Quantcast
Opinion

Robert Bennett: Do not dismiss 'style' in politics

Comments

Return To Article
  • Bob K porland, OR
    July 29, 2013 2:18 a.m.

    Christie's style is to be charming to the public, while letting conservative catholic groups (the people who put him in) rule his decisions, when it serves him. Vetoing the marriage equality legislation that easily passed the Legislature and would easily pass the humiliating, forced, popular vote, is pandering to catholic interests, plain and simple
    Cuccinelli panders to old right wing donors -- the stuff he says is so ridiculous that most people under 40 cannot believe anyone could think it.
    In these cases, "style" seems to be leaning on a lamp post waiting for customers.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 29, 2013 5:29 a.m.

    Paradoxically it may be Christie's willingness to work with opponents that will prevent him from getting the Republican nomination. Apparently Republicans don't go in for that type of thing,

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    July 29, 2013 6:53 a.m.

    What about Senator Lee's style of beating the drum of war and then surrendering on television concerning the Affordable Health care Act?

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    July 29, 2013 8:06 a.m.

    President Obama won the press with this Governor pandering to the President prior to the elections in 2012 and after Hurricane Sandy. Money speaks big in politics, even louder than votes as the media pushes loud and clear to the uninformed voters and public who allow this type of "news" at our expense.

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    July 29, 2013 10:09 a.m.

    The Republicans will never nominate Christie, whom they perceive as a traitor. Here's my bet: The Republicans have only screwballs left. They will nominate one, possibly Rand Paul, and they will utterly collapse under a tide of rational voters.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    July 29, 2013 11:20 a.m.

    Chris Cristie may be poison to the GOP right wing. Poison is the last thing he is to more practical Republicans who want to win back the White House in 2016.

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    July 29, 2013 12:06 p.m.

    It’s ironic (given the funny hats they like to wear at rallies) that the Tea Party seems to have more in common with the Muslim Brotherhood than they do the Founding Fathers.

    The Brotherhood ridiculed any who disagreed with them and built no coalitions, and thankfully their “my way or the highway” approach was not tolerated for long by the Egyptian people.

    The Founders on the other hand knew that compromise is what makes a democracy function and they never let the “perfect” be the enemy of the “good.” There was only one time in our history when we failed to compromise (on a really big issue) and it lead to civil war.

    An ideology that cannot compromise is incapable and unfit to govern… except in a dictatorship.

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    July 29, 2013 2:02 p.m.

    Bailout Bob likes to write about successful Republicans with alliterative names.

  • JayTee Sandy, UT
    July 29, 2013 4:49 p.m.

    "Hard-line Conservative": Anyone who now believes in less government, lower government spending, and lower taxes. It's all the rage to believe in fantasies like "Obamacare" (Pelosicare, actually), big-government supposed solutions to problems, and confiscation/redistribution of earnings. Many who claim to be "moderate" are simply politicians who want to keep the party going with more government insanity.

  • FT1/SS Virginia Beach, VA
    July 29, 2013 9:14 p.m.

    @Tyler D, You may want to pickup a history book on the founding fathers, and follow the muslim brotherhood more closely. Both the founding fathers, and the muslim brotherhood came into power thru violence, and both wrote a constitution. The Tea Party has shown no violence, have no power, and hav'nt written a constitution. The Tea Party is simply trying to get back too small govt which the founding fathers intended. "on a really big issue" in the civil war, it would be interesting to know what you think that was?

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    July 29, 2013 10:10 p.m.

    @FT1/SS – “Tyler D,You may want to pickup a history book on the founding fathers…”

    If you would like to argue against my point(s), great! I would simply ask that you do so against what I actually said (i.e., how I said the groups were similar) rather than knock down a few straw man differences I never asserted or denied.

    Regarding the Civil War question, am I safe to assume by the bait on the hook here that you are a “States rights” guy who thinks the war had nothing to do with slavery?

    I’ll resist (for now) the same “beat up a straw man” temptation…

  • FT1/SS Virginia Beach, VA
    July 30, 2013 8:48 a.m.

    @Tyler D, "similar"? That's not the word you used. You may want to go back and read your first post. What you stated was "more in common" that's a very strong statement. Followed by other strong points in your attempt to fit the Tea Party and Muslim Brotherhood together. Your points are wrong, and incorrect! Your assumption "“States rights” guy who thinks the war had nothing to do with slavery" is wrong! Those were issues piled on just before the civil war, and accelerated during the war. "On a really big issue" was the foundation of the war. Now, I can help you and give you the answer backed up by political, and media statements of the day, or you can do your own research?

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    July 30, 2013 9:08 a.m.

    @FT1/SS – “What you stated was "more in common" that's a very strong statement.”

    True… and then I went on to say in detail what those commonalities are. And I’ll stand by what I said unless you have good arguments against those points, rather than just your own straw men.

    RE: The Civil War – Your comment implies that you think slavery was an ancillary issue, but I don’t want to put words in your mouth. If you have a point to make here, just make it.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    July 30, 2013 9:50 a.m.

    Delegates to the Constitutional Convention went home from Philadelphia feeling they had failed. No one got everything he wanted. All felt they had given up too much. Their most optimistic hope was that they had produced a document that everyone could at least live with.

    That was the emergence of compromise as the true genius of America with the writing of the Constitution itself being its greatest triumph. That’s lost on today’s right wing which scorns the very idea of compromise. But as has been pointed out, the Civil War was the great failure of compromise. That’s when America’s mechanisms for compromise completely broke down and the issues were left to be settled on the battlefields.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    July 30, 2013 10:10 a.m.

    They argue that the founders were influenced by Puritanism’s ardent values and beliefs more so than emerging 18th century secular ideas. One such group is the Institute on the Constitution which openly promotes a conservative religious agenda. It’s popular among evangelicals and on campuses of conservative Bible colleges whose graduates are some of its historians.