At present Id like to point out something that I would assume is obvious, but, as recent news has shown, is not. You never want to put an extremist in a position of leadership. An extremist will never compromise, will never negotiate, and will never change their mind, even if there is a lot of proof that their position is wrong - or that their position will cause the exact opposite of what they want! Extremists are inherently dangerous to any system they are in, and the more power they have, the more dangerous they are. To hope that an extremist will change is to be sorely deluded. There is no instance of an extremist or fanatic that serves the long-term good. Congress is now run by people who think that compromise is a dirty word. That anything that involves reaching across the aisle and serious give and take is wrong. This understanding is inherently dangerous to the nation - and electing people who will continue this mentality is to continue to put our nation in danger. Voting for people who are ideologically pure or wont compromise is exactly what the nation does not need. Ideology doesnt make for good policy - facts do. Sincere beliefs dont make for good policy - facts do. What sounds good doesnt make for good policy - facts do. Refusal to compromise doesnt make for good policy - it impedes the development of good policy, and poses a danger to the system. In American politics, there are extremists on both sides - left and right. However, there is a group which has, more than anything else, supported the doctrines of ideological purity and the refusal to compromise. They have promoted this in their drives to get elected, touted this as a virtue, and have been brazen in their desire that they would rather shut down the government if they cant have their way. While the extremists of both parties should go - left and right - any group that allows the extremists to take over needs to be held responsible, and to enact such reforms as to ensure it cannot happen again.
Posted on: Sun, 12 Oct 2014 02:51:24 +0000