[tpaine]

"When you compromise to promote the conservative agenda, fine.

But when you compromise and promote the left's agenda, that's the problem.
And that's the problem with signing the campaign finance bill, a complete surrender; signing Daschle's ag bill, a complete surrender; signing Kennedy's ed bill; a near complete surrender; and offering to sign ANY prescription drug bill that expands Medicare. There's a difference between compromise and surrender on important domestic issues."

7 posted on 08/07/2003 2:14 PM PDT by holdonnow




justshe wrote:
Well......Mark's argument about what constitutes 'compromise' fell flat......so I think he cut and run.



Weird comment, jshe.

Marks argument was well reasoned, to the point, and backed up by some hard to dispute facts.
He defended his conclusions for a few more posts, then announced he had to leave.

That's "cut & run"? ...
You may have some sort of a dyslexic problem, imo.

[justshe]

And Mr. tp.....you may have trouble reading an entire thread. If you had, you would have seen my reasoning HERE

To: holdonnow

"When you compromise to promote the conservative agenda, fine. But when you compromise and promote the left's agenda, that's the problem."

com·pro·mise: A settlement of differences in which each side makes concessions.

Let's be honest here. Rush's definition of compromise is just a BIT skewed. He's saying "MY side ONLY gets the benefits!" Posh!

37 posted on 08/07/2003 3:37 PM PDT by justshe

---

In fact.....it isn't a BIT skewed.....it is WAY SKEWED. Mark defined surrender...by the left. He did NOT define 'compromise'.