Tuesday, December 7, 2010


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.


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.



At December 7, 2010 at 9:13 PM , Anonymous Steve said...

I oppose any semblence of what pundits call bipartisanship. There used to be real bipartisanship in Washington, but it died with the Bush-41 presidency when Democrats began stabbing him in the back. They backed him into a corner - he signed their tax increase, and they used it to call him a liar as a campaign issue in 1992 - the "read my lips pledge." Now, bipartisanship is always the GOP giving up their core beliefs and signing off on Democrat legislation.

As a country I believe we are united, but the democrat Party has been co-opted by progressives and socialists hell bent on remaking our country - which means tearing it down first, and as we saw with Obamacare and the stimulus - Nancy Pelosi, et al will steam roll anyone and everyone to get it done. About 42% of Americans self identify as conservatives, 35% as the undefinable "moderate," and 20% as liberal. The problem is the 20% has the loudest voices and make the country appear in disunity, and they're also the ones driving the Democrat Party.

Bipartisanship was fine when you had the likes of Tip Oneal and Pat Moynihan (sp) who weren't out to destroy the country.

At December 7, 2010 at 9:49 PM , Blogger BoRhap77@aol.com said...

It's difficult to imagine that there are actually elected officials who are "out to destroy the country" (as Steve said), but sadly, the evidence is there. There are many Congressmen who would gladly turn away from the traditional ideals upon which this nation was founded in order to turn it into something it was never meant to be.

I agree that bipartisanship is not the answer....at least not when conservatives have to yield to progressive legislation that continues to destroy the fabric of the nation.

The apathy of the "silent majority" has allowed the very vocal minority to impose measures that very few people want or need. Liberals would have you believe that, because of diversity and multiculturalism, America has lost its national identity....and that we, therefore, must strip ourselves of the things that have symbolized America for over two centuries. The problem is...unless we the people find our voices and let them know that American traditions and ideals MUST apply to those we welcome on our shores....the illusion of disunity will continue to grow....and our freedoms will continue to be endangered.

At December 7, 2010 at 9:57 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bipartisanship can only succeed if both parties give their equal share. Than is not going to happen as long as the left wing wants to control the show.

At December 7, 2010 at 9:59 PM , Anonymous SisterOne46 said...

Steve, your last sentence sums it up.

At December 7, 2010 at 10:42 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't think that bipartisanship really exists. I think it is a term used to make the public/voters think that it does. What is really there is political posturing, fraud, corruption, and lies. It has been said that all of this posturing goes on for the public, but after all is said and done, inside the beltway they are almost all alike, and only put on the dog and pony show when necessary.
Steve, yes, sums it up best in his last sentence.
Bipartisanship, as the political elite would have us believe exists, is a very dangerous tool.
BoRhap, I agree with you too.

At November 19, 2015 at 12:18 AM , Blogger John said...

louis vuitton bags
birkin bags
uggs on sale
abercrombie & fitch
nike roshe run
canada goose outlet
ugg outlet store
coach factory outlet
cheap oakleys
michael kors
hollister jeans
ugg clearance
chanel handbags
nike air max
jordans for sale
coach outlet online
ugg australia
louis vuitton bags
coach outlet
michael kors bag
ugg boots outlet
michael kors outlet online
louis vuitton outlet
ray ban sunglasses
ugg boots
p90x workouts
ugg boots
canada goose outlet
ugg slippers
uggs outlet


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home