-John Moraga
Founder, Conservatives Corner
Recently, on an episode of ConservaCast (E021), I addressed a topic I believe is critical to conservatives today: “MAJOR ON THE MAJORS”. My point was that it is imperative for conservatives to unite on our core values, and agree to disagree on secondary or tertiary issues. In other words, we should afford grace to fellow conservatives who may have a difference of opinion. Of course, when people who claim to be conservative egregiously veer from the core values of conservatism, they should absolutely be called out and disavowed. However, the threshold for expelling them from the ranks of Conservatism’s Army should be high. We should not evaluate people with an unreasonable *litmus test of conservative purity.
I recall my days in the Security Forces of the U.S. Air Force, when several of my brothers and sisters were disciplined for misconduct (myself included). There were various ways we were disciplined such as receiving letters of reprimand, being demoted in rank, forgoing pay, among several other methods. Certain personality types, the stresses of our job, personal family issues, or any number of reasons catalyzed many of us to misbehave. So, often we would suffer the repercussions of our poor choices of conduct. However, for the overwhelming majority of us, our loyalty to the Air Force and to the defense our country remained intact. That is why it was extremely rare when someone was eventually discharged under “other than honorable” circumstances, and even fewer under definitively dishonorable circumstances. A person would have to commit such a severe offense, or be incapable of rehabilitation from a compulsion of minor offenses, in order to face being discharged before his contract was completed. That is because the threshold for dismissing a person, who is otherwise serving his country honorably in the military, is very high. Thus, conservatives would do well to emulate the patriotism of our military, and major on the majors of political conservatism.
U.S. Senator Ted Cruz has been a standard-bearer of conservatism during the entirety of his career, yet even he has his “conservative” detractors. Sen. Cruz has not only argued cases before the notoriously intimidating U.S. Supreme Court, he has actually impressively won the majority of his cases (even his “losses” were essentially nominal arguments presented before the Court)! His litigating prowess based on conservative jurisprudence is enough to solidify his conservative credentials for life, but he has continued to reinforce his legacy as a U.S. Senator and even as a contender for the Presidency. He is a Major League player in conservative politics.
The analogy of Ted Cruz playing in the “Major Leagues” is a reference to the sport of politics. One must be naïve, and ignorant of history, to believe politics is completely void of sport. Our ethics and values being primary in our politics stipulated, we must also be practical to the ways of the world. This pragmatism is even supported in Bible, as Christians are taught to “be as shrewd as serpents and innocent as doves” (Matthew 10:16). Understanding the reality of the sport of politics, Sen. Cruz ultimately became a supporter of presidential candidate Donald Trump in 2016, who for the majority of his public life was not an example of being a conservative (to be polite). Sen. Cruz has also come under fire for some of the ways he has negotiated legislation in Congress. Conservative purists may point to other minor issues that they consider compromises of conservatism, but the fact remains that those issues are drastically outweighed by Sen. Cruz’s career of championing conservatism. Another reality of history to consider is that there has never existed the “perfect” politician. Conservative purists may criticize Sen. Cruz just as easily as they would criticize George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, or even Ronald Reagan. The truth is that a politician must be evaluated on the whole of his career and accomplishments. Sen. Cruz has proven to be a valiant warrior of conservatism, as well as an effective sportsman of politics. Therefore, conservative purists may mean well, but can often be counterproductive to the efforts of conservatism and the conflicts we face. Instead of unifying our battle front, conservative purists can unfortunately break the ranks of our formation. It is not just politicians who are attacked by fellow conservatives, political commentators and even friends and family are not exempt from the criticism of conservative purists. Mark Levin is another beacon of conservatism, who has taken flack for some of the positions he has taken. Levin also got behind president Trump, even though he supported Sen. Cruz during the 2016 Republican Primary.
In ConservaCast E021 I also made a distinction between conservatives unifying and liberals engaged in group-think. I intend to discuss this distinction in-depth in future articles and ConservaCasts, but in short, conservatives are composed of independent thinkers who happen to agree on core values, whereas liberals simply fall in line with the beliefs of one charismatic leader or group of influential leaders, irrespective of critical analysis.
*A litmus test was originally a test of chemistry. Litmus, a mixture of colored organic compounds obtained from lichen, turns red in acid solutions and blue in alkaline solutions and, thus, can be used as an acid-base indicator. However, it is now used colloquially to evaluate the true character of something or someone.