Huge gap in how Democrats, Republicans define 'compromise'
December 15th, 2010
12:39 PM ET
3 years ago

Huge gap in how Democrats, Republicans define 'compromise'

(CNN) - Everyone seems to have an opinion about whether big men should cry, given Speaker-elect John Boehner's soggy "60 Minutes" on Sunday. Just for the record: fine by me, no big deal, even a good thing.

Now that that's out of the way, there is one exchange that actually matters way more than a few tears: Boehner's refusal to let the word "compromise" pass between his lips.

FULL STORY

Filed under: Democrats • Republicans
soundoff (11 Responses)
  1. vic nashville tn

    Republicans taking a wrong turn sad

    December 15, 2010 01:03 pm at 1:03 pm |
  2. megan

    I know a few guys that cry when they drank too much booze.

    December 15, 2010 01:18 pm at 1:18 pm |
  3. S.B. Stein E.B. NJ

    Compromise should mean that everyone gives up something or moves to the middle. The GOP reactionaries don't seem to believe this. They have punished those that are more moderate by beating them in the primaries (Mike Castle is a good example of a moderate being defeated).

    December 15, 2010 01:26 pm at 1:26 pm |
  4. PalmReader

    I wonder, Ms Borger, how long it will be before the majority of Americans finally open their eyes and see how well manipulated they have been by media pundits who have sat back and become nothing more than overpaid cheerleaders in championing the divisiness that has overcome America?

    December 15, 2010 01:28 pm at 1:28 pm |
  5. Four and The Door

    John Boehner did an excellent job explaining what he meant by working to find common ground. This is one way to make things happen. Do you want your Senator or Representative to vote for something they flat out do not agree with in the name of compromise? I would rather have them work to find common ground first.

    December 15, 2010 01:28 pm at 1:28 pm |
  6. Sniffit

    "a settlement of differences by MUTUAL CONCESSIONS; an agreement reached by adjustment of conflicting or opposing claims, principles, etc., BY RECIPROCAL MODIFICATION OF DEMANDS."

    In other words, "we're not doing anything unless our demands are met 100%" is in no way a compromise. The GOP refuses to ever make any concessions and operated in that manner for the past several years, abusing the filibuster to halt delay, obstruct and gridlock congress over anything it disagrees with...be it on "principle" or simply because they believe they cannot strategically allow the Dems to do ANYTHING that would be positive or it will hurt the GOP's take-over/election chances. Based on verifiable facts...their statements and their behavior...the GOP defines compromise as "something to be avoided at all costs" rendering the word meaningless and any attempt at compromise moot. The poll above, as a result, similarly has no meaning.

    December 15, 2010 01:38 pm at 1:38 pm |
  7. Rick McDaniel

    Not really......they both define it as doing things their way.

    December 15, 2010 01:39 pm at 1:39 pm |
  8. Dutch/Bad Newz, VA

    Compromise is not in the republican vocabulary. It's their way or the highway.

    December 15, 2010 01:44 pm at 1:44 pm |
  9. Peace

    Just to help Boehner understands well what it means by "compromise".
    It is the dialogue or to make it simple a discussion of two sides who have different views, with an aim of reaching an agreement at the end of their discussion, so can be implemented. This is what Boehner and the President did on the Tax Cut and extension of jobless benefits. Those leaders who don't discuss anything and agree to those they are leading, they give orders to be implemented. In a simple english word they are called "dictators" the term never existed in this nation! I am astonished it seems Boehner is not aware of this, thats why he doesn't accept to use the word compromise!

    December 15, 2010 02:11 pm at 2:11 pm |
  10. Marty, FL

    It's very interesting to note the absence of "man pants" or "man up" nonsense now from the extremes' echo chamber. Coincidence? Wonder if the current Speaker would have been afforded such leniency? I think not, unfortunately.

    Boehner's outbursts would be more understandable if his record actually matched his emotions. He cried on the House floor for passing his TARP bailouts and then hypocritically tried to rail against it as if no one would remember. He cried on 60 Minutes but would willing cut funding from our children's public schools. Come on.

    I agree Boehner's fear/refussal of compromise is far more concerning, as it clearly showed Boehner is not the right person for the job, not to mention third in line for our presidency. Wow.

    December 15, 2010 02:23 pm at 2:23 pm |
  11. @Omegaraiel (twitter)

    John Boner is just happy to help destroy social security with the payroll tax cut.

    December 15, 2010 02:31 pm at 2:31 pm |