Purity or Compromise

Elections are fast approaching. Everyone agrees that this could be one of the most significant mid-term elections in a long time. The voters will either sweep Washington clean or approve the new course President Obama is setting for the nation by leaving incumbents in their seats. Personally I hope it is a clean sweep; however, it would be very easy for conservatives to lose this election if we don't play our cards right. Of course that's the problem conservatives have right now. Many are uncertain which card they should take.

For example, if one listens to Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh or Mark Levin, Obama and his crew are essentially Marxists. They are boldly molding our nation into European socialist utopia concurrently diminishing the nation's economy and deliberately limiting our military's ability to project American power around the world. A new global government is waiting in the wings and Obama is preparing our nation to enter into that new world order.

On the other hand, Michael Medved and other center right commentators steer deliberately clear from accusing the current administration of Marxism, socialism and other "conspiracies." Instead they talk of Obama as simply a big government guy, or a guy that doesn't understand the economy. He is attacked on points of wrong headed policy rather than going so far as to accuse him of some grander and more destructive scheme.

Personally I'm in the Limbaugh Beck wing in terms of my analysis of the Obama administration objectives. I've seen too much evidence of a deliberate radical agenda to think otherwise. That being said, Medved and his ilk have a point. Thirty to forty percent of the country are not ideologues. Politics is not something in which they have a lot of interest except at election times. These middle of the road folks usually are politically agnostic but usually display a lot of common sense. Radical positions on either side of the spectrum scare them off. Right now they are most concerned about big government actions and policies from the left that are not doing anything positive for the economy. I think the Medved camp may be right that calling Obama a Marxist turns the folks in the middle off. It scares them that conservatives will swing too far to the right. In short, we lose those folks if we are too strident in our attacks on the left.

Still I have sympathy for the purists. What good does it do to elect a RINO if his or her progressive policies are not much different from those of the left. What's the point?

But then I stop and realize that politics is the art of the possible. It is coalition building. It is incrementalism. And yes, it is often compromise. As much as I would like to strive for doctrinal purity among conservative candidates; in the end we have to build a center-right big tent coalition if we are going to prevail in the long run. If we had a parliamentary system instead of a two party system, we could achieve more intellectual and doctrinal purity within our parties. But with a two party system compromise is the name of the game...darn it.