Comments about ‘In our opinion: Brinkmanship or statesmanship?’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Nov. 3 2010 12:12 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
my slc
Newport Beach, CA

Des News: Dream on!

"The pitched partisan battles of the election are over. We trust that the rhetoric of brinkmanship can be set aside as our representatives now reveal their much-needed talents as statesmen to solve the serious problems facing our nation."


ECR
Burke, VA

DN Editors - "We trust ... their much-needed talents as statesmen to solve the serious problems facing our nation."


Thanks for this wise counsel. We'll all be watching.

Emajor
Ogden, UT

Well, what we are going to get IS gridlock. The Republicans are beating the war drum, seeing a mandate to fight without compromise on everything. Democrats are going to be defensive, and have the power to both filibuster in the Senate and veto anything from the Presidential office.

Now that Republicans have the House (congrats), perhaps they can now inform us of how they expect to get the deficit in line, especially if they want to extend all of the Bush tax cuts.

I still don't think they have any more clue than the Democrats about what to do with the economy. Or how to pay down the deficit.

Esquire
Springville, UT

The Republicans will put gaining more power ahead of the interests of the country. Now that they have control over the House, they cannot simply stop everything, they have to participate in governing. I don't have high hopes that they will be responsible and provide leadership. It will be ugly the next two years.

tom_e
Kaysville, UT

With both sides saying "it is my way or the highway" we will continue on different journeys.

Lowonoil
Clearfield, UT

I'm going to go out on a limb and make a couple predictions.

1. In 2012 there will once again be mobs of angry voters who did not have their unrealistic expectations met by the government.

2. That picture of Obama on the phone will be photoshopped to put the cord on the other end and then be mass emailed within hours from now.

Captain Kirk
Lehi, UT

Emajor,

The only real solution is to return our federal government to it's true constitutional limits.

The federal government needs to be smaller.

The gap between spending and tax revenue is just too big for this to be solved with tax hikes.

The political will does not exist to solve the problem.

There is too much selfishness to solve the problem.
The majority of the people will only vote to help themselves and care not for the nation.

Few are willing to give up their benefits to save the nation.

Every special interest wants their "share" of the public money and the federal government loves being the sugar daddy with other people's money.

It's not that people don't know HOW to solve the problem ... It is just that not enough people are willing to make the necessary sacrifices to do it.

I guess the best I can hope for right now is gridlock to slow down the federal government.

silas brill
Heber, UT

"As large numbers of independent voters swing from the Democrats to the Republicans, we think that they are looking for genuine solutions, not gridlock."

It's too late.


"We trust that the rhetoric of brinkmanship can be set aside as our representatives now reveal their much-needed talents as statesmen to solve the serious problems facing our nation."

Wow. I cannot believe this editorial. It's too late. If you wanted talented statesmen, you should have supported them and voted for them.

working class
Salt Lake City, UT

"Centrist "blue dog" Democrats from conservative districts were among the biggest losers to the Republican wave,..." They deserved it! Matheson should have been one of them.

All American
Herriman, UT

"putatively uncompromising tea party" Excuse me? Why shouldn't they be uncompromising? This is NOT the time for compromise (i.e. the Blue Dogs losses). Putative? How? Shame on the D.N. for name calling. The tea partiers are main-street America - moms, dads, grandparents - and they were angry enough not to compromise. Compromise is not always the best policy. How can you compromise the socialist/marxists running this county and the conservatives who want to keep American free?

MapleDon
Springville, UT

"But is that precisely what voters have asked for?...we think that they are looking for genuine solutions, not gridlock."

Wrong.

Many of those, like myself and Captain Kirk, wanted the out of control spending and government takeover of industry after industry to stop. That means gridlock. And we got it.

It's interesting how you point your scornful finger only at Republicans. I have to laugh (out loud, even). It puts a sparkle in my smile to know this shift in power upset you.

You (editors and staff at D-News) probably cried in your Cheerios this morning, and your pictures of Obama hanging in your cubicles have tears in their eyes, but you have to pat yourselves on the back for your (Deseret Media's) efforts at saving Harry Reid's job.

MapleDon
Springville, UT

By the way, I don't recall you (Deseret News editors) calling for statesmanship in 2008. Why do the Republicans have to work with Obama today? It's obvious the American people don't like the direction Obama was taking this nation--and their only Hope for Change was to put a stop to what was happening--and that meant going with the other party.

I might be wrong, but you sound like sour grapes and poor sportsmen to me.

Jiggle
Clearfield, UT

We are going to get gridlock and little cooperation! The ability of this administration to get major new programs accomplished was already limited. This just seals the deal! Political gridlock is supposed to be good for business. If bickering lawmakers can't agree on anything, the thinking goes, they can't pass laws and regulations that make the economy worse. In today's challenging environment, gridlock is detrimental. As much as Republicans want to speed up the recovery process and accomplish their agenda...I think they will just slow progress down to a slow crawl of inaction.


justaguy
Out There in, WI

My understanding is that the people do better and our government is more effective at producing real solutions to our very real problems when control is divided like it now is. Let's just hope that we don't get as close to the brink of disaster as Britian has gotten before these guys we've sent get around to the serious business of working on our country's problems rather than focusing on getting re-elected or partisan bickering.

T. Party
Pleasant Grove, UT

We did our part yesterday. It's up to Congress and the president now. In two years, we re-assess their work. If they don't do what we hired them to do, we fire them.

Repeat until spending is in line with revenue.

facts_r_stubborn
Kaysville, UT

It's hard to imagine how such simple principles of human nature can be so misunderstood by so many. Common myths:

1) Politicians don't listen.

The truth: Oh yes they do, and with itching ears represent the will of their base who elect them. The voters are saying, don't listen, don't budge, but from opposite sides of the coin.

2) To the conservative: Compromise has caused the deficit and all the problems of big government. To the liberal: Compromise has cost us 100% government run healthcare.

The truth: Mud slinging campaigns, gaming ethics, and the 20 second sound bite are all doing well. The ends always justify the means as long as your core principles agree with mine. Shouldn't some of those principles include simple things like frankness, transparency, honesty, integrity, problem solving and thoughtful debate of issues?

3) Being friends with the loyal opposition while respectfully diagreeing on issues is a cardinal sin. Compromise, poison.

The truth: There is less friendship and comraderie in the Senate then ever before. There is no compromise and hasn't been for some time.

The real change would be working together to find common ground. Or carry on...

KM
Cedar Hills, UT

I'm all for "finding common ground." As long as the common ground means limiting the size and power of the federal govenrment and stopping the insane spending! Then we can talk, otherwise lets just agree to disagree.

facts_r_stubborn
Kaysville, UT

@KM

Agreed. My point is not the direction we are headed, although direction is fundamental and extremely important. It's the ability to get the job done.

History shows society, issues, events and circumstances change, although certain basic human principles never do. Regarding the Constitution, let's try harder to distinguish between the two.

Biology shows that people cannot solve problems effectively w/o some level of cooperation and coordination, in a family, a company or a nation. Persuasion at gun point is an oxymoron.

In a strong dictatorship "my way or the highway" is a very effective governance technique as long as you can maintain power through force. It is not only a question of the rightness of your direction, it is a question of power, and the ability to execute effectively long term.

Absolutes, don't work in a democratic republic where not everyone agrees on the direction to take. Better to get 75% than nothing. The current slash and burn political pendulum cannot achieve limited government. The idea that gridlock will achieve limited government is as wrong headed as it is cynical. Changing course requires action and compromise, not stalemate. Improvement perhaps, not perfection. Just watch...

CJ
Murray, UT

Obama is not a statesman, he is a committed socialist ideologue. If you think he is going to compromise and do what is best for the country you are insane. This guy thinks everyone who makes a profit of any kind is evil and needs to be controlled and that the government is the solution to everything. He is not going to do anything other than stick to his radical agenda. Thank heavens the Republicans got in to neutralize this guy who should never have been elected in the first place.

louie
Cottonwood Heights, UT

CJ The president has already compromised. At least he is not totally bought off and brainwashed by the biggest exploiters in the history of man. There has never been a wealthier class of people and you call it socialism to have them pay more in taxes, (by the way a tax rate they were familiar with, since they made millions in the process of paying those taxes). What are you people really afraid of.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments