Dean Esmay says that “We need more people in both parties who aren’t rabid partisans.” Wrong! We need more partisians. I get so sick of hearing about “bipartisianship” and the need for “compromise.” These are nothing more than a way of saying Conservatives will give up their principles so that Liberals can achieve their goals incrementally.
I would run up and down the street cheering the day that I hear someone in Congress got so angry in disagreeing with another Congressman that he punched him in the face. I don’t even care who’s the puncher and who’s the punchee. I want people that beleive in what they are standing for, and I want them to stand for it.
I don’t want compromise. I want all or nothing. “But FIAR, then not as much will get done in Congress.” You’re damn right less will get done. If you don’t feel strongly enough for something to stand for it, and not water it down in the “spirit of bipartisianship” and “compromise,” then why the Hell are you passing a bill on it in the first place? Compromise is how we get bad law. Sure, we can get bad laws and bad bills witout compromise, but they’ll be so bad, they will be easy to repeal, or easy to veto.
It’s because of compromise and bipartisianship that we’re fighting a half-assed war. “Sure. We’ll let you warmongering rethuglicans fight your war for oil, but you can’t actually kill anyone, or blow up anything, and you have to treat the terrorist like exalted guests. Oh, and don’t interrogate them either.” Have a war, or don’t. Don’t have a war and fight it half-assed.
See. Without compromise, that’s what you get. You get a war, or you don’t, but you don’t get a half-assed war. We either get border security, or we don’t. The libs get their illegal invader amnesty program, or they don’t. Their is a clear distinction between those positions, and it offers a clear distinction as to who gets voted for on election day.
Moderates want to find the “middle ground” and compromise. They don’t feel strongly enough to fight for what they want. They compromise and give us crappy, unclear, convoluted bills that make everyone unhappy. Make no mistake, it’s Liberals that want compromise, because it is the Liberal credo, “if I can’t have it, no one can.” That’s what they want. “If I can’t be happy and get what I want, then no one else will either.”
I want politicians that say, “If I can’t have it, I will fight until I must surrender, or until I get it.”
You may now attempt to persuade me that I’m not always right.

6 responses so far ↓
1
richj
// Sep 14, 2006 at 2:23 pm
I only drink in moderation.
2
richj
// Sep 14, 2006 at 3:52 pm
And some may mistake my not giving a shit with being a moderate which would be incorrect.
3
Patrick Joubert
// Sep 14, 2006 at 3:54 pm
I tell anyone who says that to me: “How can we meet in the middle if we don’t come from opposite sides?” “Bipartisans” are nearly always passive aggressive manipulators.
4
Insolublog
// Sep 15, 2006 at 2:52 am
I couldn’t agree more. Make the distinction. Give them a real choice.
5
STP
// Sep 15, 2006 at 4:08 pm
You continue to live up to your name, FIAR.
6
Wild Bill
// Sep 15, 2006 at 4:44 pm
Ah F’in men!
Leave a Comment or the Terrorists Win!
If you're wondering how to get an icon next to your name, go to gravatar.com and sign up for a free account.
Remember, only terrorist sympathizers don't have a gravatar.