Lone Hope of the Left

November 24, 2002

by Christopher G. Adamo

Ever since Election Day, conservative pundits have had great fun at the expense of Democrats. The astounding success of Republicans, occurring as it did in the mid-term elections, has been correctly viewed by those on the “right” as a vindication of their ideology. But although a celebratory response is warranted, it might be a bit premature to scoff at the manner in which Democrats have reacted to their unprecedented losses.

On the surface, it appears that the Democrats are engaged in a politically suicidal swerve to the hard left in the hopes of somehow magically revitalizing their connection to an America that, ever since 9-11, has shifted noticeably to the right. The selection by House Democrats of Representative Nancy Pelosi, an ultra-liberal from San Francisco, to be Minority leader, stands as their most profound statement of unabashed liberalism. But it is hardly an isolated incident among the Democratic leadership, which has taken every opportunity since the day after the elections to trumpet their commitment to ‘60’s era ideology. And if such is truly the overall Democratic strategy, conservatism will only have more to celebrate in the future.

However, in consideration of past Democratic tactical successes, the present situation had better be evaluated from a standpoint of more insidious but effective efforts. Indeed Democrats have a track record of political ploys that have consistently worked, as long as Republicans unwittingly cooperated. Unfortunately, Republicans also have a track record of doing just that.

According to the shrillest Democratic spokesmen of the past few weeks, it is the “blurring” of distinctions between parties that caused their losses on November 5. In reality, nothing could be farther from the truth. That so many of them are making such a claim, which they must know to be untrue, ought to raise a warning flag. It was the contrast between the parties, both in 2002 and in 1994 that highlighted the inherent liberalism among Democrats, thus ensuring their defeat. Unfortunately, Republicans have all too often assumed that the softening and blurring of differences between the liberal and conservative approaches to government would work to their advantage.

Since the elections, a vastly contradictory story has also emerged from liberal pundits and political strategists who claim that the 2002 elections were all about the emergence of “centrism” as the dominant political philosophy. Yet others still contend that the survival of the Democrat Party depends upon its assertion of undiluted liberalism. Though completely irreconcilable on the surface, these two schools of thought bear one thread of commonality. They both presume the foundational precepts of conservatism to be out on a political limb. It is altogether likely that neither of these Democratic clarion calls are intended for the American people at all, but rather as a means of convincing the “me too” wing of the Republican Party to orchestrate its own demise through the sort of compromise which was its undoing in 1995 and 1996.

On the heels of their phenomenal ‘94 victories, Republicans began backtracking, intimidated by the intensity of media criticism. Rather than pressing boldly forward with the agenda by which they had inspired grassroots America to support them, they felt compelled to water down their efforts. Instead of making necessary cuts in wasteful government spending, they began to declare their intentions to outspend Democrats on Medicare, assuring the public that they weren’t going to scale back or eliminate “valuable” government entities such as the Department of Education, school lunch programs, or the National Endowment for the Arts. And the list goes on.

If, in the midst of defiant professions of commitment to liberalism by Democrats, Republicans once again feel compelled to “meet in the middle”, they will not only infuriate their base, which was enthusiastic about this off-year election unlike any other since 1994, they will also negate any reason for undecided voters to take them seriously. Worse yet, if liberals can believably claim to be “centrist” while shifting to the left, Republican efforts at “moderation” will require compromises far more profound than those in the past.

For grassroots conservatives, it is undeniably a time of rejoicing. But it is not too soon to make clear to Republican officials that they had better remain committed to the conservative ideology that defined them as significantly different from Democrats, and thus brought them victory on November 5.

_________________________________________

Christopher G. Adamo is a freelance writer who lives in southeastern Wyoming with his wife and sons. He has been involved in grassroots political activity for many years. Chris was the editor of the Wyoming Christian from 1994 to 1996, and his columns can also been seen at CheyenneNetwork.com.

Send the author an E mail at Adamo@ConservativeTruth.org.

For more of Christopher's articles, visit his archives.