All Things Being Equal, Many Aren’t Moderates

Swinging up and down completely differs from remaining level.  A boat bouncing severely while riding stormy waves isn’t enjoying what averages out to a smooth journey.  While that’s true in the real world, it’s not so in the rather perverse confines of Washington, D.C., where even physics lessons are commonly ignored.  Within that ignoble swamp, politicians who vote conservatively on a morning bill and on the liberal side after lunch are routinely classified as “moderates.”  In fact, they’re just running across the aisle, not straddling it.

Being a reactionary at times and a pinko at others sort of equals out, in a twisted way.  But true moderation would mean reliably backing a watered-down version of one party’s platform.  What we instead most often see in the Capitol are legislators who oscillate wildly to please please please get what they want.  Yes, bigmouth strikes again, and the only thing worse than cramming a “Panic”-related Smiths reference into this paragraph are unpredictable Republicans who can’t adhere to a logical platform most of the time.

The warped press isn’t helping, as when they ponder the fate of oh so poor “middle of the road lawmakers.”  Similarly, other journalists ponder whether “GOP moderates” (h/t Ericka Andersen) will dominate the party, an odd thought for anyone who’s seen the nation lurch rightward after coping with the alternative in practice for over a year.

Maybe the present anti-statist climate will actually force the officeholders to pick a direction and follow it.  As evidence, even John McCain is playing conservative in order to trick voters into thinking he’s more appealing than primary opponent J.D. Hayworth.  It’s true that the man frequently not elected president occasionally veers into Sarah Palin territory on particular budget matters.  But he remains a Republican beloved by the press whenever he doesn’t act like a Republican.  That’s the case when it comes to campaign finance, bailouts, amnesty, and a couple dozen other issues where he disproves the value of inconsistency.

Likewise, ex-sorta-Republican Arlen Specter has been classified as a “moderate,” which is true except for virtually every vote he’s ever cast.  If not for his admirable support for gun rights, Specter might have been a candidate for Joe Biden’s present occupation.  And it’d be much less fun to giggle at such an astounding bore.  But Specter has still occasionally scattered himself across the ideological map: he’s somewhat unpredictable, which is wholly different than being lukewarm.

On the other hand, Democrats could use a little moderation in the sense that they should water down their beliefs.  It would be better for the country, and I suppose for them, too.  The approach will be a tough sell, as Obama didn’t campaign as a centrist: he ran as a messianic figure who superseded politics.  After taking office, he stuck with the let’s serve the people blah etc. routine for about a day and a half. 

Unfortunately, it turns out the people don’t care for his particular idea of service, but he’s still imposing it as best as he can.  He’s not going to let something as trifling as our lack of money keep him from spending nonexistent dollars while meddling in our destitute existences.

He and his congressional teammates could have scaled back the plot to their advantage.  Moving closer to the center than the left may have kept his happy cult largely intact.  But Obama has already abandoned the chance to be Bill Clinton without the wantonly scummy lifestyle.  Set aside his occasional foray into practical decisions such as on letting Predator drones act like predators: Obama is an example of why ideological purity is conversely only good to a point.  Said point involves being too much of a leftist twit.

For example, Democraticare might be an awful law as opposed to a rotten idea if party leaders had just been willing to let people pay for their own abortions (h/t Teri Christoph).  But they couldn’t be content with guaranteeing virtually unfettered access to ghastliness: they had to ensure taxpayers would be on the hook for the morally revolting procedure, too.

Mercifully, it didn’t help them.  The failure to soften, or perhaps a word like “moderate,” their social engineering/socialistic spending policies has doomed their agenda.  There’s something to be said for unyielding arrogance, at least from their foes’ view.

By contrast, Republicans are classified as moderates when they occasionally or frequently stray from conservatism.  But that’s inaccurate usage.  The term should be reserved for someone who supports, say, milder tax cuts than Jim DeMint or is slightly less Darth Vadery on anti-terror issues than Dick Cheney.  Alternately, someone like, oh, Scott Brown should be addressed as a semi-conservative, Republican temp, or such when he strays.  We’ll modify his classification once he makes himself easier to classify.

It’s tricky pinning down meaning these days.  As with “stimulus,” “moderate” seems to be a word whose definition is misunderstood by certain media members and Presidents of the United States of America.  The left are actually the ones who should tone down their domestic efforts, as that would help them avoid having to conspire about how to pass a nation-altering bill in the most temperate-averse method conceivable.

As for those affiliated with the right, frequent swaying makes little sense.  Conservative principles are based upon steady ideals: the government shouldn’t be responsible or pay for much aside from catching and imprisoning criminals or catching and imprisoning and/or eliminating war enemies.

The feds should let us build houses and only approach our property if barbarians besiege us; we and not our congresspersons can call a private contractor about getting new kitchen fixtures or killing termites.  Letting the Al Frankens and Louise Slaughters of the world crash on the couch is antithetical to conservative doctrine.  But some Republicans still need to learn the value of kicking out unwelcome guests.

GOP politicians shouldn’t only be more conservative in general; additionally, they need to be conservative on more specific measures.  Tea Partiers should harangue the leaders in question so that they tilt toward reducing the state’s role as a default setting.  The goal is maintaining both reasonability and stability in one’s beliefs.  That means we may have to write off Lindsey Graham.  So, it works out all around.

Anthony Bialy is a freelance writer and “Red Eye” Conservative in Western New York.  He blogs at http://thebuffalobean.com and tweets at http://twitter.com/AnthonyBialy.

Popularity: 1% [?]