In today's political climate, one
thing seems to be causing gridlock, preventing some actions to move forward. The
lack of compromise,
is seen more and more often. In some ways, I see this as two sides, remaining
stubborn to hang on to political power for their sides. Compromise, may be seen as
a weakness to stand ones political ground, or as a political weapon to
make the other side look bad.
Our political system can only
work when a consensus is achieved to get the nations
business done. But, that also requires that both sides are trying to achieve the
same general goal, but differing ways to get there.
But there may be a hitch
in this, and I feel it applies in DC today - The Constitution.
IF, and argue as you
choose on this, there is a choice on the floor between the Constitutional and
some Socialist type proposal. A "compromise", would suggest those supporting the
Constitution, should give in a little to some socialist (or UN-constitutional) ideas. ..... I will tell
you here and now, I would NEVER "compromise" when it comes to our
Constitution. To do so, in favor of what I would feel as a creeping in of some
other form of government or governing, would not be on the table for negotiation. NEVER.
IF, and it is yet to
be decided, the healthcare reform act IS
found to be un-constitutional, and
assuming many on the right always felt it was, then an unwavering position to
oppose the only bill offered up, would likely be seen by the right as the right
thing to do. In an "all or nothing" proposal that is believed to be constitutionally wrong, no
one should go along with it just to show they can get along and be
"compromising".
While all this can be
argued as to what is steadfastly "constitutional" or not, there is another way
I look at the sometimes problem with "compromise".
IF you went to the
doctor for an localized infected ingrown toenail, and the doctor told you that
you would have to have your leg removed, would you be willing to "compromise" by only
having just your foot removed? Wouldn't you object to such an extreme measure,
and ask the doctor why the he/she couldn't just fix the toe? But the doctor insists the
measures offered were the only ones he/she was willing to do. You protest that
evaluation and protest firmly against those two options. The doctor then tells
your family that you are being impossible, because you won't compromise. Then even
your family begins to think you are being a bit unreasonable.
A "compromise",
between two bad choices without consideration of a third option, is NOT a valid
compromise. And THAT is where I stand, as well as others, like Tea Party
supporters, and will NOT compromise on issues I see as "constitutionally" wrong. If
that is being a "right wing extremist", then sign me up!
