How Much Do You Have to Hate Someone Not to Proselytize?

Francis Schaeffer on the Origins of Relativism in the Church

One of My Favorite Songs

An Inspiring Song


Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Compromise? Really?

I'm not naive enough to believe that all the people that voted Republican the other day agree with me on every jot or tittle of my political philosophy. I don't expect that, not at all.

On the other hand...

Since November of '06, I've listened to intellectual deadbeats on the left--and putatively on the right, in some cases--tell me that conservatism was dead, that the era of Reagan was over, that we had to pander to this constituency and that constituency, that we had to give up huge amounts of ground in terms of liberty and fiscal sanity, that we had to "reach across the aisle" in order to attract enough voters to win. That drumbeat only picked up steam with Barack Obama's--peace be upon him--election in '08.

My, how the tables have turned. Turns out that--while again, acknowledging that not every independent that voted Republican agrees with me on all things--conservatism isn't dead, pandering not only doesn't work but isn't necessary, and voters are open to arguments concerning the Constitution, liberty, and fiscal sanity. Not that conservatives have scored the ultimate victory and can rest on their laurels. Never. We must continue to make our case from now 'til the Second Coming, no doubt about that.

But now, what do I hear? What do I hear from the same people that have been telling us, "I (they) won"? What do I hear from the same people that have been telling us that we--Republicans and conservatives--need to "sit in the back"? What do I hear from the people that said they didn't want to hear Republicans and conservatives do a whole lot of talking?

Of course, what I hear are calls for "bipartisanship" and "compromise."

I have four answers. The first is one I heard from Michelle Malkin:
Take your olive branch and shove it, Democrats
Now, for what it's worth, that's not intended for every Democrat--there are some I know and am quite friendly with--but for those who march in lockstep with Obama/Reid/Pelosi. What we conservatives have learned, with pain, over the years, is that when that caliber of Democrat talks of bipartisanship and compromise, what actually happens is that conservatives lose. It is always the old story of how the wife wants a cat and the husband wants a dog, and they wind up "compromising" by getting a cat.

By now, we know better. At least, some of us do.

The second is this:

The third is this (hat tip to Sister Kat:
Every Democrat in the House, I don't care, every Democrat in the House, Blue Dogs that went out and openly campaigned, supporting Obama and health care lost. We are two Americas. We have flyover America and we have the coasts. Take a look at the map. It's 90% red. The blue is on the coasts, a little bit in Texas, a little bit here in south Florida. We do have two Americas and Obama is gonna do his best to continue to divide this country. I have to laugh. I laughed when I listened to these guys, Democrats, Obama and his aides talking about, "Well, now it's time to compromise." No. Compromise is off the table. They didn't want to compromise with us and we have no business compromising with them. They lost. Losers compromise. We don't. We've got nothing to compromise. Where do we compromise with this agenda? There's not one aspect of this agenda that's worth compromising. This agenda must be stopped. That's what this election meant.
And the last is mine:

Compromise? With those who have made a career and/or a sport of trashing the Constitution and doing their darndest to wreck my country and pick my pocket, destroy my inheritance, take away various and sundry of my liberties, all in the name of implementing Jacobinist ideas that were discredited 200 years ago?

My ***.

Pardon my French.

1 comment:

  1. In situations like this and when I am trying to maintain my *ahem* genteel reputation, I generally settle for "my shiny white hiney."