Who Done It?

Red State Blue ^ | 29th of October 2008 | David Aronin

[DIM1]

Thank you for your kind words as well as for - your - very thoughtful reply!

You had written:
“...there is one very fundamental problem with this statement. There is no definition or limit as to what is considered an acceptable amount of compromise. Such a gray area can be very subjective.”

I don’t think that the problem you are referring to could be one attributable to my statement. My statement is a description - a description of what I believe the founders created and why. If my description is correct, then the problem would be with the vision that the founder held - or the way they expressed that vision in our system of governance. On the other hand, my description could be wrong.

The problem you posed itself though - “ a gray area [which] can be very subjective” - regardless of its origins - might be more tangible when seen in the context of everyday life.

For example -
John has a temperature of 100F, Cathy of 104F. We are concerned about Cathy - based on her fever alone - but not similarly worried about John.
Simon came to work an hour late - and he does that frequently. Mark came to work 10 minutes late, does so rarely and called in to tell us that he might be delayed. We are thinking of firing Simon, but not Mark, etc.

It may appear then that dealing with “gray areas” - i.e. distinctions of degree rather than kind - is something we do all the time, usually without much fanfare, and often with success.
But, what is more telling is the fact that - such situations, and the necessity of dealing with them - are inescapable. They are - in fact - the kinds of problems to which the term - “judgment” - as in “he has good [or] poor judgment,” applies.

Back to my description - to the effect that — the founders created a system for imperfect men, and “[to]do that, and do it without resort to tyranny, they crafted a system that normally requires a great deal of comprise to get anything done.” If that is correct then matters which must - rationally - be resolved through resort to judgment are also inescapable given the system they bequeathed us. And then, yes, a leader must make a judgment at each point in regards to matters such as you mentioned latter on in your posting - amnesty-immigration/security, treaties/sovereignty, free-speech/corruption, etc. In each case one is striving to find a balance-point between different principles and concerns. That’s how the system works.

Then citizens get to make their judgments on whether those made by their officials were to their liking - i.e. matched the way they - the citizens - thought these things should have been balanced.

And, in some of these cases the point-of-balance might not be as clear as it may seem at first glance. For example, like yourself, I am very concerned with the implications that illegal immigration has for our nations security - and I oppose amnesty and “open borders” accordingly. But, particularly when taken together - the effects of cutting and running in Iraq, de-funding missile-defence, and cutting the legs out from under our ability to keep suspected terrorists - and the people who love them - under surveillance - MAY be catastrophic enough - and so acutely so - as to justify a compromise on other issues that also affect security - such as immigration - IF - a solid case can be made to that effect.

This brings us to the problem of judgment in regards to the situation you describes in these term:

“Combined President Bush, Senators McCain and Obama support these issues. It is difficult if not impossible to distinguish the difference between the two parties when the leaders of these parties agree on such key issues.”

One way that might help in making a judgment of that kind is to match up the points of similarity and difference between the contending options and see where the balance lies. You - and many others - seem focused on the similarities. A view of the differences can be seen @

http://red-state-blue.blogs.com/my_weblog/files/obamavmccain1.htm

I think you will find them to be VERY substantial - enough so to justify support of Sen McCain - when match against Sen Obama - by conservatives in perfectly good conscience.

Much more to be said, but i need to wrap up a few things and get to bed.

Best wishes, and
G-d bless and save our Republic.
DIM1

[rebapiper]

The markets are down and Bloomberg’s wealth is down, he must stay in office, the good life off the backs of hard working Americans.
The people of New Jersey and New York have no voice, a vote doesn't count against a stacked deck.
The Piped Piper obama ran on CHANGE his change is bringing back the Clinton administration. The do nothing Emanual lives in a fantasy world, he watches COWS FLY OVER HIS HOUSE, now he can watch the Cows fly over the White House.
Those were his words on CNN during his do nothing post with
Clinton.

[rebapiper]

The threat of obama in the White House and a congress full of RATS have been driving the market down, the news of obama’s win is also bringing down the market. I HOPE BLOOMBERG goes broke, to bad New Yorkers were once again silenced, the RATS in office stole our constitutional right to vote and stop the GREEDY Bloomberg from staying in office. Bloomberg can't get anyone to cover for his corrupt administration, his grab for massive amounts of wealth, his want a be dictator role, so why not go to the same corupt New York officials get them to OK another FREE RIDE on the tax payers back.
obama’s CHANGE bring back the Clinton administration, the very people that sold this country down drain. The very people that laid out the plans and set the course for 9/11/
THE RATS SET THE COURSE AND LEFT THE COUNTRY WHILE THE TERRORISTS FLY THE PLANES. More was to come but they under estimated Pres.Bush and he get us safe from further dist ruction and death. THANK YOU PRES.GEO.BUSH
I only hope the Pres.BUSH will fight back and sign away on EXECUTIVER ORDERS in order to protect this country, protect Social Security. Please Keep the S S out of the hands of the RATS in power.
This country is doomed if we don't change who controls congress. The communist Kennedy clan once again wants to help bring down this country.
Why Did McCain throw this Election? McCains rejection from the last election is still eating away at him. He turned on Pres.Bush more than once.
Sara Pelin was not what McCain expected.
Sara brought life to the party and he hated it and McCain supporters don't want to admit they were WRONG, McCain was throwing a race.
The attacks on Sara Pelin should not go unpunished. Sara Pelin and Joe the Plumber would have get McCain elected if only McCain would have fought back, he didn't and why?
Why did McCain refuse to expose obama”? Why wouldn't McCain come out fighting against those attacks against Sara Pelin and Joe the Plumber?
McCain said lets fight, fight but who was he wanting to fight? Who, Pres.Bush and the American people, that's who. McCain's REVENGE against his rejection over Geo.Bush.
PRES.BUSH WOULD HAVE GIVEN MCCAIN THE ELECTION BUT HE DIDN'T WANT IT, HE WANTED REVENGE AND NOW WE HAVE A POSSIBLE COMMUNIST TAKE OVER, A U N TAKE OVER. ONCE AGAIN WE WILL FACE THE TAKE OVER OF OUR MILITARY. CLINTON PROMISED THE UN WOULD HAVE CONTROL OF OUR MILITARY, SO DID
TONY BLAIR, THANK GOD BLAIR IS OUT BUT AMERICA STILL HAVE CLINTON AND HIS SIDE KICK OBAMA.