In response to:

Governing Versus Campaigning Party

rosecityken Wrote: Mar 05, 2013 9:29 AM
cont.... watching that show we saw the stark difference between someone who would risk political clout to do the right thing for the country, and someone who does everything for political clout and expediency, despite what was good for the country. Reagan never would have "played chicken" with the US economy to force unsustainable spending upon the taxpayers of this country. Reagan was the polar opposite of Barack Obama. And no amount of revisionist history from the glassy eyed slobbering cult of Obama will ever change that.
There are two major parties in the United States: the party that wishes to govern and the party that wants only to campaign.

It's to their credit that Republicans are obsessed with getting the government to address its unconscionable and unmanageable debt, freeing up the productive private sector to create economic growth and maintaining the nation's military preeminence. But there's something almost pathetic about the way leading Republicans complain that the president doesn't negotiate in good faith. Of course he doesn't. He's not interested in governing -- at least not with Republicans. He's determined to campaign from now until November 2014 so...