Re: [RETIREMENT] Nick Demola

> Got me to thinking it's about time we set aside this whole "My team,
> your team" mentality, because it's obviously not cutting it... For
> example, I'm an athiest, and believe that morality is relative,
> putting me on the liberal side, but I believe that people should be
> free to try to own firearms, putting me on the conservative side...
> There's obviously more than one team out there, and the two party
> system - the act of assuming that whoever doesn't agree with you on an
> issue is on the other team - just doesn't work any more.

Here's the problem, Mat. What you're asking for is, basically, a
moderate and centrist party. The Compromise Party. That doesn't work
for me. Moderates aren't classically willing to fight for what they
believe in. That's why they're moderates. Some examples...

Moderate Repulicans are pro-2nd Amendment and don't want guns banned,
but they're willing to accept incremental legislation like licensing,
ballistic fingerprinting, limits to how many guns can be owned, etc.
Essentially, they won't accept an outright ban but they'll accept a
de-facto ban for many people by virtue of "common-sense" legislation.

Moderate Democrats don't want Roe v Wade overturned, but they're
willing to accept incremental legislation like the partial-birth
abortion ban, parental advisement laws, etc. Essentially, they won't
accept an outright ban of abortion but they'll accept a de-facto ban
for many people by virtue of "common-sense" legislation.

I want legislators that are willing to fight for what they believe in,
i.e. the things that I believe in. I don't want legislators going in
willing and ready to compromise and give away, bit by bit, the
liberties with which I've entrusted them.

Get my drift?

Greg