Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: nyconse
Compromise is not the same thing as acquiescing...

When it's the most destructive ideology mankind has ever known, yes, they are the same. Compromise is mutual. Marxism doesn't compromise. When only one side compromises, that's acquiescence. It's precisely what got us where we are today.

Reagan did say that he would rather have an elected official who voted with him 75% of the time then one who vote against him 100% of the time

Rather than a paraphrase of Reagan, I'll give you his exact words on the subject:

A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.
- Ronald Reagan (CPAC, 1975)

236 posted on 04/28/2009 10:10:28 AM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies ]


To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard

He held to his principles but did in fact compromise...you are misreading Reagan.


258 posted on 04/28/2009 10:31:27 AM PDT by nyconse (When you buy something, make an investment in your country. Buy Amrican or bye bye America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies ]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard

Despite your quote...which is true...Reagan was pragmatic and understood the art of politics which requires some compromise...he also appealed to a broad range of voters...big tent.


306 posted on 04/28/2009 6:47:12 PM PDT by nyconse (When you buy something, make an investment in your country. Buy Amrican or bye bye America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson