MODERATES! Utter that word in the company of staunch conservatives and be prepared for apoplectic stares, attacks of the vapors and the stacking of bundled faggots around the pole at which you will no doubt be burned alive.
In this highly polarized and politically charged first decade of the 21st Century, conservatives know the enemy when they see it. While they detest the liberal wing - frequently referred to as ‘lefties’ - they can at least identify common traits which they share. Both are committed to an almost pure, distilled ideology, both are minority branches of a larger whole, and both will never budge from principles which they regard as sacred and immutable.
Like the crusaders and muslims of the 12th century - each bent on the inihilation of the other’s faith before the gates of Jerusalem - conservatives and liberals share a grudging admiration for the staunchness of their opponent’s views.
But Moderates! From a conservative prospective, moderates are loathsome and detestable apostates, despised for their apparent spinelesss lack of principle. They are - horror of horrors! - pragmatists! Like lepers of the Dark Ages, they are infected by a heinous disease -
compromise !
Cursed by a willingness to engage the other side in dialogue and seek bipartisan - oh,
that word! - solutions, moderates are frequently described as traitors, or worse.
Early in the primary season, Fred Thompson was revered, even deified as the personification of unflinching, uncompromising conservative principle. His demise at the polls was attributed to weak-kneed, vascillating moderate republicans and cross-over moderate dems, who, to their everlasting shame, chose John McCain, the ultimate symbol of cross-the-aisle, unprincipled moderation.
Conservatives could understand Obama’s win. His victory, as they saw it, was the result of unflinching adherence to liberal principle. Reading the essays of staunch conservatives carefully, one detects a wistful, grudging admiration for the leftie triumph in the selection of the senator from Illinois.
Not so, John McCain. He has been, and will continue to be, vilified for a senate record of compromise and cooperation with the democrats. Never mind that all legislation is the result of bipartisanship and that all presidents have curried the support of the other party, McCain is the living symbol of pragmatic and unprincipled sleeping with the enemy.
Two examples will suffice. Even though McCain voted for the 700 hundred mile border fence legislation in 2006 and has sworn to keep border security as his first priority - positions at wide variance with Obama - he remains committed to comprehensive immigration reform. Conservatives view this as a total sell-out of principle, even though President Bush, along with most moderates, hold the same view.
On energy, John McCain is even further to the right of Obama, having called for off-shore drilling, eliminating the federal fuel tax, the construction of new refineries and nuclear power plants, and empowering states to control their own resources. Yet, he is lambasted by conservatives for not including ANWR [at least not yet] and for proposing a carbon cap and trade scheme - both moderate policies.
McCain’s greatest sin is not that these modest proposals are not steeped in conservative ideology, it is that they appeal to moderates! He has committed the cardinal sin.
Political wonks of every stripe will continue to opine on the candidates, their positions, their records and their ideology or lack of it, right up to election day, but, with one significant difference: liberal lefties will savage John McCain and so will conservatives.
Moderation, it seems, is still no virtue.
