Angrychair's series on "compromises"

[angrychair]

Remember, when Clinton and other moderate centrist "progressives" talk about "compromise", the first question out of your mouth should be "who is getting compromised?"

A perfect example is Puerto Rico. A lot of pixels and sound-bites and self high-fiving has been happening lately in regards to yet another "compromise" fix for the poor people of Puerto Rico but few in the MSM are asking "why are we here?". It took John Oliver to even get people to admit that the people of Puerto Rico were victims, not spend-happy free loaders.

Puerto Rico, a place that has spent decades being "compromised" into oblivion, where the rich get richer and the poor and middle class people of Puerto Rico get left with the bill.
That is what "compromises" get you.

Coming up next: ACA

[Skwmom]

1. Look where it's gotten us. Though compromise was an illusion. It is what they intended.

[CorkySt.Clair]

2. It's always interesting when people think they know everything.

[angrychair]

3. It's always interesting when people

That think they know everything point out they don't think people know everything.

ipse se nihil scire id unum sciat

[Old Codger]

4. Watching Obama

At first I gave him the benefit if the doubt, think he is a slow learner, then I figured he was a "People Pleaser"it took a while for it to sink in, that was the way he had intended all along...

[Broward]

7. Exactly, just like he tried to "compromise" on cuts to SS.

[Old Codger]

8. yup

All along

[Tarc]

5. Puerto Rico, where Clinton will likely cruise around 60-40

Why is that?

[angrychair]

6. Are you asking me

Or yourself?



To be clear, I'm not hanging the situation in PR on HRC specifically, just the concept of "compromise" as a governing tool. The problem with that concept is two-fold:
1) it's not the compromise but those being compromised in your solution.

2) it hard to see it as a "compromise" when you are always on the losing end.