A conservative comments on progressive christian agenda

As a conservative, I'm posting this as a political analysis piece, not a partisan rant.

First, I agree with the vast majority of the policy issues and values as expressed in the 2006 CrossLeft agenda paper.

But, as always, the devil is in the details.

For the left to expand it's political power in the future, I think it must start to "convert" some of the red state people. It's not enough, for either side, by the way, to just inspire it's base. There must be some conversions to change the political balance.

I think the more the left can make health care and the environment the issue, the more they will suceed. This is proving to be a real challenge. I think healthcare is the most important issue. Just how to make that more of a priority for the US, I'm not sure. I know many good poeple are trying to do that.

I think the main issues that still plague the left are abortion, gay rights, gun control, and national defense. Howard Dean had it pretty right when he said "God, guns and gays". Or whatever order he put them in :). I think the progressive left could take control of the political landscape, if they could take a new direction on these issues. A pro-life decmocrat, what respected the rights of women, and supported the 2nd amendment strongly, and perhaps supported some sort of civil union for gays, might be able to forge a new way for the left. And, I know that John Kerry tried to do that really. The problem is making people believe the left is sincere in doing those things.

I know there is no easy answer here. I think for the people to believe that the democrats have changed their beliefs somewhat, there would have to be strong stands taken on these issues. Not just give lip service to them, but advocate strongly for them. I think Clinton has done the best job of this in recent memory.

In the red state areas, you are just not going to lead a big parade when you say "I'm for gay marriage! I want to take your 2nd amendment rights away! I don't care if you kill your babies! And I hate prayer in schools! I deplore the use of Under God in the Pledge! And hey! Go ahead and burn the flag!!"

I am obviouly overstating the case here. And I know those statements don't truly reflect what progressives believe. But that is really what the red state people "hear" when they listen to democrats. The subtleties of the arguments are not considered. It's black and white to most of the red staters.

I think the left has to either bring more and more people into the fold in the urban areas, or through immigration perhaps, to have any chance of stopping the right from continuing to win elections.

The progressive left must somehow begin to win over the "little people" and not just the political opinion elites. And what the left actually does matters most, not just what they say.

I think a perfect example was John Kerry's attempt, and failure, to convince the average american that he was truly for a strong national defense. It's very true that he served honorably in the military. And he talked a good game. But the swift boat ads, and Zell Miller's speech destroyed much of that with a big dose of reality. By showing John Kerry, apperating before congressional committies, and in his own words, comdemning the US military, and accusing his fellow soldeirs of atrocities, undercut his advantage on that. Regardless of wheter you think the swift boat ads, and Zell Miller's speech were "fair", the reality is they worked. And I would maintain they worked because there was a large element of truth in them. Lot's of factual stuff. John Kerry did say those things, and John Kerry did vote against those defense bills.

I think the wisdom of the public is often underestimated. You can't fool all the people all the time.

I hope this is seen as a contructive post. I'm not just trying to put down the left. I agree with many of the ideas of the left. I'm trying to give an objective viewpoint on the current political landscape. I don't know if what I suggest is even possible. Given the current political situation among the democrats.

It may require a new party. A third way, so to speak.Perhaps a socially more conservative, but more liberal politically leader will emerge, that is not saddled with the current "baggage" of the left. Such a leader would welcome backing by pro-choice people, and gay rights people, but would not be totally controlled by their agenda. He would be moderate on those issues and seek compromise with the right.

Thanks for listening.

Eric