[okie01]

Can we afford NOT to work with a Democrat President if it means we can help the USA?

Your initial premise is in error. You presume that helping the president will help the USA. But the president is not interested in helping the USA. He is, instead, concerned with destroying it. Whether out of incompetence or malignance is uncertain.

So, you damn right we can affort to NOT work with the President. The country's health depends upon it.

[Conservative_Pragmatist]

This is me again.

I have responded to a bunch of comments, but don’t yet see them posted.

But rest assured I’ve not left.

But I am getting a kick out of being called —

Noob
troll
Liberal
Communist
and my favorite, an Indian

Anyway, I’m here to discuss the issues.

thank you,

Gupta Parthameshanki.

[GOPJ]

We need to do what's best for the country... we're not dems - we don't JUST think of our own re-election. Dems don't get that - they're always thinking in the short run. And often in the short run they win - like you pointed out - we helped Clinton with welfare reform, balanced budget etc. and he used it to win. Fine. Dems are ingrates and backstabbers... We knew it all along. So in the long run, we do what's best for the country - and we'll do fine. There's no rush to form a judgment - that's a dem thing to.

Oh and the reason some questioned if you were a troll is because dems have a reputation of being liars... another 'short run' solution of theirs. That one's backfiring too..

[Flying right]

I think it is always correct to do the right thing. They absolutely should start tackling problems now. If the president decides to cooperate/compromise, great. Personally, I don’t think he has it in him. If the president doesn’t cooperate, then he’ll look pretty bad. The very worst thing to do would be for the GOP to compromise. They will lose their new found voter base if they do that.

[mojitojoe]

Sniff sniff