Best political leadership comes from centerJuly 4, 2007 |
Liberals once perceived a
sure thing going on almost every front against docile
Republicans — think Gerry Ford who gave us Justice John
Paul Stevens. Conservative voices were minimal, one
George Will was enough for Brinkley on Sunday morning.
The election of Ronald Reagan and a host of new
conservative faces to both houses of Congress were
considered just a temporary setback. Even the Gingrich
revolution in 1994 wasn’t looked upon as permanent.
There’s a basic epistemological reason for this. Liberals generally believe in trends that are beyond diversion by mere human endeavor. That series of conservative victories were just annoying setbacks. To many liberals it was just a matter of time before America got back on the left track. What this innately arrogant form of determinism fails to take into account is the constant movement of the political center based on a number of factors mostly caused by individual human choice and endeavor. This is the fundamental philosophical difference between most of the left and right. They’re determinist. We’re not. The center moves and has in general been moving right for 30 years. The two parties have re-aligned from a squishy center-right and dominant center-left to temporary equilibrium with a basically conservative GOP and a Democratic center-left more left than center. Evidence is abundant when Rudy Giuliani is the “liberal” Republican, the last known real Democrat conservative was Zell Miller and Joe Lieberman is the only Scoop Jackson Democrat left. Voting and governance decline when parties and candidates appear similar, which is why I advocate the politics of polarization. What we may lose in civility is made up for in clarity. This is an excellent time to re-read the Declaration of Independence, which is a classic example of polarization. America began with a negative campaign. Our national parties are different from fifty years ago but more like those in the 19th century. Those who haven’t caught on to that will join the losers. Democrats must first appeal to their base as Republicans must first appeal to theirs. Nothing new that Tammany Hall and Henry Clay didn’t grasp long ago. The same applies to state parties which will vary according to demographics, culture and personalities. Arizona has a reasonably representative method of choosing party leaders. Directly elected precinct committee people choose local party officers who choose state leaders and write party platforms. Local Democrats have tacked left for some time, local Republicans are moving right. A left-leaning media ( know any center-right local columnists besides me?) and a big university helps tilt the electorate and many local Republicans, like the national party, played Step’n Fetchit to them for too many years. Many still do, which hasn’t helped them win many elections. “Me too” only works when the enemy is already wounded. But the center has shifted, measured by counting the number of yahoos on both sides pulling on that center. The recent immigration debate illustrated that both sides have their share, but the rightees were far more numerous on this one. They ranged from mostly intelligent opponents of a flawed piece of legislation to those who’s knuckles leave grooves in the carpet. How far the GOP center moved is indicated in the tumult that descended on Sen. Jon Kyl. Checking the blogs, many who cannot even spell his name want him “impeached or something,” indicating a failing grade in Gov’t 101. While competent extremists are preferable to inept and timid moderates, those near the CURRENT center are the best shot for leadership in both parties. How well they handle their own bozos and loudmouths will be a major factor in future elections. Sen. Kyl has served 20 years in both Houses of Congress. The American Conservative Union gives him a lifetime voting index of 97 percent. Test for those wanting him removed and calling him “traitor”: I have 100 questions for you. Better not miss more than three. |
BUT WATCH WHAT YOU SAY! |
|
|
|||