Sometimes being politically and ethically inflexible is the right thing to do.

[Lyric]

For example? I am one-hundred-effing-percent INFLEXIBLE on racial, sexual, and sexual-orientation equality. There is no ethically, rationally, or logically appropriate way to be "flexible" about peoples' basic civil and Constitutional rights. It's hard to find "wiggle room" in this phrase:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

If someone else sees room in there for political parties to trade away "equal protection of the laws" in order to gain temporary political advantage, please feel free to point it out.

And no, I don't think that *I* am the problem. I think that the "flexible" types among us who are willing to put OTHER people's rights and freedoms up for negotiation--but rarely, if ever, their own--are the problem.

I'm inflexible about other things, too! Like fair, uncorrupted elections--totally rigid about that one. Adequate Food Stamps, WIC, Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, and other public assistance benefits meant to keep the poor and vulnerable of our society from starving and freezing to death in the streets. The right to practice any religion I want to, or not to practice one at ALL. The right to know that my government is not torturing people in my name. The right for people to be treated with dignity and respect by officers of the law, and to NOT be subjected to police brutality just because their skin is the "wrong" color for the neighborhood they happen to be driving through. You know--all that "leftbagger", bleeding-heart crap.

Yep, I admit it--I'm inflexible on basic human rights. The problem is not people like me are "inflexible". The problem is that too many people ARE "flexible" about these things.

[m00nbeam]

1. Very well stated

I completely agree with you.

[Solly Mack]

2. K&R

[Fumesucker]

3. Sorry, that's neither pragmatic nor sensible..

And it damn sure is not centrist..

Report for your drug test posthaste you fucking cognitively challenged professional leftist you..

[Lyric]

12. Robert Gibbs can bite me twice.

If giving a shit about people who AREN'T well-off, white, heterosexual males is all it takes to be dubbed a "professional leftist", then sign me the eff up.

:hi:

[xchrom]

4. Recommend

[nashville_brook]

5. absolutely.

[Dappleganger]

6. K&R

[foxfeet]

7. K&R

[stray cat]

8. Anti-abortion people who murder doctors are just as comvinced of their righteousness

[Caretha]

13. Did you notice

in the OP's post there was nothing she/he was inflexible about that harmed any living creature and was the exact opposite of people murdering other people for their beliefs? Or did that just zing right over your pointed little head?

[Odin2005]

9. +1,000,000,000,000,000,000

:applause:

[Redstone]

10. Amen. I could not have said it better, no matter how I tried.

Redstone

[TheKentuckian]

11. Fucking A

[lonestarnot]

14. K & R!

[flvegan]

15. Very well said.

Big REC from me.

[bigmonkey]

16. Sometimes?

Your post seems to indicate that you really think "always", yes?

[Lyric]

17. Please tell me, of what I listed above, which issues would YOU compromise on?

:hi:

[bigmonkey]

18. I'll take that as a yes.

Thanks!

[Lyric]

20. Well since we're putting words into each others mouths,

should I take YOUR lack of a response as an affirmation as you're cool with negotiating with people like David Duke and Fred Phelps?

Because there are no lines in the sand, right? No litmus tests, no issues AT ALL for which this party should stand firmly and say, "This is not negotiable. PERIOD."

Right? Because if not, then it seems that you agree with my original premise--that there ARE some issues that we shouldn't be "flexible" about.

:hi:

Thanks yourself!

[bigmonkey]

24. How marvellously binary!

Do you really think that labeling anyone who you think might disagree with you a monster is helpful rhetoric? It may appeal to a few people, but ostensibly your purpose is to affect the beliefs of the majority. Making quick enemies of allies is not a very successful strategy.

Your response is a little charged. I only suggested that your original post should substitute a word like "always" for the word "sometimes" if that's what you actually mean. I am implying, I suppose, that the use of the word "sometimes" hints at a flexibility that the rest of the post vehemently denies in every case.

[2 Much Tribulation]

19. half a right (like torture only every other day) is NO RIGHT AT ALL. K&R nt

[bvar22]

21. Thats the great thing about sensible Centrism!

You don't have to STAND for ANYTHING,
and get to insult those who do!
:party:



"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

22. "Moderation in principle is always a vice." Thomas Paine

[newtothegame]

23. I'd say we've become pretty damn FLEXIBLE on the whole "All persons born or naturalized" part. nt

[ClarkJonathanKent]

25. That being said...

what are our options? Let's get 10 thousand principled Floridians to vote for the Green Party or something, and then watch an important election go to Republicans (who will make a situation much worse) when it could have gone to a Dem (who will make it slightly worse or slightly better). I know it's a cliche argument, but lesser of two evils is sometimes the best choice. I fight for exactly what I want 95% of the time, but sometimes, I am forced to simply fight AGAINST what I don't want. It really sucks, but we gotta keep the shit to shoe level.