In response to:

'Compromise' Is Not a Dirty Word

Ric47 Wrote: Jun 07, 2012 12:13 PM
Part 3 : Goldberg is right in theory but misses some important points. First of all, most liberals and conservatives actually agree on the goals for America – freedom and prosperity – but disagree in part about what that freedom and prosperity imply and how to get there. Forward vs backward involves direction, not final destination. Sometimes going backwards is necessary to get around an obstacle to going forward. The example Goldberg cites about throwing gasoline on a fire is bogus – backfires (starting a fire to block the advance of another fire) is one of forest fire fighting's most powerful weapons. Sometimes, fighting fire with fire isn't so stupid after all.

Compromise has always been a holy word for the Washington establishment. But against the backdrop of ever-increasing anxiety over our fiscal dysfunction, most particularly the next budget showdown, the word has taken on a tone of anger, desperation and even panic.

But in all its usages these days, "compromise" remains a word for bludgeoning Republicans. "Congress isn't just stalemated, it's broken, experts say," proclaims the typical headline, this one in The Miami Herald. And the experts say it's all the Republicans' fault.

"The challenge we have right now is that we have on one side, a party that will brook no...