"it's obvious from the action of Harry Reed and his Democrat cronies that they have no plan for social security and have no plan for Iraq and the ony thing they know how to do is pull the wool over the eyes of Senator Graham." Charles Krouthammer.

And, no, I do not expect immediate agreement between opposing idealogies, on any divisive issue. The whole point was that the cooler, moderate heads were/are needed to work to reach agreement. The extremists, left and right, are doing their damndest to keep the noise and dust stirred up. The 14 who brokered the compromise acted more like professionals and adults than did their aislemates.

In other I made comments, which certainly are based on what I think is right (I hope you don't think I opperate on what I think is wrong), to which you call mindless extremism, which I am assuming you say based on what you think is right.

Understand, I do not refuse enertaining other's advise and consent. Otherwise, SC Headlines would be open only to those who share my idealogical persuasion. I listened to Graham's explanation for his compromise. I asked for your explanation for the compromise. You can call me (I don't take it personally by the way) extreme all day long (again, based on your own reasoning), but I will call you sensitive.

To think that when you disagree with me, I am forcing my version of truth roughshod over you, is being too sensitive. Do you really expect us to live in a world where everyone must agree? No, of course you don't, or you wouldn't have disagreed with me in this forum.

Excuse me? What's radical about it? I am no mugger, either, but I can recognize a mugging when I see one. I won't define extremist/extremism for you- go to your dictionary of choice. I apply that description to anyone on whom it fits- left, right, red, blue, pro, con, Yankees, Red Sox, whatever.

When your vision- and thus, your mind- becomes so narrow that you cannot see the tree for the bark (never mind the forest), when you determine to force your version of truth roughshod over others, with only the barest of numerical majority, when you see such scorched earth parliamentary tactics as just and proper and refuse to entertain advise or consent from any but those who are your idealogical clones, then I am comfortable labeling you as "extreme."

I use "you" in the broader sense- not aimed at YOU, personally, Benj.

First, let me defend myself. I think you read over a very important word "seems." Before you get all emotional and tear into me, take a deep breath and read carefully. I'm the first to admit that I am baffled. What these seven Republicans have done doesn't make sense; as an intelligent person I'm sure you're going to help the rest of us understand. People have targeted L.Graham amongst the seven, because he has presented himself as a conservative.

Now, my question for you. What seems to be the club of mindless, wild-eyed extremism? Thatís a radical statement to make as one who is trying to come across as non-extreme. Is it the fact that I have taken a stand that opposes you and therefore you canít tolerate it? Maybe youíre all stirred up because you are anti-conservative and pro-moderate? If so, I can respect that, but look whoís being mindless and extreme.

"Now I will say this, I respect a leader when he goes against the grain when he has his peopleís best interest in mind. After all, acting on principle as opposed to partisanship is respectable. However, for a Senator to make the people back home mad for personal advancement is intolerable. Senator Graham seems to have betrayed his constituents for his own profit. And to be honest, I don't understand what that profit is at this point." [emphasis added]
Then how can you assume he is acting "for his own profit?" Has it now gone so far, and gotten so bad that nothing matters- to most of the fools in congress and most of the fools who elect them- more than wielding the club of mindless, wild-eyed extremism?

My way or the highway. With me or against me.

What a load. Compromise is not a dirty word, people. Rabid, narrow-minded extremism of any flavor is for idiots. Intelligent people seek compromise and consensus to resolve polarizing issues- anything less just leads to more divisiveness, more meaningless noise and more counterproductive eye-scratching and hair-pulling. The so-called "nuclear option" was an amazingly stupid thing to ever consider. It would damage congressional relations for some time to come and established a foolish and dangerous precedent for bullying something- anything- through the Senate, by brute force.

We need more moderates. Their knees don't jerk so hard it kicks their brains out of gear. I'm satisfied my best interests were served.