How many of you understand the difference between pragmatic and principle? Would we be better off if

[In Truth We Trust]

we supported our principles or succumbed to pragmatism?

For me the answer is: "Give me principle or give me DLC Bullshit"

[havocmom]

1. There is room in the middle

That used to be what politics in America was about.

One without the other is pointless.

[In Truth We Trust]

3. You can't have a middle if the majority of both parties are on the right. I do understand your point

though and in the past it would be more accurate.

[havocmom]

6. 'in the past' is why I used past tense

;)

I am so old, I remember the term 'the loyal opposition' being used with honesty and affection during substantive congressional debates.

We've come a long way, baby, and it hasn't been toward the greater good.

And the middle I was referring to was the ground between pragmatic and ideological, not left and right.
The lack of that middle ground between the practical and the ideal is a major problem for both the left and the right these days.

edited for typos

[In Truth We Trust]

12. Well said. I apologize if I implied a correction. Not my intention, I agreee completely with what

you've stated.
Btw, I too can remember those day's where respect and civility was commonplace in debate. Now we argue over non binding resolutions and I can't even recall the last time we witnessed a true debate of substance. All we get now are platitudes and distractions.

[havocmom]

14. Don't know about you, but I am tired of the way things have degenerated.

Too many don't even recall a time when debate was real.

It's all "TASTES GREAT" and "LESS FILLING" now. Makes me really sad and not especially hopeful.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

2. “In matters of conscience, the law of majority has no place.” Gandhi

[ThomCat]

5. Awesome quote, and necessary point!

:applause:

[LoZoccolo]

4. That is a false opposition.

You should be pragmatic in pursuing your principles. If you are not, you will not see them realized, the notion that they are really your principles can be called into question.

[ThomCat]

8. If you determine your principles based on what's pragmatic

you never accomplish anything significant. You never stand for anything unless you already know for sure it's something you can accomplish.

The world would be a very miserable place if everyone thought that you should always be pragmatic.

[havocmom]

10. Look at it this way: Principals = long term goals

pragmatic = the stages to get to those goals.

Real life.

[ThomCat]

11. I agree.

My point is that the pricipals need to come first.

[In Truth We Trust]

13. I appreciate all the responses in this thread. LoZoccolo makes a very valid point but Thomcat's post

to which I am replying, seems to me to be the ultimate arbiter of which path one should take.

Life is full of these dilemmas and necessary decisions.

Iraq war: stay or go or timetable.
Electronic voting: HCPB's or audits and/or more of the same.
Party affiliation: Dems or Greens.S
Snickers: Homophobic or condescending of homophobe's
Impeachment: Off the table or Do It NOW!

There are so many many more.....

[havocmom]

9. Excellant

Nader is a case in point ;) His taking $$ from the GOP to affect change in the DEMs is just the most glaring example.

[Radical Activist]

7. Sometimes you can do both.

Barack Obama allows me to support a progressive that reflects my principles but he also has a serious chance at winning.

[manic expression]

15. Don't let them win

Do what you can so that your principles will determine the future.