necessary to understand what all the options are, and what it all means. One thing, however, is clear. Beneath the financial rhetoric, lies an equally important issue: the pros and cons of bipartisanship in Washington.


There are Congressmen from both parties who cringe at the thought of bipartisanship. Some get downright angry about it. We've heard Democrats threaten Obama if he makes any concessions to the GOP.  Republicans, too, have made their share of threats against compromising their ideals by giving in to Democrats. But....how do the people feel about the need for bipartisanship in the halls of Congress?


We have found that there at times when one can get an idea about what people are thinking by reading the comments section at the end of articles. Some are a waste of time, but others are well expressed and thought provoking. Many address the issue of both parties working together for the good of the country. They tell us what the people are thinking and enable us to look at important issues from all sides. Such is the case with this bipartisanship that Washington is requesting.

"Bipartisanship.

Sounds like a great concept.  At one time, it actually existed in the halls of power in Washington.


Bipartisanship helped President Ronald Reagan get his tax cuts through a reluctant, Democratic-controlled Congress in 1981.


In those days, the Republican Party — in the minority in Congress just like it is today — was led by GOP leader Robert Michel of Illinois, a Congressman who believed that building coalitions was the best way to serve the best interests of a nation."

George W. Bush was this writer's Governor before he became her president. Much of his success as Governor was due to the fact that he was able to work well with both parties in Texas. However, when he arrived in Washington he found that bipartisanship in D.C. is completetely different. Here is a glimpse of GWB's take on bipartisanship, spoken in his own words towards the end of his presidency.


"I did not really anticipate the harshness of the rhetoric here. It was so different than Texas. Texas -- you know, we had our differences, but we treated each other with respect. Here, some, if they can't out-argue you on a policy will just start tearing you down. And I was -- I will not miss the name-calling and the way that some treat the President and others.


And, you know, I -- look, I don't -- I was partially responsible for the tone; I worked to change the tone. We actually got a lot of bipartisan legislation done. But in the course of my presidency, I have never used the office of the President to denigrate and call somebody out or call them names."


Yet today, when our country finds itself in dire straits, the opposition to working coalitions betwen the parties continue by members of both parties. As conservative Republicans, these two sisters' idea of a perfect world is one in which everyone abides by the Constitution and respects the vision of our Founding Fathers, while liberals and the left do not exist. But, that is just a pipe dream, and we must face the fact that we live in the real world. We reside in a country where a two party system dominates the voting, and hopefully the views of all voters are represented by one or the other.


We believe that there are times when it is absolutely necessary for the good of the country for members of both parties and the President to make concessions, in spite of the fact that they disagree on issues. What is most important is America's survival.


It is just as important for the citizens to stand united, be it against a common enemy or decisions made by those whom we elected to represent us and our interests.


Although bipartisanship has worked in the past, we are hesitant to trust it in the present political climate. Why? Because we have seen our freedoms and our personal assets threatened by socialist ideals of government intrusion and distribution of wealth; because we have experienced an unparalleled growth in government size and spending; because we are experiencing a Socialist president in the White House - a man raised, tutored, and guided by Socialist ideology. We can sit here and fill this page with all the reasons why we oppose the Obama administration, but it all boils down to one word: TRUST. We simply do not trust him to keep his word.


Now that the political landscape in Washington has changed, do we -- can we -- trust this president enough to make concessions and build a coalition that will save the country?


We simply cannot answer that question, but we hope that you, the readers, think about it and take the time to let us know your opinion. We invite you to share your ideas about where America went wrong and what we can do to correct the things that detract from our nation's greatness. Somewhere, somehow, something will have to change if we are to make America great once again.


We love our country with great fervor, and we're not ready to throw in the towel yet. This is why we blog. It is why we email, and Facebook. We are just two over-the-hill sisters using a keyboard as our weapon of choice. We will continue to fight, one word at a time.


































____________________________________________________