For some reason, in this battle, the idea of compromise has become bad. As if compromise means losing political ground, rather than as an agreed upon negotiation to a fair end. I’m a Democrat through and through, as most of my readers are aware. At the same time, the bulk of readership is Boomer and 50 plus and hits to entitlement programs are direct hits to us. I’m pretty sure most of us would be OK with medicare being delayed to 67 or our social security starting a year or two later with a few less dollars. It would hurt our pocketbooks as our earnings diminish, but we’d live with it knowing that we make up about 30% of the population that needs support from these programs. To categorically allow companies like Exxon and Chevron to boast profits of 41 and 43% when most of us can barely pay the rent or can’t find work and then say that closing those companies tax loopholes will hurt job creation is more than just hooey. It is a slap in the face to the poor, working, middle and retired classes of America. So to the priveleged of the tea party, those like Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin, or child support welsher, Joe Walsh, or any of the other newbies who can’t possibly run the greatest country, I say, it is time to re-examine what compromise means. Do any of them ever compromise in their relationships or it is always “my way or the highway”. Everyone in life has to compromise. It is the way of the world. A bissel of this and a bissel of that, as my great grandmother used to say while making a meshuggenah (crazy) sign behind my uncompromising grandmother’s back.