When Is Fighting For Your Principles Wrong?
The other day I praised E.J. Dionne for his column embracing an open debate on principles, in that case, between Democrats and Republicans regarding the Supreme Court. Today Dionne writes a column criticizing conservative Republicans for fighting for their principles in the Florida GOP Senate primary coming up in 2010:
When Charlie Crist, Florida's popular governor, announced this week that he would run for the U.S. Senate, it was the best news the Republican Party had had in an otherwise unpleasant year. The problem for the GOP is that its right wing quickly decided that the good news was very bad news indeed. . . . Florida will be one of the clearest tests of whether rank-and-file Republican voters are more interested in doctrinal purity, or in winning -- even if it means nominating an Obama hugger.
(Emphasis supplied.) Define "winning" E.J.? Do the actual policies matter anymore? After all, Florida is not Massachusetts. Or more interestingly, Connecticut. Because, columns like Dionne were written about the Democratic Connecticut primary in 2006, when Ned Lamont challenged "sure fire winner" Joe Lieberman. Back then, progressive blogs did not much appreciate being attacked by the Media for fighting for their principles (they had principles back then.) Today they join the pile on. As in the 2008 Presidential primary, the progressive blogs find themselves in tune with the Establishment. More . . .
|< Infuriating NPR Interview with Elizabeth Warren | DOJ Recommends 20 Year Sentence For Don Siegelman >|