Over the last 6 years I think Al Gore and I have both come to a realization: there is, within the Republican party, some really nasty, I'd almost say evil if I believed in evil, people. They torture, lie to get into an invasion, destroy the Constitution, steal elections and basically lie at every opportunity. They are driven by raw greed. They don't even stand for traditional Republican values anymore, which is why they aren't too popular even in Republican districts.

I have accepted that there is no compromise with those people. There is no common ground to compromise on. Israel and Palestine are fighting over land and the right for their two nations to exist. Republicans aren't even fighting for anything so noble. They are fighting for another million dollars in their bank accounts and another year of weilding raw power. They don't even accomplish anything with that power. They let Americans drown in New Orleans while they party it up on vacation. The blatantly profit off the deaths of our soldiers. They accomplish nothing by their own self interest. I cannot compromise with them.

When I meet a Republican with real integrity and ideas (generally these people HATE Bush with a passion that rivals mine) I usually have an excellent conversation with them, finding all sorts of common ground. Similarly, I can have an excellent conversation with my Shi'ite, pro-Palestine friend about Israel because we are after solutions. Bush Republicans don't want solutions because within those solutions are a loss of their power. They depend on fear and instability to keep power. Much like many dictators of the past. Much like al-Qaeda. Desmond Tutu said it when he said that for non-violence to work there has to be a common level of humanity. If one side lacks that most basic level of humanity (we can discuss whether "humanity" is the right word!) then non-violence fails. Even Ghandi said that violent action is better than inaction, though, unlike Tutu, he alway thought non-violence is better.

I don't advocate actual violence, at least not very often. Fighting al-Qaeda I do think military action was and is necessary. But in general I believe non-violence is better. But I still think when one side is so out for raw greed and power and so willing to kill and torture, then it really is a war. I look over history, particularly the history of Jews, and I see how often belief that the other side really can't be THAT bad is wrong and leads to a sin of omission: allowing genocide to occur. King Leopold was able to kill possibly as many as 10 million people in the Congo because no one was willing to belive a "civilized" European would be that brutal. But he was. For years people denied despite mounting evidence what Hitler and Stalin were doing. But they did it.

I don't believe the Republicans are at the level of Stalin or Hitler. But they are on their way to at least being a King Leopold if not actually a Stalin. In all these cases, including Bush and Cheney and their strongest supporters, their own raw greed, for power and/or riches, supercedes all other concerns including the well being and live of millions of people. I do not see that as a force I can find common ground with.

My fights within the Democratic Party are vastly different. I maintain a respect, even sometimes friendship, with those I am opposing. I am working with people who were pissed as hell with me mere months ago because basically we DO have common ground. I am willing to dig in my heels and fight when I think it is important, but I spend at least as much time looking for and working with that common ground. My wife and I often are bridging two factions in a club, usually solidly with one side, but usually with good contact with and mutual respect with the other side. Here I see real fights, but fights among sometimes allies rather than a fundamental fight against someone who may yet point a gun at me simply so they can make a few extra dollars profit.