Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
There's something about the hours before an all-night drive that leaves me restless and even a little excited, like a kid before a big trip. I should be sleeping,…and in a little while I will do just that. But for now, my eyes keep popping open like one of those little dolls my sister had years ago. You remember them, don't you? The eyes click open every time she is upright (the doll that is, not my sister). So I've carted the laptop into the truck stop restaurant, stuffed a "Grand Slam Breakfast" down my neck, and am now enjoying some fresh fruit and coffee while thinking about what every other trucker thinks about; Ideological Purity.
You should hear them on the CB these days:
"Man, these fuel prices are killing me! When the [deleted] are we gonna start drilling for our own [deleted] [deleted] [deleting deleted] oil?"
"Well driver, ol' what's his [deleted] from Texas wants to start drilling now, but he's pro-life and I hear tell he prays a lot, and he went and said something or other 'bout overhauling Social Security too."
"Well, I'm a [deleted] independent ya know, and that kind of [deletable] scares the biscuits-n-gravy outta me… so I'll stick with 4 bucks per [deleting] gallon of fuel. We independent voters would rather go out of business than have a religious guy in the White House."
Of course, that conversation is as fictional as shovel-ready jobs, but you wouldn't know it if you listen to those who fret that we may lose the independent vote if we nominate anyone other than a candidate whose principles appear to be planted firmly in the shifting breeze.
Now, I usually direct my fire at the left in general and President Obama in particular, since it is they who are taking a bulldozer to the country. I have little use for people who are ostensibly on the right, yet who spend their days making a name for themselves by taking pot shots at conservatives. It might get you a cozy gig on a network or a magazine, but if such an arrangement requires regular acts of polemical fratricide, I'd rather drive a truck. Besides which, I know of no instance in history where anyone won a war by shooting at his own side.
But I must admit that I'm growing less disposed to being lectured to on the perils of "ideological purity" and its deleterious effect on political independents who are even now executing a perfect stampede away from Barack Obama, a president who is to economic literacy what Bill Clinton was to the Ten Commandments. Even the term, "ideological purity," contains a sort of derisive assumption of irrationality, and after all, what independent minded person would want to associate with a fanatic? Is it an irrational act of "purity" to insist that at a time when the country is going over a financial cliff, that we ought to apply the brakes to spending as opposed to merely cruising over the cliff at a slower speed? When did moderation in pursuit of national suicide become a virtue worthy of the independent vote?
Are those conservatives who favor a return to constitutional governance guilty of ideological purity? Were the Founders purists too, and therefore to be disavowed? Should Patrick Henry have boldly staked his ground and said, "Give me liberty, or give me something else?" Are independents so put off by concepts like individual liberty, separation of powers, and enumerated powers that if Republicans nominate a candidate who takes his oath of fidelity to the Constitution seriously, it will send them running back to the economic wrecking ball known as the Obama Administration and its star-studded cast of authoritarian freaks?
On the contrary, independent voters spoke loudly last November and said that the whole redistributive approach to governance has gone over like a pregnant pole vaulter. Republicans swept not only the House of Representatives, but governorships, statehouses, and local offices as well. The left suffered an enormous and comprehensive rebuke which was reinforced just recently with the decisive reelection of Governor Jindal in my home state of Louisiana. Independents have experienced the unvarnished Utopia of the collectivist in recent years, and they now look for a powerful and decisive reversal. Virtually any one of the the candidates vying for the Republican nomination would be huge improvement over the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, which is why I respectfully submit that the independents are with us and will be heartened, not dissuaded, if we actually nominate a candidate who embraces the role of government as envisioned by the Founders. It's not ideological purity. It's Constitutionalism. We do the country a disservice if we abandon the bold colors Ronald Reagan spoke of and revert instead to weak pastels.
- Comment (27)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Feb '11
Re: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
I have to agree with you. It's one thing to be wary of people who hold some positions you disagree with. Much of the argument, however, sounds like complaining about the leaky tires of a car whose engine is on fire.
I can argue about the things that annoy me after we've settled the things that are going to crush my children's future.
May '10
Re: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
What we need is someonw who will take the fight to Obama specifically, and the left generally. Someone with the moral courage to rub their noses in the mess they've made of our economy and America in general. Someone who can throw a punch and take a punch.
And that is the problem with Romney. He just doesn't seem like he's that guy.
That explains the serial rise and fall of Bachmann and Perry, and now the rise of Cain.
Dec '10
Re: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
Slammin Dave! We need to stop commenting on the triviality that the MSM conspiritorial moderators want us to comment on. We need to concentrate on principle, on what we believe, and what we are going to do once we remove the ingrown toenail in the White House. Slammin!
Re: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
Nick Stuart: What we need is someonw who will take the fight to Obama specifically, and the left generally. Someone with the moral courage to rub their noses in the mess they've made of our economy and America in general. Someone who can throw a punch and take a punch.
And that is the problem with Romney. He just doesn't seem like he's that guy.
That explains the serial rise and fall of Bachmann and Perry, and now the rise of Cain. · Oct 30 at 5:00pm
Nick, have you seen the Washington Post piece on Newt Gingrich today? It's interesting, as he is evidently getting a second look as well.
Edited on October 31, 2011 at 1:12amMar '11
Re: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
Something Obama said this week isn't getting the play it should. He said that if the Republicans take over next November, it'll force people to be more self-reliant. It seems to me that he's distilled our message to its essential element. However, I hope there are enough people left in this country to know what that really means, enough at least to go to the polls and give us the chance. Drive safe.
Edited on October 31, 2011 at 1:26amFeb '11
Re: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
I agree that a strong conservative could win the White House, but only if they can effectively communicate their ideals. That ability to communicate is what set Reagan apart. Right now I don't see that person amongst our candidates.
Nov '10
Re: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
Great post, Dave! Ideas have consequences. Let's roll!
Nov '10
Re: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
Dave Carter
Nick Stuart: What we need is someonw who will take the fight to Obama specifically, and the left generally. Someone with the moral courage to rub their noses in the mess they've made of our economy and America in general. Someone who can throw a punch and take a punch.
And that is the problem with Romney. He just doesn't seem like he's that guy.
That explains the serial rise and fall of Bachmann and Perry, and now the rise of Cain. · Oct 30 at 5:00pm
Nick, have you seen the Washington Post piece on Newt Gingrich today? It's interesting, as he is evidently getting a second look as well. · Oct 30 at 5:12pm
Thanks for posting the WaPo link. Newt is the only candidate left standing at this point, as far as I can see.
However, if his baggage starts impeding him, what else is there? Help me out.
May '10
Re: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
This is why I had such high hopes for Perry. My only solace is in believing that if Romney is elected he will do what a Republican House and Senate tell him to do. But it's not enough. You're right, Dave. We need a leader with a powerful voice who will bury Socialism and its evils for another century and be the shining example of how America should be.
Oct '10
Re: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
Well, ideological fervor can be taken too far. We will have to accept new revenues, for example, probably one third new taxes to spending cuts. Of course, in order to get that magic three-to-one cut-to-tax ratio we'll probably have to ask for 30-to-1, but that's Washington for ya.
Aug '10
Re: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
I wish I could shake the suspicion , indeed the paranoia , that we would discover someone else driving our train into this seeming wreck . How do we make sure that Casey Soros isn't driving this train , high on cocaine ?
Edited on October 31, 2011 at 3:40amJun '10
Re: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
Exactly!
Oct '10
Re: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
And of course you (we) will get screwed once again as not a dime of the promised spending cuts will happen. Get over your delusional thinking and recognize the truth. Most politicians will promise you whatever gets a vote and totally screw you once they own you.
I've wasted 50 years voting for the Republican losers. Only Ronald Reagan ever gave me what I wanted. A president committed to restoring America to leadership. And even his best efforts only kept things from going further downhill, on balance.
My vote is for Herman Cain, and frankly, he is the only vote that I will make. If the GOP establishment does the usual and gives us McRomney as our final choice, my vote will still be for Herman Cain as a write in.
I am disgusted with the GOP.
Edited on October 31, 2011 at 3:32amMar '11
Re: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
We don't have to expect new taxes if we simply cut the bureaucracies that cost so much money, like the NEA, the EPA, etc. Add to that the extra Laffer Curve revenue and we don't need to raise taxes a bit. That need to raise taxes shtick is a lie, Joseph. Don't believe it.
Apr '11
Re: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
Words of general advice from the Fighting First: "If you're gonna be one, be a Big Red One".
Edited on October 31, 2011 at 4:15amRe: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
Three thoughts:
1) The Founders were not purists! See, for example, the three-fifths compromise. And the numerous intense disagreements among the Founders.
2) Shooting at your own side in war is all cost and no benefit. It isn't an analogy that maps onto politics. In the world of politics and ideology, critical voices help strengthen ideas. Debate serves as a crucible. And no one is extinguished from being criticized. The oversensitivity to criticism on the right is a sign of immaturity and a lack of confidence.
3) It is foolhardy to make every conversation about national politics a treatise on first principles held from 10,000 feet. We're spending more than we can afford. That's a specific problem. The right ought to be arguing for specific cuts, specific spending reforms. Some are. There is no reason to make it a fight about purity or first principles.
Finally, I'd be thrilled if the right cared about separation of powers, but nope. Even with Obama in the White House, many Republicans are happy to take the John Yoo view of executive power.
Sep '10
Re: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
I should be asleep, too, but I'm glad I checked in here before bed. It's been a tough weekend, but the phrase "gone over like a pregnant pole vaulter" is going to put me to sleep with a smile. Thanks, Dave!
Jul '10
Re: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
Thanks, Dave, I fully agree with you. A lot of people have characterized "independents" as being in the middle in terms of viewpoint. A lot of them are libertarian-oriented and would view themselves as the true right when it comes to limiting government.
For many, limiting government means taking some of the more values-oriented issues out of the discussion and, at a minimum, leaving them to the states. That may fire some up, people I agree with, but if you put your money where your mouth is in terms of the constitution, you'll get some of these issues out of the discussion as far as the federal government is concerned.
I would like my leaders to share my values so that their conscience might approach difficult decisions in a way I prefer.
But politics is about policy. It is about policy. About policy. Therefore, it is much more important that the person I vote for shares my views on the fundamental way government should (or should not) operate. That is why I will not be convinced by Romney and am with raycon in his views above.
Oct '10
Re: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
Gus Marvinson
We don't have to expect new taxes if we simply cut the bureaucracies that cost so much money, like the NEA, the EPA, etc. Add to that the extra Laffer Curve revenue and we don't need to raise taxes a bit. That need to raise taxes shtick is a lie, Joseph. Don't believe it. · Oct 30 at 7:36pm
I don't know if I would go quite that far. I'm serious about 30-to-1, btw, and I'm entirely open-minded to the idea of going even higher (perhaps even to the 99-to-1 ratio David Brooks whined so much about in his debate with Paul Ryan--those unreasonable Republicans!). I mean, I imagine we'll end up with an effective ratio in the low tens, but the higher we aim on the "official" number the higher that effective ratio will be.
Hrm, now I'm having fantasies of 500-to-1. 1000-to-1. ∞-to-1.
Jul '10
Re: Is It Ideological Purity Or Constitutionalism?
Conor,
You make good points on numbers two and three. With respect to point one, just because the founders obviously compromised to design the Constitution doesn't mean that it's appropriate to compromise about whether it is a Constitution.
Your final statement is gratuitous, and muddles your entire case. Surely you recognize that we have specific foreign policy problems. Why should we be debating the scope of presidential war powers rather than the best way to deter Iranian nuclear weapon development?