In response to Marc Phillips’ comments (Letters, Herald, Aug. 10) regarding compromise, I ask, why should President Barack Obama compromise? More than half the nation voted for him (twice!) and agrees with him. Less than a third would like to impeach him, and the rest don’t really know or care. Phillips’ astounding reference to (and apparent praise of) Bill Clinton is just too rich to ignore. This would be the same President Clinton that Republicans/conservatives in the ’90s wasted precious time and money impeaching because they hated him so. He said that Clinton was “outnumbered” and therefore compromised. Democrats hold the Senate and the executive branch, so why is it Phillips thinks the majority should do the compromising? Basic conservative logic goes like this: When I am in charge, you should compromise and do what I want, and when you are in charge, you still compromise with me because that’s how I, as a conservative, think.

Does anyone in this country believe for one millisecond that if Republicans/conservatives held the Senate and the presidency, that they would feel obligated to compromise with the minority on anything? That idea make me roll on the floor laughing. As for the complaining, it makes Phillips’ comments difficult to take seriously when he and his conservative friends have done nothing but complain about this president since his first election. Now, his letter is more of the same: The FOX/Limbaugh echo chamber chorus whining because they don’t get their conservative way.

It’s the reverse-logic of it all that makes it comical. Can you imagine how much worse off middle-class America would be with a conservative majority? I’m thankful every day that they aren’t in charge. Vote against this conservative brand that is stifling America’s progress.

Maurice Harrigan

Pittsboro, N.C.