Pragmatist Blues

 I’ve been talking with a lot of regional conservatives – as opposed to Republicans, lately, although most conservatives do vote Republican, with one degree of nose-holding or another. 

A lot of them.

And one of the common themes of our discussions is the sense that too many candidates and influential staffers in the GOP – nationally as well as Minnesota – are trying to sneak away from conservatism, back toward the mushy-middle hell that the party endured when many of us center-right bloggers were just becoming aware of politics in the first place.

Of course, with all politics there’s the eternal battle between pragmatism and idealism.  Being on the extremes is easy: the Libertarians, Socialist Workers, Constitution Party and (in most places except Minneapolis) Greens defend their ideals fiercely, unpolluted by the need to actually govern, with its attendant compromises; pragmatists like Jesse Ventura and Arne Carlson, more concerned with getting elected or tinkering with the knobs and buttons of power (respectively), use ideals like election brochures, to be stored away in boxes until the next campaign while they get down to wheeling and dealing.

Most of us pick a place on the continuum between “ideals” and “reality” for a variety of reasons.  Some hover closer to the edges; Paul Wellstone’s idealism was intense enough to marginalize him as an on-the-ground legislator; Ronald Reagan’s was also intense, but communicated better; Phil Krinkie’s made him “Doctor No” on Saint Paul’s Capitol Hill.  Others play the room; Dick Day and Chuck Hegel blow with the most profitable wind.  Tim Pawlenty jumps between both with fluency that, after five years, still astounds me.

And any pol’s position on that continuum is going to influence voters, who themselves have their own point staked out, leading to amazing conclusions; I still roll my eyes at the guy I interviewed at the Patriot Picnic last year who was giving up on Mark Kennedy over ethanol subsidies, as if putting Amy Klobuchar in office would change anything…

And then there’s Norm Coleman. 

Norm’s never pretended to be an orthodox conservative.  It would have been political suicide; he’d have never been elected mayor of Saint Paul had he not first been a DFLer, and then governed as a relatively conservative, pragmatic East Side, Randy Kelly-style Democrat before changing parties.  Since going to DC, he’s been fairly solidly conservative on most issues.  Up until this past year, the big blemish was the ANWR Drilling issue, and while he didn’t vote the way I’d have preferred, it wasn’t the sort of thing I’d drop support over.  He’s been on the side of the angels on taxes, immigration, and especially the UN, where he’s led the charge to uncover the rot in the world’s unofficial, self-appointed government.

And yet…there’s the war.

Hugh is rolling up the towel, perhaps for a vicious snap before throwing it in:  according to Hugh, Coleman is only barely on the “worth fighting for” list.   

Gary Miller disagrees.  Sort of.

We’re not there.  Yet.  The Senator is a champion on taxes, judges and the U.N.  He is a disaster on Climatism and the GWOT.  The former are “nice to haves”.  Getting it wrong on the latter have the very real prospect of plunging the world into a new Dark Ages.

It’s hard out there for a pragmatist. 

And we, the center-right, need to make it harder.  Write the Senator.  Tell him where you’re at on this issue.