Moving

This blog is moving. Check out Ohio Valley Politics for new posts.

Thursday, August 23, 2007

More Thoughts On The "Bush Dog" Debacle

Of all the things I've learned about politics, I think the hardest thing for me to grasp is that politics is really nothing more than a refined form of finding compromises. That's it, that's the big secret that greases the gears of our political system. It's such a simple concept and yet it seems so hard to do. People believe that to reach a compromise they have to abandon their beliefs. Instead they need to be approaching a compromise as the first step towards getting what they want. It's about getting all that you realistically can rather than wasting everyone's time trying to get the impossible.

What happens when someone refuses to compromise? Look no farther than the White House. They've continually refused to work with anyone they disagree with and because of that they've become one of the least popular administrations in history.

A second case of refusing to compromise is Open Left's "Bush Dog" campaign. They're calling it research but don't fall for that lie. They announced their conclusion when they decided to post a list of Representative's that they call the "Bush Dogs". They want to get rid of anyone that won't vote the way they want regardless of the fact that their constituents elected them.

Let me put it this way, Charlie Wilson is my Representative. I voted for him in '06 and I'll vote for him again in '08. Furthermore every other Democrat in this district that I've shown that list to has found it offensive. There's your research, take his name off the list.

It's been my position all along that we should have patience. They put a six month sunset clause on the FISA act, and I doubt that they would do that without having a good reason.

2 comments:

craig41 said...

It's been my position all along that we should have patience. They put a six month sunset clause on the FISA act, and I doubt that they would do that without having a good reason.

What's going to be different in 6 months? You're post with Wilson's response basically said that he would vote for a bad bill rather than leaving the country unprotected. So if there is a veto threat, will he vote for another bad bill? I think we've all heard that we should be patient for the next 6 months a few times now, I don't think anyone is buying anymore. I'm not saying you shouldn't vote for Wilson, but perhaps pressing him to stand up with his party, for your civil rights is something you should consider over the next 6 months.

David said...

My impression was that he wanted time to consider an alternative before just giving up on it all together. I get the feeling that if it comes down to the situation you've described I don't think he'd vote for it again. If he does than he deserves whatever he gets, I won't defend him anymore.