Sunday, December 21, 2008


If we (at least some of us) have learned nothing in the past few years, it should be that reaching across the isle is an exercise in futility. Call it "bi-partisanship", the "new tone", or just plain old civility, when you set out to make a compromise for the sake of "getting something done" you will always come up on the short end of the stick.

First, let's look at the word compromise. From our first years on this planet, we are taught that compromising is a good way to settle a dispute and work out differences. I disagree.

I have found that in most instances life presents us, whenever their is a dispute, only one party is correct in their assertions or assessments. Occasionally, both parties might be wrong, but after careful examination of the facts and evidence available, rarely are both parties right.
That means in order to make a fair compromise, one party is required to be a little more right, but another party is required to be a little more wrong.

Imagine two firemen arguing about how best to put out a fire. One fireman suggests that they throw water on the fire. The other fireman disagrees and suggests that they throw gasoline on the fire. They "compromise" and decide to throw both water and gasoline on the fire, all in an effort to get "something" done. Though the guy who compromised toward water is now a little more correct, he still throws his share of gasoline on the fire along with his compromise share of water.

The guy who was actually right in the beginning has acquiesced, and is now obligated to throw his compromise share of gasoline on the now raging inferno. The end result is the death of both firemen and an out of control fire that is now left to others to put out.

Had the party who knew he was right stood his ground, both firefighters would still be alive today. Unfortunately, he decided to engage in a "new tone", and by default he compromised his principals and everything he ever leaned about fighting fires. And for what?

He lived in a world where being wrong was no longer something to be embarrassed about. Media outlets commonly gave as much air time to those who were clueless as they did with with those who used common sense. There was no longer shame attached to being wrong. In fact, people were taught at an early age that every one is an equal and criticism is actually "hate speech". So now, even though he was right, it was acceptable in some circles to throw gas on a fire. So the other guy was considered to be equally qualified to make decisions and never questioned, nuch less ridiculed for being an idiot. When he spoke out, he was pressured to give in for the sake of getting something done.

Too bad for us that this mentality has infected our allegedly representative democracy. Our elected officials are more worried about being called a "zealot" or a "partisan" than they are about what actually happens to our country. Standing up for the principals that have a time tested track record of success and prosperity is no longer an option. If it doesn't bring high numbers in a focus group or opinion pole, it doesn't see the light of day.

Why do we do this? Do we ever get anything for our attempts to "reach across the isle"? No. Unless you count a bloody stump. Democrats learned this lesson decades ago, but we continue to insist on taking a punch and asking for another. In an age where it is getting harder and harder to tell a Republican from a Democrat, I can't help but wonder why we even have a party anymore.

Until we are willing to stand up for what we know is right and start dropping some ideological nukes on the liberal establishment, we are going to continue to lose elections and probably the nation as a whole. I'm looking at you John McCain!


Kofi Bofah said...

I am just swinging through to check out what you were talking about.

I am just staying easy right now.

Too tired for debate at the moment.

Just saying hello for no reason, really.

Seane-Anna said...

"..start dropping some ideological nukes on the liberal establishment..." HELL YEAH!!!!

JMK said...

A part of the problem is that BOTH major Parties have pretty much switched political positions over the last century.

"Progressivism," the inane idea that every problem has a scientific solution, best implemented by government was first championed by Teddy Roosevelt, ironically enough one of the current President's icons.

It was also championed by Herbert Hoover, before being embraced by Teddy's cousin Franklin.

Through the 1960s the Democratic Party was largely a blue collar, working class Party comprised of very socially Conservative working people, a Party led by its Southern Conservative leadership.

When LBJ moved the Democratic Party far to the Left, a lot of those working class Democrats would later become "Reagan Democrats."

Since that time, the Democratic Party abandoned its Conservative roots, while the Republican Party tepidly embraced Conservatism and its new "Conservative base," while its Moderate ("Rockefeller-wing") continued to espouse and work for the principles of Progressivism.

NONE of that was "compromise," it was a planned dislocation of the socially Conservative working class.

All one has to do is to look at how the GOP treats its real Conservatives, people like Pat Buchanan and Newt Gingrich.

Conservatives, for better or worse, have been moved from their traditional Democratic party home to an unfriendly GOP, where the monied interests oppose all things Conservative.

ZACK said...

Roadhouse, we gotta get up on these posts man! It's been two weeks. :)

You don't know how to "micro blog" from the road? I kid, because I love.

I have told you before that I respect you so much for speaking your mind, no matter what anybody else thinks. And you're good at taking my jabs. A very macho quality that makes you alright in my book.

Roadhouse said...

Thanks for the comments. The holidays have kept me away from the computer (kids + Christmas = fewer blogs). I'm considering a laptop for the road. Stay tuned.

Seane-Anna said...

Hope you get your laptop, Roadie! And did I say congratulations on the new baby?