New York Times columnist David Brooks told the world Monday that he thinks voting for a guy that has a chance of being accepted by the obstructionist, grid-lock Congress will reap bigger rewards than voting for the guy with all the ideas they work so hard to stop.
Isn’t that like telling your daughter that if her date wants more than she is willing to give, she should submit, and things will work out for the best?
How is giving in to the demands of the Stop-Obama-At-Any-Cost-Congress not like giving in to date rape? Or paying kidnaping ransom? Or negotiating with terrorists? Or at least giving your lunch money to bullies?
We try to teach our children to do the right thing even when it is hard. I don’t recall teaching my kids the fine arts of sabotaging your opponent, then lying in wait to take their place when they or their followers have given up.
I will not reward the well established pattern of bad behavior in Congress, State Legislatures, or anywhere else by caving-in and supporting their chosen candidates.