Tag: compromise

A Compromise to End the Divisiveness

On the morning of June 14, 2017, James Hodgkinson went to a park and opened fire on Republican lawmakers at a practice for the annual congressional baseball game, injuring 4 and leaving Majority Whip Steve Scalise in critical condition.  To many people, this was not surprising because of the polarized climate of political discourse in the United States.  According to a 2022 NBC News poll, 80 percent of Americans believe that their opposing political party poses a threat to the country, and if not stopped, will destroy it.  Most politicians claim to want to end the divisiveness and bring people together.  Many regular Americans are fed up with the division in our country, especially in Washington.  We should all want to stop this division from becoming violent.

In light of this polarization, I thought it would be the perfect time to propose a compromise that should unite Americans on one major issue.  It turns out Hodgkinson was a strong supporter of Senator Bernie Sanders, who ran to be the Democrats’ presidential nominee in the last two elections.  His Facebook page was reportedly covered with posts about a major talking point of Senator Sanders and the Democrats:  income inequality.  For years now, the main strategy of Democrats to win elections has been to divide people into groups and tell one side that they are victims who need to vote for Democrats to fight for them.  They divide people into black vs. white, male vs. female, gay vs. straight, and Christian vs. non-Christian, but maybe the biggest division they push is rich vs. poor. 

You have probably heard Senator Sanders or other Democrats talk about “the top 1 percent” or how “the rich need to pay their fair share.”  Democrats consistently propose that we raise taxes on whoever they deem rich.  They want us to keep our progressive tax system, where the percentage of income that you are forced to give the government in taxes goes up as you earn more.  Not only that, but they want to raise taxes at an even steeper rate.  In fact, the shooter at the baseball practice was shown in a photograph holding a sign that reads “Tax the rich like Congress did for 70 years till Reagan’s Trickle Down.  We need 20 brackets – $20 million.” 

Republicans often refer to this rhetoric as class warfare.  They note that somebody else’s success does not hurt the people on the bottom, and in fact, it helps them.  Most Republicans prefer a flat tax system, where everyone pays the same percentage of their income in taxes.  This still means that people with higher incomes pay more taxes, but not at a higher, disproportionate rate.  A flat tax is without a doubt the most fair tax system.  Unfortunately, there is too much opposition by Democrats to get a flat tax system in place. 

This is where my compromise comes in.  This may even sound like a lopsided win for Democrats at first glance.  I propose that as a compromise, we keep the Democrats’ progressive tax rates that we currently have.  The current tax brackets range from 10% at the bottom up to 37% at the top.  Here is the catch that should unite Americans.  We should lock all of the tax brackets together on a sliding scale.  By this, I mean that if the top rate is raised by 5%, to 42%, the bottom bracket goes up equally to 15%.  If the top rate is lowered to 32%, the bottom rate is lowered to 5%.  The result?  Every American would now be on the same team.

Many Republicans are going to balk at this idea because it is unfair and a progressive tax system punishes achievement.  I agree.  As I said, the only fair tax system is a flat tax.  Hear me out, though.  Think about the results of this compromise.  No longer could someone say, “Raise taxes on that guy over there, as long as you don’t raise mine.”  Very few people will want to raise your taxes if it also raises theirs.  Democrats would not be able to pit people against each other like they always do.  At least, not on this issue. 

This is, ultimately, the best way to unite Americans.  Align their interests.  That way, when Democrats fret that Republicans want tax cuts for “the rich,” people will all be happy because that means lower taxes for them too.  When Democrats want to raise taxes on the rich, who will support them if that also means raising their taxes?  While at first glance this idea might seem unfair, the practical effect would be to unite rich and poor, eliminate tax hikes, and likely end the career of politicians who try to raise taxes. 

When Americans are united on a cause, it generally leads to success.  This is one of the rare instances that unity can be easily achieved.  I do not make a lot of money, but I want to lower your taxes.  Do you want to lower mine?

A Wartime Consigliere

“I think it’s sad that these are our choices.  It seems like we can do better than Biden or Trump.”  This sentiment was recently overheard at a barbeque I attended, and it is not the first time it has been proclaimed as we lead up to next year’s presidential election. 

With an incumbent president who has given us massive inflation, rampant crime, porous borders, unparalleled corruption, and shown weakness to our enemies worldwide, it seems obvious that he should be replaced in 2024.  The part that is not obvious is who should replace him.  Under normal circumstances, there would be a clear candidate.  We have a former president running with an impressive record on almost all of the important issues.  He was feared by our enemies, leading to unprecedented peace treaties in the middle east, and putting China, North Korea, and Russia in a holding pattern until America became weaker.  He was a great friend to Israel.  He fought to protect our borders.  He lowered the government’s interference in our lives, leading to a booming economy.  He appointed three Supreme Court Justices who make rulings based on the Constitution instead of the political whims of the day.  That person, of course, is Donald Trump.

With all of that in mind, it seems as though the case should be closed.  President Trump should be the easy pick.  Unfortunately, there are obstacles that come with President Trump.  He has an unpolished image and often says things that turn off large swaths of the population, including many conservatives.  He has been attacked by the media and entertainment industry obsessively for 7 years, and some of it has poisoned the opinions of many people who agree with almost all of his policy decisions. 

The supporters of President Trump try to use logic to point to all of the great accomplishments that he had in office.  Then, they are frustrated that logic does not make much of an impact.  Those on the left simply hate his guts.  They will never change their minds, but they will feel the same way about Ron DeSantis or any other conservative candidate, so their opinion should be irrelevant. 

The problem is the many otherwise conservative people who cannot stomach his antics.  Their concerns are not imaginary.  His unpolished persona and sometimes outlandish rhetoric contribute to his unlikability in some circles.   These are the ones who prefer candidates like former Vice President Mike Pence.  Many Trump supporters are incensed by Pence and call him a RINO (Republican in Name Only).  He is not.  Mike Pence holds conservative positions and is a very nice Christian man.  This is what those conservatives long for.  They want a candidate who is nice.  The problem is, nice only works with a nice opposition party and an honest media.  The United States today has neither of those things.

Our opposition party, the Democrats, is relentless in its dishonest attacks.  Our media is their propaganda wing, and will stop at nothing to destroy anybody with an R after their name, or who espouses traditional Judeo-Christian values.  They vilified President George W. Bush as a far-right monster, and he was a moderate, and a nice man.  They even crucified candidates John McCain and Mitt Romney as extremists, and they are not even close to conservative.  The media will cover for Democrats who do unethical things.  Then they will dig and dig and dig to find the smallest piece of dirt, real or imagined, on Republicans, and never let it go.  They are at war with us and they fight to win.

A nice candidate has not, and will not work in this climate.  I recently rewatched one of the greatest films of all time, The Godfather, and there is a scene that seems relevant to the situation we are in now.  After things have gotten out of hand and the five families are at war, Michael Corleone returns from hiding in Italy and becomes the leader of the family.  He gathers together all of his top men and lays out his plan for the future of the Corleone family.  During the meeting, he does something that always seemed a little unfair to me.  He tells the consigliere (the top advisor in the family), Tom Hagen, played by Robert Duvall, that he is no longer the consigliere.  Tom Hagen was Vito Corleone’s adopted son, a savvy lawyer, extremely smart, and very loyal.  Tom protests.  Then Michael says, “You’re not a wartime consigliere, Tom.”  I did not understand it until recently.  I thought Tom was cunning and completely trustworthy, so why would you want to demote him?  Then I realized what Michael meant.  Tom is a pretty strait-laced guy, who likes to work within the system and avoid getting dirty.  As the narcotics trafficking Virgil Sollozzo says earlier in the film, “I know you’re not in the muscle end of the family, Tom.”  As much as you can be in a movie about mobsters, Tom Hagen is the nice guy.  This is what my conservative friends who wish we can do better than President Trump remind me of.

This is not an endorsement of President Trump.  I have still not decided who I am going to support.  It is, however, a defense of his tenacity and combativeness.  He calls out the left for their lunacy and he calls out the media for their hypocrisy and bias.  At this moment in time, those qualities are a necessity.  Maybe DeSantis, Larry Elder or some other candidate has that fight.  Hopefully, they do.  We need a lot of fighters.  The people who are hoping for a better candidate are looking for an unrealistic candidate.  They want someone with the looks of Brad Pitt, the kindness of Mr. Rogers, and the magical ability to unite people who hold biblical values with people who think that men can get pregnant.  That person does not exist.

If we try to play nice against people who are playing dirty and playing for keeps, we will continue to get used as a punching bag, and we will lose.  In the past, both sides shared Judeo-Christian values and wanted America to prosper and lead.  Now, the Democrat party stands for the destruction of Judeo-Christian values and no longer wants a prosperous, powerful United States.  This is not the time for compromise.  We need to utterly defeat the left and we need a leader who will push on without regard for what the left thinks.  For those of you who want a nice president, instead, let’s make them an offer they can’t refuse. *

*My proofreader suggested I change the last line because the left might accuse me of making a threat and use it to attack me.  While I think it is naïve to think that the left needs a reason more than that I disagree with them to attack me and try to silence me, I will clarify.  That line is not a threat or a call for any horse head shenanigans.  It is just a tie-in to The Godfather, and it means that we should support a candidate who will be uncompromising on any issue of importance.

Let’s Make a Deal to Save Lives

America is divided and we all know it.  Many people talk about us coming together and finding common ground, but in general, I don’t think that is possible because we no longer share the same values.  There is, however, something that both the left and the right claim to want right now that makes for a great compromise.  Both sides say that they want to save lives. 

Now, a fair compromise gives both sides something that they want.  We should all agree that saving lives is a worthy cause, even if we do not agree on how to do it.  If both sides are sincere about their desire to save lives, they will agree that this is a compromise worth agreeing to.  If not, they never really cared about saving lives and just wanted power and control.

So, how does the left say we can save lives?  They want everybody to get vaccinated from Covid.  For full disclosure, let me explain my position on the vaccinations.  I am not vaccinated.  I am not an anti-vaxxer.  I believe that each individual should have the freedom to choose whether they get vaccinated without having to disclose their vaccination status to anybody.  Some people on my side might not agree with this, but I do not think the vaccine is likely to kill you.  We have to be honest about that.  It likely kills some people, but the odds of that are pretty slim.  If we say that the media should stop exaggerating the dangers of Covid, we should not turn around and exaggerate the dangers of the vaccine. 

That being said, there are two main reasons why I have not partaken.  First, it is a solution in search of a problem.  There is literally a 0.0% chance that Covid will kill me.  You have to go another decimal point for it to even register as a cause of death, and that is using the inflated numbers from the government.  The risk of me dying in a car accident on the way to get the shot is likely higher than the odds of me dying of Covid.  I do not want to take an experimental vaccine if I am fine without it.  Second, it is far too much fun listening to angry leftists flip out because there are people who won’t fall in line and do what they command us to do. 

My thoughts aside, the left says that they want everybody vaccinated because it will save countless lives.  Whether it will or not, they are pulling out all the stops.  They are trying to guilt-trip people into compliance. They are vilifying and shaming people who choose not to get vaccinated.  They are bribing people to get the shot with cash and contest entries.  They want vaccine passports so that they can shun and banish unvaccinated people from society.  They would like vaccinations to be mandated for all Americans.

Here is where my compromise comes in.  Conservatives also claim that they want to save lives.  While the net number of people saved or lost by the Covid vaccines is debatable, conservatives can document how many lives their tradeoff would save.  The number is approximately 62 million lives in the past 48 years.  In fact, since the left supposedly cares about black lives, this compromise would end the leading cause of death among blacks in America.  My proposal is this:  I would gladly volunteer to get the vaccine, and even support mandatory Covid vaccines in exchange for the immediate and irreversible ban of abortions in the United States. 

When you think about it, it’s the perfect compromise.  Both sides claim that the problem they would be solving is a major, existential crisis.  Both sides are even giving up what they perceive to be the same thing; choice in a healthcare decision.  If they truly believe that what they are fighting for will save myriad lives, this would be an easy and heroic deal to make.  If they will not make this tradeoff, they must not really believe that their respective cause will actually save many lives. 

We are not likely to agree on which action actually works, but whether you are on the left or the right, you can be sure that this deal will save lives one way or another.  My sleeve is rolled up and ready.  If you honestly believe that lives will be saved, agree to the compromise.  Otherwise, you know it’s not that important to you.