- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Bipartisanship - meeting half way and compromising - is fine.
If that is something the Dems really want, I would think they would clearly define their 'side' and saying that is the point from which they will start to the middle. I don't see that happening. All I see is a call to drop the bickering. That, in itself, is relatively worthless when it isn't mutual. Just as bickering is worthless in itself as well.
Is the call for bipartisanship coming from both parties? Why isn't the party that lost clamoring louder for bipartisanship? Don't they want to do their best to keep their priorities in the forefront? To get things done they determine important? From what I read, the call for bipartisanship is coming pretty much from the Democrats.
But back to 'define the starting point' from which you will compromise. There is something else I don't really see being expressed by many. One of the tenets of our republic is that the majority will not deny the rights of the minority (part of the reason why Wyoming has two Senators just like California). Has anyone here come across an elected official stating that bipartisanship is fine and dandy as long as the middle doesn't trample the rights of the minority? That there is a Middle that isn't the really the middle? That there are unacceptable compromises?
