Everyone has their part to play in this election year battle of ideas.
I like the trenches, seeking out one to one contact with the enemy, especially in the midst an especially divisive Republican primary season.
Hearts and minds, one or two at a time. And yes, some of my more conservative friends and acquaintances do have hearts, and some still have some semblance of a mind.
Lately, they all seem to agree on one thing, one concept. I hear it in practically every conversation, and most online postings. Somehow they feel that they, and by extension, their chosen candidate is superior because they are... "Constitutionalists".
"I like (insert Republican candidate name here), he is a "Constitutionalist.
In reply, I quote a great man, a hero of mine.
"I do not think that word means what you think it means".
Of course, as the good little conservatives that they are, they take offense and assure me that they do indeed know exactly what it means. After all, a Progressive like myself couldn't possibly know anything about the Constitution, right?
So I ask my conservative friends to enlighten my poor, uninformed self what it means to be a "Constitutionalist". After stumbling a bit, the usual response is something like "Some one who supports the Constitution", or maybe something like "Someone who believes that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land".
It's not too bad an answer, here in America. After all, we are all taught that stuff back in High School.
"Oh, like Barack Obama, right? He was a constitutional law professor, so we know that he knows it. And he did take that oath. You know, the one to support and defend the Constitution, right?", I reply, and heads usually explode.
It seems that only conservatives can be "Constitutionalists" these days. I guess I missed the memo.
This is usually followed by some mumbling about "liberal activist judges" and "states rights".
So I ask "So, are you an originalist? A strict-constructionist, perhaps?"
Nervous nods to the affirmative. "Which is it?", I ask.
Silence.
I throw them a lifeline. "Does the text stand on it's own, or does the intent of the founding fathers carry more weight?"
More silence.
After a few seconds, you see the mental coin flip. At this point, it's anyone's guess.
Them: "The text stands on it's own."
Me: "It's pretty vague in places. Who gets to figure it out, the court?"
Since to the Post-Obama conservative mind, the Supreme Court is almost as fanatically liberal as the media, this won't do at all... so even if they do answer this way, it's just a quick jump to the left, and a step to the right to the second possible response.
Them: "The intent of the Framers is all that matters".
Me: "So, do you favor then the intent of the Federalist or Anti-Federalist Founders?"
And that's where I lose them. Every time.
Once again, the unwashed conservative masses have picked up a buzzword to explain the reason for their passion, without realizing it explains nothing at all.
In the same way most conservatives interpret the Bible, the Constitution means whatever fits best with their personal and collective ideology, to be used when convenient, and circumvented when it isn't. And they don't even realize it.
Just the other day, when an conservative friend stated proudly "I support Newt. He is a Constitutionist", I asked him to elaborate. "So, how does Newt interpret the Constitution?" Once he realized the depth of the question, he realized that he just didn't know. It was quite a shock to him. He had a sleepless night, but let me know the next day that even if he doesn't vote for Newt, he will still support the Republican, any Republican, against the President in November. I believe him. I also know that would have a harder time explaining why than he would have had yesterday.
It reminds me of all the Libertarians I've met in the last couple of years. You know, the ones that woke up and realized that the Republican Party was no longer anything they wanted to be associated with, so they figured they would be Libertarians, instead.
Imagine their surprise when they actually figured out what Libertarians actually believed.
I'm starting to worry. This is way too easy.
As long as "generic republican candidate" doesn't get the nomination, I think we are looking at 4 more years.