To Compromise or Not to Compromise

[Chris]

The "winning" party of course wants the opposition to compromise, bend over backward, if not capitulate altogether. But is compromise always a good thing?


Compromise is a wonderful thing at times, but a disastrous thing at other times. For example, “Johnny, you split that last cookie with your sister Sally,” is often a good compromise. Munich (I’m thinking 1938 but really any compromise related to Munich) was a bad compromise. Sometimes arguing and fighting is a more wonderful thing than compromise and “getting something done.” Here are six examples of the things I think require more fighting and less compromise:


We do not need to compromise on spending; we need to spend less.
We do not need to compromise on taxation; we need to tax less and tax with less complication.

We do not need to compromise on regulation; we need to regulate less and with less political correctness and nannyism. We need to end the giant, super-powerful government bureaucracies that are not only costly but get “captured” by special interests and then add to cronyism; such bureaucracies are, in their essence, anti-liberty in their wide powers.
We do not need to compromise on the amount of crony capital that goes to politicians’ friends and to politically correct industries; we need to let everyone stand or fall on merit.
We do not need to compromise on how much of the people’s personal judgment we replace with government authority; we need to let grownups purchase whatever soda size they want and let parents be in charge of their own children. If that leads to imperfect outcomes for some, well, nobody ever said freedom was sugar-free.
We do not need to compromise on the Second Amendment (or any enumerated right of any citizen)....


Others, I know, have the exact opposite views to mine and might produce the inverse of my list. I do not reject the very idea of some compromise with them, even regarding the issues I list above, but in practice these compromises usually have been found wanting (more below). Furthermore, I would agree that on a few issues (e.g., immigration) we could use more sleeve rolling and less fighting, and that the middle ground of compromise might be best. But these are usually the rare issues where the question of “how?” is more relevant than the questions of “why?” and “what?” For instance, on social issues, I would produce a more left-leaning personal list of principles that I’d be hard-pressed to compromise on. But, I might be willing to do so with social conservatives of goodwill, on either matters of “how?” or where we don’t stand on a slippery slope.

@ source (http://american.com/archive/2013/march/yes-labels)

[Pete7469]

The repukes "compromised" with the moonbat messiah at the beginning of the year, they "compromised" away tax increases, more than half of what that big eared bastard was demanding. Just one month later, the next democrook created catastrophe and here he is demanding more taxes.

You don't "compromise" with people who are wrong, because you'll never be more than half right, and you don't "compromise" with lying, thieving fascist pigs, because they never settle, they always come back for more.

[Cigar]

The Majority of The United States of America are tired of Republicans crying about losing ... twice.

... and if they keep on crying, it will be another 8 years of whining.

[Chris]

The Majority of The United States of America are tired of Republicans crying about losing ... twice.

... and if they keep on crying, it will be another 8 years of whining.

To repeat: "The "winning" party of course wants the opposition to compromise, bend over backward, if not capitulate altogether. But is compromise always a good thing?"

[Mainecoons]

Compromising by Republicrats got us into this mess. First order of business is to toss the McCains and Grahams and get serious about cutting government.

[Cigar]

To repeat: "The "winning" party of course wants the opposition to compromise, bend over backward, if not capitulate altogether. But is compromise always a good thing?"

Well let's see ... is Filibustering over 180 times in less than 4 years a good thing?

How about Governing; is that a good thing?

Spending years debating Birth Certificate, is that a good thing?

So Yes ... Republican compromising once or twice would be a welcome change for us Adult Citizens who Voted for the Winning Party.

~ Later

[Chris]

Well let's see ... is Filibustering over 180 times in less than 4 years a good thing?

How about Governing; is that a good thing?

Spending years debating Birth Certificate, is that a good thing?

So Yes ... Republican compromising once or twice would be a welcome change for us Adult Citizens who Voted for the Winning Party.

~ Later

To quote you, cigar: "I wish the rest of Congress would have the courage to filibuster this way and govern like adults." http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/11410-Rand-Paul-s-Filibuster-Gives-Civil-Liberties-A-Rare-Washington-Moment?p=244940&viewfull=1#post244940

[Pete7469]

1882

[Chris]

.

[Peter1469]

The Majority of The United States of America are tired of Republicans crying about losing ... twice.

... and if they keep on crying, it will be another 8 years of whining.

Then they deserve the depression and currency collpase that their policies will bring. Enjoy.

[Boris The Animal]

And the Useful idiots known as Liberals think that "compromise" means Conservatives sell out their principles? Please.

[Peter1469]

And the Useful idiots known as Liberals think that "compromise" means Conservatives sell out their principles? Please.

Oh sure.

But on a discussion board that accepts all stripes I would think that the more bright (IQ scale term) can manage to express their opinions without offending their opponents.

I can understand how dim (another IQ scale term) people are unable to do this.

My rule is to not expect people to act contrary to their nature. So tell me -- what is your ability in communication? I will honor your stated position.

And this applies for the entire board, for all members, posters, and visitors. We should be able to discuss our differences without assuming that those who disagree are somehow deviant.

[Chris]

Goldwater put it, to disagree you don't have to be disagreeable.

[Pete7469]

Oh sure.

But on a discussion board that accepts all stripes I would think that the more bright (IQ scale term) can manage to express their opinions without offending their opponents.

I can understand how dim (another IQ scale term) people are unable to do this.

My rule is to not expect people to act contrary to their nature. So tell me -- what is your ability in communication? I will honor your stated position.

And this applies for the entire board, for all members, posters, and visitors. We should be able to discuss our differences without assuming that those who disagree are somehow deviant.

So it's cool for you to insult people who insult people?

I see.

Noit that I care what anyone thinks about what I have to say anyway. "People" like ol' stoogieboy are "useful idiots" in that they're promoting the people trying to manage the decline of our nation. If you don't find that deviant, I think there's something wrong with you.

[patrickt]

I do not necessarily have a problem with compromise but it requires that an element of trusts reasonably exists. When we compromise with liberals, they say that if they can raise taxes they will promise cross-their-hearts will reduce spending. Of course, they don't. If they say that if they can increase spending, they'll reduce taxes, they never do. Remember "No new Taxes"? That Bush trusted Sen. Ted Kennedy and the crew.

Compromise is only foolish when you're dealing with a dishonest entity who will lie, cheat, and steal like liberals.

[Pete7469]

I do not necessarily have a problem with compromise but it requires that an element of trusts reasonably exists. When we compromise with liberals, they say that if they can raise taxes they will promise cross-their-hearts will reduce spending. Of course, they don't. If they say that if they can increase spending, they'll reduce taxes, they never do. Remember "No new Taxes"? That Bush trusted Sen. Ted Kennedy and the crew.

Compromise is only foolish when you're dealing with a dishonest entity who will lie, cheat, and steal like liberals.

Even when they demand say a %10 increase, they compromise down to %5 and get the bill passed, then the propaganda wing spins up stories of staving elderly widows eating dog food so the thieves can come back and demand the other %5.

I say don't give them anything. Instead conservative politicians should be ripping the doors off the left wing media studios and demanding equal time to set the record straight.

[Mainecoons]

This isn't a polite discussion any more, it is coming down to those who would preserve and protect the Constitution and free enterprise versus those, like our resident communist Nic and our general purpose idiot, Cigar, who are actively working to destroy both. I view these people with contempt and understand that they need to be thoroughly defeated lest the obvious decay and destruction of the nation continue.

We don't tolerate or entertain in our home liberals. We understand that they are in a very real sense a fifth column destroying America. If someone comes to your door packing heat with the express purpose of stealing even more of your earnings and destroying your freedom, do you have a polite discussion with them?

[Pete7469]

This isn't a polite discussion any more, it is coming down to those who would preserve and protect the Constitution and free enterprise versus those, like our resident communist Nic and our general purpose idiot, Cigar, who are actively working to destroy both. I view these people with contempt and understand that they need to be thoroughly defeated lest the obvious decay and destruction of the nation continue.

We don't tolerate or entertain in our home liberals. We understand that they are in a very real sense a fifth column destroying America. If someone comes to your door packing heat with the express purpose of stealing even more of your earnings and destroying your freedom, do you have a polite discussion with them?

We both know the answer to that.

[zelmo1234]

The Majority of The United States of America are tired of Republicans crying about losing ... twice.

... and if they keep on crying, it will be another 8 years of whining.

Yeah that selected not elected thing is getting old. OH! wait that was you guys.

I see no eveidence of them whining aobut the election, they hate the policies that are killing growth and jobs in america, but that is not whining about an election

what i see is a democratic party that is whining about the opposition doing what they are suposed to do!

[Pete7469]

Yeah that selected not elected thing is getting old. OH! wait that was you guys.

I see no eveidence of them whining aobut the election, they hate the policies that are killing growth and jobs in america, but that is not whining about an election

what i see is a democratic party that is whining about the opposition doing what they are suposed to do!

Is he still on that? Besides their moonbat messiah winning an election over a turd in the punchbowl that never garnered support of over %20 of republican primary voters (real big "victory" there huh?) they barely made any other gains.

I quarantee that if Herman Cain wasn't brought down by a handful of bitches with ZERO evidence, and a media that helped destroy every candidate until Romney was the last one, we would have a real black president.

Next time around, when the media goes after a candidate I hope the party has sense enough to do what the bed wetters do, circle the wagons and defend them. The more they hate a candidate, the better they will be for the country.

[nic34]

Constitution and free enterprise

You have no earthly idea what those things are, and your post here proves it.


our resident communist Nic

You don't have any idea what the word communist means.


our general purpose idiot, Cigar who are actively working to destroy both.

Sorry, but I'll continue to exercise my freedom of speech and expose the lies and disinformation as I see fit.

[Chris]

So it's cool for you to insult people who insult people?

I see.

Noit that I care what anyone thinks about what I have to say anyway. "People" like ol' stoogieboy are "useful idiots" in that they're promoting the people trying to manage the decline of our nation. If you don't find that deviant, I think there's something wrong with you.


How does someone's opinion being wrong, let's say, translate to something wrong about the person? Hint, it doesn't. Arguing the messenger doesn't argue the message.

[Boris The Animal]

Oh sure.

But on a discussion board that accepts all stripes I would think that the more bright (IQ scale term) can manage to express their opinions without offending their opponents.

I can understand how dim (another IQ scale term) people are unable to do this.

My rule is to not expect people to act contrary to their nature. So tell me -- what is your ability in communication? I will honor your stated position.

And this applies for the entire board, for all members, posters, and visitors. We should be able to discuss our differences without assuming that those who disagree are somehow deviant.
Oh no. Liberals are not mere "opponents", they are the enemies of America as she was founded and meant to be. And as such, we need to be ruthless and merciless until every last iota of Left wing screwball ideology is left in the dungheap where it belongs.

[Chloe]

Oh no. Liberals are not mere "opponents", they are the enemies of America as she was founded and meant to be. And as such, we need to be ruthless and merciless until every last iota of Left wing screwball ideology is left in the dungheap where it belongs.

What do you mean by ruthless and merciless exactly?

[Peter1469]

So it's cool for you to insult people who insult people?

I see.

Noit that I care what anyone thinks about what I have to say anyway. "People" like ol' stoogieboy are "useful idiots" in that they're promoting the people trying to manage the decline of our nation. If you don't find that deviant, I think there's something wrong with you.



You can feel the way you wish, and you also should be able to be civil.

And my post could not possibly have offended anyone with a reasonable IQ. You certainly don't seem to be dim based on your posts.

[Peter1469]

This isn't a polite discussion any more, it is coming down to those who would preserve and protect the Constitution and free enterprise versus those, like our resident communist Nic and our general purpose idiot, Cigar, who are actively working to destroy both. I view these people with contempt and understand that they need to be thoroughly defeated lest the obvious decay and destruction of the nation continue.

We don't tolerate or entertain in our home liberals. We understand that they are in a very real sense a fifth column destroying America. If someone comes to your door packing heat with the express purpose of stealing even more of your earnings and destroying your freedom, do you have a polite discussion with them?


This is an internet discussion board. Nobody here has the power to do anything. If we did, we wouldn't be here.

[Peter1469]

Oh no. Liberals are not mere "opponents", they are the enemies of America as she was founded and meant to be. And as such, we need to be ruthless and merciless until every last iota of Left wing screwball ideology is left in the dungheap where it belongs.

That is fine. Just try to play nice here.

[Chloe]

This isn't a polite discussion any more, it is coming down to those who would preserve and protect the Constitution and free enterprise versus those, like our resident communist Nic and our general purpose idiot, Cigar, who are actively working to destroy both. I view these people with contempt and understand that they need to be thoroughly defeated lest the obvious decay and destruction of the nation continue.

We don't tolerate or entertain in our home liberals. We understand that they are in a very real sense a fifth column destroying America. If someone comes to your door packing heat with the express purpose of stealing even more of your earnings and destroying your freedom, do you have a polite discussion with them?

Really? So you wouldn't have friends over for dinner or something like that if they were liberals? Why would politics even need to be talked about in your house when you have company over anyway? You would think it could just not even be brought up and just enjoy having people over. It's rarely ever talked about in our house if we have company over for dinner, parties, or just people stopping by to say hello.

[Mainecoons]

That is correct. We have taken a stand against progressivism in our home. This isn't just a polite disagreement anymore, this is a matter of life and death for the nation. Perhaps one day you will grow up sufficiently to understand the uniqueness of the American Constitution and why we should defend it against liberalism.

And maybe not. You will live long enough to find out just how wrong your ideas are.

[Chloe]

That is correct. We have taken a stand against progressivism in our home. This isn't just a polite disagreement anymore, this is a matter of life and death for the nation. Perhaps one day you will grow up sufficiently to understand the uniqueness of the American Constitution and why we should defend it against liberalism.

And maybe not. You will live long enough to find out just how wrong your ideas are.

Hmm. Well for what it's worth I'd let you in our house.

[Peter1469]

Hmm. Well for what it's worth I'd let you in our house.

Make sure you make it safe for the elderly....

[Chris]

Hmm. Well for what it's worth I'd let you in our house.

Party at Chloe's!!

http://i.snag.gy/14NRP.jpg

[Dr. Who]

Oh sure.

But on a discussion board that accepts all stripes I would think that the more bright (IQ scale term) can manage to express their opinions without offending their opponents.

I can understand how dim (another IQ scale term) people are unable to do this.

My rule is to not expect people to act contrary to their nature. So tell me -- what is your ability in communication? I will honor your stated position.

And this applies for the entire board, for all members, posters, and visitors. We should be able to discuss our differences without assuming that those who disagree are somehow deviant.
Absolutely.

[Private Pickle]

You don't have any idea what the word communist means.

A political ideology whose aim is to create and maintain a classless, moneyless and stateless social order.

- PP

[Dr. Who]

You can feel the way you wish, and you also should be able to be civil.

And my post could not possibly have offended anyone with a reasonable IQ. You certainly don't seem to be dim based on your posts.
Visceral intolerance of people with differing political points of view is disturbing. Taken to its ultimate conclusion would see non-liberals seeking the physical demise of liberals or vice-versa.

[Private Pickle]

Visceral intolerance of people with differing political points of view is disturbing. Taken to its ultimate conclusion would see non-liberals seeking the physical demise of liberals or vice-versa.

When in doubt, defer to the Constitution.

Both parties have completely ignored that fundamental tenant of our country and it's ruining us...

[Peter1469]

Visceral intolerance of people with differing political points of view is disturbing. Taken to its ultimate conclusion would see non-liberals seeking the physical demise of liberals or vice-versa.

Hey what's to worry about? That is how concentration camps get started....

[Chris]

To disagree, one doesn't have to be disagreeable. -Goldwater

[Dr. Who]

Really? So you wouldn't have friends over for dinner or something like that if they were liberals? Why would politics even need to be talked about in your house when you have company over anyway? You would think it could just not even be brought up and just enjoy having people over. It's rarely ever talked about in our house if we have company over for dinner, parties, or just people stopping by to say hello.
There are people with whom you can discuss politics and/or religion in a civilized manner and those with whom it is impossible. In most polite society both politics and religion are off limits at gatherings. If you were to eliminate those from your sphere of social interaction who disagree with your point of view, you might have to eliminate family members from your life. That would be very sad and short sighted.

[Chris]

There are people with whom you can discuss politics and/or religion in a civilized manner and those with whom it is impossible. In most polite society both politics and religion are off limits at gatherings. If you were to eliminate those from your sphere of social interaction who disagree with your point of view, you might have to eliminate family members from your life. That would be very sad and short sighted.

My dad, a blue dog Democrat, and I are given 5-10 minutes before my mom politely changes the topic.

[Dr. Who]

Hey what's to worry about? That is how concentration camps get started....
Yes, let's have the dominant point of view round up the rest....????

[Dr. Who]

My dad, a blue dog Democrat, and I are given 5-10 minutes before my mom politely changes the topic.
Yes, and I am sure that having him in your life is far more important than politics on a personal level.

[Chris]

Yes, and I am sure that having him in your life is far more important than politics on a personal level.

It's interesting. As a blue dog he's always been somewhat conservative. His dad hated FDR. Neither of us liked Bush, so we agreed on that. But he thought Obama was the solution, oh the arguments. Now he's come to realize Obama's as much a problem as Bush was, so we agree again. My mom just gets nervous about politics. Religion is pretty much a no no.

[Dr. Who]

It's interesting. As a blue dog he's always been somewhat conservative. His dad hated FDR. Neither of us liked Bush, so we agreed on that. But he thought Obama was the solution, oh the arguments. Now he's come to realize Obama's as much a problem as Bush was, so we agree again. My mom just gets nervous about politics. Religion is pretty much a no no.
A pretty normal family, I would think. If one agreed with their parents on everything that would be odd!

[Pete7469]

Yes, let's have the dominant point of view round up the rest....????


Right, funny how the "dominant point of view" that has historically created concentration camps, gulags and forced famines was based on marxist zealotry, who's accolytes to this day have no more tolerance than they ever have. It's just now that the the marxists are faced by enemies they can't tolerate but are armed too the teeth. Yet their enemies have yet to so much as build a fence or arrest a marxist let alone kill one, in spite of our "dominant point of view".

[Dr. Who]

Right, funny how the "dominant point of view" that has historically created concentration camps, gulags and forced famines was based on marxist zealotry, who's accolytes to this day have no more tolerance than they ever have. It's just now that the the marxists are faced by enemies they can't tolerate but are armed too the teeth. Yet their enemies have yet to so much as build a fence or arrest a marxist let alone kill one, in spite of our "dominant point of view".
Hmmm... the suggestion, however facetious, came from the non-dominant point of view.