When liberals purporting to be “progressive” dismiss black, Hispanic, women and gay Conservatives as mere tokens, sell-outs, “Uncle Tom“, “pool boys”, “house ni***rs”, self-hating, delusional opportunists, how and why should anyone take their arguments seriously that they are the party of diversity, liberty or choice? How are we to persuade those who have already decided they will not be persuaded but dismiss arguments out of hand as “unreasonable”? How are we to reason with those who have already decided they reject any reasons other than their own? How are we to compromise with those who have rejected the concept of compromise, deciding that their side need not give ground on anything? When one side of the argument is a lamb & the other side of the argument is a coldly calculating, vicious, ravenous, bloodthirsty wolf, what other possible outcome could there be?

There can be no compromise with an opponent who seeks only our destruction. There can be no partnership with an opponent whose view is diametrically opposed to our own. There can be no bipartisanship when the opponent is committed to the end of the party. There can be no middle ground when the opponent has pushed you to the edge with a sword.

There can only be war.


One thought on “On The Concept of Compromise

  1. of course like your web-site but you have to test the spelling on
    several of your posts. Many of them are rife with spelling issues and I in finding it very bothersome to tell the truth
    however I’ll certainly come again again.


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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