Today is my day for making up words. Deal with it!
So Sid makes a point that Obama is making that move to the center that seems fairly common this time of year as the candidates start to scramble for those people in or near the middle. My comment to him was that compromise is necessary to the democratic process. You need to be able to give and take.
In this day and age that seems to be a novel concept. Maybe it has always been so. In any event I think that one can and should go towards the center on a concept like abortion. Polarizaton solves nothing. You end up with a stalemate. I am actually anti-abortion from a strictly moral place, but in terms of my politics I have been labeled pro-choice (or anti-life depending upon your POV). I think that it is VITAL to be able to cross the aisle on hard topics. Compromise is not a dirty word. It is hard work and I think you do need to have lines you won't cross, but some give and take should be expected. What say you?


Comments (13)
I agree that it is politically necessary for politicians to shift towards the center during the general election. But that doesn't make it right. Obama is liberal. We know that. That's what I like about him. His recent shift towards the center comes across, to me, as disingenuous. It makes him look like a typical politician.
And this probably belongs in another thread, but since you brought it up, I'll address it: I hate the terms "pro-life" and "pro-choice." It implies that those who are "pro-choice" are against life. Everyone (almost) is pro-life and everyone is pro-choice. We may argue about what each means, but that type of language only serves to exacerbate the problem. It may be a question of semantics, but I think in this case, it's important that we are precise with the language.
And furthermore, if anyone labels me as "anti-life," regardless of their POV, we will have words.
*breathes deeply* "Calm down, Toby."
Posted by Toby
|
July 8, 2008 1:06 AM
Posted on July 8, 2008 01:06
Hey Scott,
As I said in my comment, I also believe that compromise is necessary and good. But as Toby points out, Obama's move to the center for the general election is disappointing. It proves that Obama is just another politician and doesn't represent change as much as he'd like us to believe.
I also think that one shouldn't compromise on one's ideals. Compromising when working with others to govern is fine. Meet others with different ideals part way. But if one compromises one's ideals, they've already given up ground. Meeting some else part way is then farther away from where one's ideals started.
Posted by sidfaiwu
|
July 8, 2008 12:31 PM
Posted on July 8, 2008 12:31
Hey Scott,
As I said in my comment, I also believe that compromise is necessary and good. But as Toby points out, Obama's move to the center for the general election is disappointing. It proves that Obama is just another politician and doesn't represent change as much as he'd like us to believe.
I also think that one shouldn't compromise on one's ideals. Compromising when working with others to govern is fine. Meet others with different ideals part way. But if one compromises one's ideals, they've already given up ground. Meeting some else part way is then farther away from where one's ideals started.
Posted by sidfaiwu
|
July 8, 2008 12:31 PM
Posted on July 8, 2008 12:31
Damn. Double-post. My sincere apologies.
Posted by sidfaiwu
|
July 8, 2008 12:33 PM
Posted on July 8, 2008 12:33
Is either of you really surprised that he knows the political game and also know that he HAS to play it? Disappointed sure, I am too, but surprised?
Posted by Scott
|
July 8, 2008 12:49 PM
Posted on July 8, 2008 12:49
Surprised? Nope. I'm just expressing my frustration with the Obama's centricity, to use your word. I'm pretty damn liberal and would like to see my values reflected.
Posted by sidfaiwu
|
July 8, 2008 1:24 PM
Posted on July 8, 2008 13:24
Expressing frustration is good. Using words I coined, also good.
And Obama's move to the center is only a bad thing if he actually does the things he says he's going to do.
Okay quiz time, which would be worse:
A) Obama doesn't move center and we get McCain.
B) Obama moves center and doesn't even try to do centrist things when he gets in.
C) Obama moves center and tries to actually do the centrist things.
Discuss.
Posted by Scott
|
July 8, 2008 1:40 PM
Posted on July 8, 2008 13:40
It depends on how far McCain moves to the center. So far, it seems he hasn't budged on the issues most important to me (reproductive/woman's rights and equal legal protection for homosexuals) so 'A' would be the worst. But your quiz presents a false trichotomy. The _best_ is D) Obama doesn't move center and he wins.
Posted by sidfaiwu
|
July 8, 2008 3:57 PM
Posted on July 8, 2008 15:57
That would obviously be the best, but it's not likely and I knew you would say it was the best, so there you go.
Posted by Scott
|
July 8, 2008 5:36 PM
Posted on July 8, 2008 17:36
And I phrased it as to which would be worse.
Posted by Scott
|
July 8, 2008 5:37 PM
Posted on July 8, 2008 17:37
Indeed, I wanted to answer more than you asked, which is a bad habit of mine. :)
Posted by sidfaiwu
|
July 9, 2008 8:30 AM
Posted on July 9, 2008 08:30
So it's all your fault then. ;-)
Posted by Scott
|
July 9, 2008 9:25 AM
Posted on July 9, 2008 09:25
I liked this Scott:
"Polarizaton solves nothing."
Also liked what you said about compromise.
Posted by Kansas Bob
|
July 18, 2008 3:56 PM
Posted on July 18, 2008 15:56