In Media Stat Virtus

Aristotle for the most part was right. Virtue, truth, wisdom, does indeed generally occupy the middle ground. Government, especially a democratic government, is one area where this can be seen. Add to that the polarization this country continues to exhibit and moderation becomes even more critical if the business of this country is to move forward. The truth is that given our widely disparate philosophies and political viewpoints the possibility of forming consensus will necessitate compromise. I believe our current president exemplifies that middle position. Let's look at some important examples.

The debate that was part of the recent General Petraeus hearings is a case in point. Democrats by and large do not support the president's policy. They believe the war is a bad idea and it is time to bring the troops home. Republicans believe the troops should remain until the job is done and if more are necessary they should be sent. The deadline to begin withdrawal gives aid and comfort to the enemy. On the one hand the government should just say Afghanistan is too difficult and go home. On the other hand, whatever resources are needed should be applied to win the war. These seemingly irreconcilable positions need to be forged into a coherent policy.

I believe the president has done that. Do I agree with every facet of it. No. Yet, he has shown a steady hand and proved he was in charge by his decision to fire General McCrystal. He has made clear that we will not stay in Afghanistan forever. A year from now we need to begin a transition. We need to stand up the Afghans. But notice he does not say we are leaving. We will honor our commitment, but maybe not with combat troops into the forseeable future. Will it work? Is it possible it will have to be retooled at some point? We will have to see. But to the Democrats he is saying definitively this is not forever, and to the Republicans he is saying we are committed to the surge and he has sent additional troops and given the generals pretty much free rein in the conduct of the war. He is standing in the middle. Nobody likes the position. It is not popular. But I would contend it is precisely the right position for a serious, determined president to take.

How about another example - health care reform. Republicans of course said no. Liberals were unhappy that the president didn't push for a public option or even a single payer system. Some even threatened to vote no because the reform package wasn't forward looking enough. Yet, once again, the goal was to accomplish something worthwhile, even if it might not be perfect. Those standing on principle would insure that nothing gets done. The middle is where something can and must be accomplished.

Financial reform is perhaps an even better example. It is an area where both parties actually want to be able to say they voted for some kind of reform package, even though what each side wants may differ in many respects. Democrats and Republicans were actually able to come together and craft a bill in this area, because they were willing to compromise. Republicans accepted a few things they didn't like, and Democrats gave up some things they really wanted. There is no other way to move forward.

The solution on other issues whether it be immigration reform, middle east peace, energy reform legislation, or many other issues can only be achieved through compromise. Yet, it is at the extremes where Americans seem to have settled. Cable television is one force that pushes us there. It is by exaggerating differences that news channels generate viewers. A look at the congress shows that there are almost no senators or congressman left who can be called moderate. Even the scriptures somehow seem to suggest that the Daniel Webster way is not acceptable. Jesus in very harsh language says that I wish you were either hot or cold, but since you are lukewarm I would vomit you out of my mouth. That's enough to make a moderate run and hide.

A word or two about the scripture quote seems necessary. Jesus was not talking about extreme views, be they political, economic, or even religious. He was talking about passion, intensity of feeling, determination. Although we seem to have forgotten this point, moderates can be passionate too. In fact I believe the passion and dedication of the moderate and the compromiser may be of a higher quality. Their passion is directed at getting things done, making things happen, moving the ball forward. Often at the extremes passion is directed at preventing the other guy from getting something done. It cultivates gridlock.

Hopefully we can agree that we've had enough of doing nothing. It is time to return to moderation in our politics. It is time to make progress in this country again, even if it be slow and plodding. Those who filibuster, stand in the way of the extension of unemployment benefits, etc. may not be so passionate. Maybe they are just afraid of change. The challenges of this generation are too great to stand still. Much needs to be done. Americans have always found a way to do what needs to be done. There has never been a more important time for us to put aside differences and angry rhetoric and find solutions to the many seemingly intractable problems on our plate. The goal should be not to win, or destroy the other guy, but to build a better future for all Americans.