Sounds like Matheson is either weak or naïve,or unwilling to
stand for something and risk being labeled.Constantly compromising
is not a solution or answer, rolling over for everyone nothing good will come
The No Labels movement is laudable in concept, but it is a pipe dream. Starting
with Newt Gingrich and his "destroy the other side" approach, to Denny
Hastert's policy of not allowing votes on legislation unless the majority
of Republicans supported it (thus negating the votes of the minority), to the
radical right wing of the GOP that refuses to compromise even if it literally
harms the country and its people, the Republican Party is what is wrong with the
country. Until the GOP starts thinking about the people instead of wealthy
special interests, things will only get worse and Matheson will be irrelevant.
It would be worse, though, to elect Love. We see the dysfunction of the GOP
House, and there is no point to contribute to the mess.
Of course reasonable compromise is the much-needed solution or answer. Our very
form of government, with all its revered documents, is a product of compromise.
For the past years we have seen what intransigence has done for us. I applaud
Huntsman, Matheson, and all who are trying to get something done.
Perhaps Esquire is right....No Labels may be a pipe dream. But I hope it gets a
good chance to play out and see how effective it is. Something has to counter
the extremes we find in both parties.
Looks like the No Labels movement is the political version of the Coexist bumper
sticker. It's nothing more than progressives trying to "re-brand"
themselves...again, hoping we won't notice what they are doing. Nice try.
Esquire, you are a perfect example of what's wrong with politics today.
Thanks for making Jims point. And thanks for showing why nothing gets done in
Congress. No one wants to be called names and then asked to work with the name
Hello, we need labels. Labels help you quickly decide things. Like bonds. If
some bods didn't have the Label of junk, investors could lose a lot of
money. If someone doesn't have the label as a Muslim: you wouldn't
know to not offer that person pork. People use labels to make decisions faster.
We label some schools as Ivy league. We label some foods as organic. It gives us
a quick description on that item without having to spend a couple hours
describing the object.
Esquire, you think Democrats behave any differently regarding special interests,
a "destroy the other party" mentality, and an inability to compromise
(think Obamacare)?Regardless of Mattheson's votes and
positioning himself to be independent, he remains liberal enough, and fails to
represent a majority of Utahns enough, to vote for Pelosi as Speaker of the
House. House and Senate leadership controls the bills that go before the
respective bodies. When Mattheson votes for Pelosi he completely fails to
represent most Utahns.
Matheson is just trying to run from the label that best fits him so he can once
again deceive Utah voters.The No Labels movement is laudable in
concept, but it is a pipe dream. Starting with the “Borking” of
Reagan’s SCOTUS nominee (LOOOONG before Newt Gingrich), Dan Rostenkowski
and his "destroy the other side" approach, to harry reid's policy
of not allowing votes on ANY legislation (thus negating the votes of the
minority), to the radical left wing of the dem party that refuses to support
BO’s compromise with Boehner even if it literally harms the country and
its people, the Democrat Party is what is wrong with the country.
...like the Fiscal Cliff compromise which accomplished nothing.We have two
very different mindsets regarding America. We need contrast, not consensus.