[Ash123]

I guess by your logic that was a fascist ACT... :-)

Re: me... I wouldn't make any assumptions. I support things on both sides of the aisle.

By the way, damn that inspiring Obama! And his inspiringness.I wish there was someone less inspiring around... oh wait... hmmm :-)

[tomder55]

Ash this is from James Madison is Federalist #51

It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers, but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. Different interests necessarily exist in different classes of citizens. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure. There are but two methods of providing against this evil: the one by creating a will in the community independent of the majority -- that is, of the society itself; the other, by comprehending in the society so many separate descriptions of citizens as will render an unjust combination of a majority of the whole very improbable, if not impracticable. The first method prevails in all governments possessing an hereditary or self-appointed authority. This, at best, is but a precarious security; because a power independent of the society may as well espouse the unjust views of the major, as the rightful interests of the minor party, and may possibly be turned against both parties. The second method will be exemplified in the federal republic of the United States. Whilst all authority in it will be derived from and dependent on the society, the society itself will be broken into so many parts, interests, and classes of citizens, that the rights of individuals, or of the minority, will be in little danger from interested combinations of the majority.

Generally compromises can be achieved on minor issues. But the founders struggled until the civil war to compromise on opposing positions of principle and their solutions failed badly . I think it better that positions be vigorously defended rather than compromised away.

[Ash123]

Tom, you seem like a nice guy but this is a facile conversation.

I like you and your convictions, though I studied history, and could fire back with volumes of stuff on bipartisan inititaives on BIG things I will save us all from that...
I mean it is silly to argue that bipartisanship is... bad?

Teddy roosevelt, lincoln achieved this and they are 2 republicans who did their job well.

In more recent history here's a thought on ONE VOICE from none other than Bush Sr.

See Bush's excerpt on diplomacy below:

George Bush: Statement on the Bipartisan Accord on Central America

(His son has failed at this mission, and has caused people like you and me to not be able to agree AND disagree... it's just disagree... because of the with us or against us mentality of this administration.)

[Ash123]

Anyway back to the point at hand:
(I posted this on the other clemens discussion I was involved in as well).

ESPN - Pettitte apologizes for 'embarrassment' of HGH use, says he mulled not playing - MLB

I think the one who is going to come out looking the best is Pettitte.

Why?

As they say, "It's not the crime. It's the cover up...." that leads to really big trouble and public outcry. I would guess Pettitte did not "misremember " at all... and people will smile and pat him on the back for manning-up everywhere he goes. Bet you!

Clemens is headed the way of Bonds and Maguire. If he had just said I did it on these dates and it was stupid, he would have made it to Cooperstown a lot easier... But it takes guts. And Pettitte was forgiven overnight for HGH. Maybe Clemens figured steroids was too incendiary to talk about.

IF Clemens was 100% innocent, Pettitte would have had Pettitte right next to him. But Pettitte knew the truth was a dagger - and that truth spoken by Petitte has not been called into question by anyone in the court of public opinion.

Sorry Rocket.