Danger Signs

Hugh Hewitt's post early on May 6, reminds me of students who are caught goofing off in chemistry class, and refuse to accept the criticism that they might do harm (break equipment, &c) because they have no such intentions. Good intentions do not guarantee that one will do no harm, nor should they exempt anyone from criticism. There is no doubt that some people who criticize avowed Christian political actors are as much bothered by their Christian conviction as they are by their disagreements over policy. But there does seem to be a creeping defensiveness in Hewitt's dismissals as well as others (Ingraham, Hannity, &c) that all critics of the agenda of Catholic conservatives and evangelicals are anti-Christian. This creates a reason to ignore all critics, and that is a dangerous condition.

Christine Todd Whitman, Arlen Spector, John McCain and others in the Republican party itself have raised concerns at various times and places. But responces seem to range from purging them from the ranks to marginalizing them to just ignoring them. None of these are strategies for electoral victory in 2006 and 2008.

We need to expand the party, not engage in purges to create ideological purity. This means reaching out to centerists. But that doesn't have to mean that the party moves to the left, though it will mean that some on the right will have to put up with a party more to the left then they would like. What the party should do is to reassure moderates and centerists by making appeals that are broad and arguing the case for reforms in social security and tax policy, rather than casting appeals to the already committed and using language that isn't limited in its appeal to the already committed.

This is impossible if a large block of Republicans cut themselves off from ideas held by other than the like-minded, and regard others suspiciously.