Quantcast

Comments about ‘Readers' forum: Ideological intransigence’

Return to article »

Published: Sunday, Aug. 7 2011 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Bryan
Syracuse, UT

That budget bill was nothing but political quackery that does nothing to solve the financial problem currently facing our nation. Apparently, Matheson was the only one to not understand that and vote for the status quo.

EJM
Herriman, UT

I don't know what bill you are referring to Bryan but it passed both houses of Congress and included Republicans and Democrats alike voting for it. Last time I checked there were a lot more than just Congressman Matheson who apparently disagree with you. You might want to read Pignanelli and Webb's column. When I can agree with Mr. Webb on an issue that is a rare thing. Check it out.

Esquire
Springville, UT

Intransigence is what led to the lowering of the credit rating from AAA, which will be higher interest costs, which will lead to higher interest the country has to pay to its creditors, meaning higher taxes for all of us, and it will take longer and cost more to pay off the debt, and it will be harder to balance the budget. It will be harder for state and local governments to balance their budgets and thus lead to higher state and local governments raising taxes. And on top of that, all of us will pay higher interest rates on our personal credit. All because the Republicans wanted to play a political game by combining the debt increase with the budget and refused to compromise. Thanks Republican Party, especially the Tea Party. You are working overtime to bring down the country.

one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

Senator Lee is painted himself so far in the extreme right corner that his vote will never help Utah. His goal is to do what Rush Limbaugh the great statesman tell him.

goatesnotes
Kamas, UT

Apparently, one man's ideological intransigent is another's patriot. For me, they're all patriots, except Matheson.

Given the content of that bill and the way it punted to the super committee, what rational objective observer would find anything in it worthy of a YES vote?

S&P wasn't impressed, downgraded our credit rating as a nation for the first time in history, and neither was I.

Unless people stand up to the current state of affairs in Washington and oppose the status quo, like Lee and Chaffetz and Bishop and Hatch, we will continue going down the same path toward fiscal oblivion.

You can call that ideological intransigence if you wish, but that's the direction we must move in because the status quo represented by Matheson's vote is unsustainable.

One further note. Search online for the S&P report about the downgrade -- it's easy to locate -- read it thoroughly, and then ask yourself as a rational and objective observer, setting politics aside, is there anything here with which I would disagree?

When I did that yesterday, I was compelled to admit S&P got it right. The Emperor truly is naked and anybody who can't see it is ideologically intransigent.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

What did the bill do? It promised $2 trillion in cuts sometime in the future (when a different Congress will ignore it). It gave Mr. Obama more than $2 trillion to spend before he leaves office.

The deficit was about $10 trillion when Mr. Obama took office. Now it is $14 trillion. As L White wrote yesterday, that is a 40% increase in two years. With his blank check, it could easily be $16 trillion before he leaves office. That would be a 60% increase in ONE TERM.

That is what all of our Congressmen EXCEPT Jim Matheson understood. All he heard was Mrs. Pelosi telling him to get in line and act like a Democrat.

Where are we going to get another $2 trillion to pay for that debt increase? Repealing the Bush tax cuts will bring in $60 billion per year - if that does not cause job losses. At that rate, it would take 66 YEARS using those HOPED for revenue increases just to pay for the $4 trillion Mr. Obama has already racked up.

Mr. Matheson sold us down the river.

KM
Cedar Hills, UT

ejm
If you haven't noticed...just saying that "it passed both republican and democrat votes" means nothing. When both parties have become the ONE party, the progressive party, they both will destroy our country with out of control spending. Just ask our national bank, the Chineese.
We are being set up by the NEW party. Where the dupes of society actually think there is a difference between the two. Tell me how Obama is any different than Bush?

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

"what rational objective observer would find anything in it worthy of a YES vote? "

A no vote means smashing into the debt ceiling and would make a downgrade to AA+ look tame compared to what we would have gotten had the no's won.

red state pride
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Correct me if I'm wrong but Republican majorities passed two budget bills prior to the Boehner deal- neither was considered by the US Senate led by Harry Reid. President Obama's budget was voted down 97-0 in the Senate. So who exactly is being extreme?

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@red state pride

No, they were debt ceiling bills. This was not a budget debate. Both were tabled by senate vote so it wasn't Reid, it was the senate that voted them down without wasting time on formal debate since they contained the balanced budget amendment which would have required (due to its making tax increases almost impossible) 35% spending cuts which would have crippled the economy and destroyed over a million jobs while slashing social security and medicare. The Democrats should not waste time with formal debate on something they find insane when they're near a deadline.

Grover
Salt Lake City, UT

Mike: You post your address as South Jordan. The second district appears to skirt South Jordan entirely. Is Rep. Matheson your representative in Congress or not? If not, stick to your Constitutional "insights" and lay off Matheson.

Bruce Christensen
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

This is the unedited version on my letter. Bruce Christensen

Sad to see all of Utahs congressional delegation except Rep. Jim Matheson vote for default. Thats what they did! Ideological intransigence is whats bad, not political compromise. Matheson showed courage.

Throw out the extreme right-wing nut cakes and the extreme left-wing loons. Utah needs people like former Sens. Bob Bennett, Jake Garn and Frank Moss, former Gov. Scott Matheson and former Salt Lake City Mayor Ted Wilson.

Sen. Orrin Hatch needs to repent; resurrection may be possible for him. Sen. Mike Lee needs to wake up or pack his ideologically intransigent bags and go home.

What has Rep. Jason Chaffetz brought home for Utah? Nothing but whining and ideological intransigence. And Rep. Rob Bishop caved at the last moment.

Sad day for Utah! No wonder congressional ratings are at an all-time low. Let members of Congress show the way in budget cuts by cutting their paychecks first!

Demosthenes
Rexburg, ID

Sometimes a line in the sand IS worth drawing. Call it what you will.

Hank Pym
SLC, UT

re: Mike Richards | 9:02 a.m. Aug. 7, 2011

I love all the Tea Party Repubs hoping on your moral high horse parroting the myopic rhetoric you hear from AM Radio & the Murdoch propaganda channel. There have been roughly 70 instances of the debt ceiling being tweaked since 1962.

The whole crisis and related debate about the debt ceiling was theater of the absurd. I hope writers for Soap operas & wrestling were paying close attention; they could have learned something.

The most recent demagoguery left me wondering one thing; Who is the Edgar Bergen to McConnell's Charlie McCarthy?

As far as the lowering of the credit rating, it was done by the same agencies who turned a blind eye to the nonsense concocted by Wall St a few yrs ago.

the truth
Holladay, UT

The fact that the letter writer supports the same old democrats and RINOs show Ideological intransigence.

We need real change.

one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

The tea party's last stand resulted in them all going down with the ship.

LBU
FORT CAMPBELL, KY

One vote,

Better to stand for something and go down then to have wobbly knees and never be able to stand.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

Grover,

According to the Constitution, Jim Matheson represents all of the people of Utah. We are entitled to three representatives. We do not have three Utahs, we have ONE Utah. Mr. Matheson is doing his best to ensure that we actually have only ONE Representative. His votes nullify one of the other votes.

He is NOT representing the will of the people of Utah. He is not willing to tell Mrs. Pelosi that he has the duty to represent the people of Utah, not the people of California.

You may THINK that he only represents those who voted for him. If you do, you are incorrect in your thinking. Utah is the most conservative State in the nation. Mr. Matheson does not vote the will of the conservative people of Utah. He has put politics before duty. You seem to agree with putting politics before duty.

SG in SLC
Salt Lake City, UT

@Mike Richards | 8:41 a.m. Aug. 8, 2011

Actually, Congressman Matheson DOESN'T represent all of the people of the State of Utah; nor does Congressman Bishop, nor does Congressman Chaffetz. Congressman Matheson DOES represent all of the people . . . of the Utah 2nd Congressional District; Congressman Bishop represents all of the people of the Utah 1st Congressional District and Congressman Chaffetz represents all of the people of the Utah 3rd Congressional District.

If you are looking for statewide representation, then you might want to look to Senators Hatch and Lee* . . . but a Constitutional scholar would know that.

-----
*As originally envisioned in the Constitution, senators were to represent the interests of their respective states, as a whole, rather than the people of their states; but with the 17th Amendment provision for the direct election of senators, they effectively became representative of the people of their whole states; but again, a Constitutional scholar would know that.

to comment

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