Stefanie wrote:
Obviously, we'll just have to disagree on certain things.

Certainly. I have some concern that this debate is going too far. Its not really my intent to drag you into a fight.

One thing I do want to point out is that compromise, while certainly a fact of life, should be the last option, not the first, and even then, it doesn't necessarily need to be applied in all situations.

I guess thats at the heart of where we disagree. I think... I KNOW that the political parties encourage these diametric positions in order to present voters with black and white choices. Rove's strategy has clearly been about using wedge issues to bring out the base instead of courting the center. Razor thin majorities are then used to impose policies which are completely unacceptable to the rest of the country.

The views of that other 49% aren't completely irrelevant just because they mustered a few thousand fewer votes. Those people don't go away just because of a simple electoral victory, and I think its both irresponsible and unpatriotic to govern as if thin majorities represented a mandate for hard line policies.

This isn't a war, this is a country, and if we're more interested in imposing our views upon eachother than we are in figuring out how to live together in spite of our differences I think a Constitutional crisis is inevitable.

RE: The Conservative Revival - New York Times