Let’s talk about compromise

I’m getting sick of people saying things would be better if people in Congress or in politics in general would just compromise. Because compromise means different things to different parties:

Screenshot 2016-07-09 at 10.11.52 AM

Democrats tend to see a problem and work to compromise by trying to find a solution by working with the other party.

Republicans tend to imagine problems and say compromise is doing what Republicans want to do. Which brings us back to the problem with compromising with crazy people.

Now you can go with the Ayn Rand philosophy of compromise from “Atlas Shrugged“:

There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil. The man who is wrong still retains some respect for truth, if only by accepting the responsibility of choice. But the man in the middle is the knave who blanks out the truth in order to pretend that no choice or values exist, who is willing to sit out the course of any battle, willing to cash in on the blood of the innocent or to crawl on his belly to the guilty, who dispenses justice by condemning both the robber and the robbed to jail, who solves conflicts by ordering the thinker and the fool to meet each other halfway. In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit.

Or as Digby put it more simply, it’s like taking a date to a fancy restaurant, and you want to order a nice steak and potatoes, but your date wants anthrax and tire irons.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s