Why is it that the Democrats take all the heat about being inconsistent?
Was that a flip-flop we witnessed after Harriet Miers' nomination? And what of that WMD matter -- now you see them now you don't? And then there's the we're-in-a-different-war-now explanation for "mission accomplished." By the way, what happened to all the promises made to victims of Katrina?
On the torture issue alone, Dick Cheney takes a harsh pro-torture stand, even as his boss rejects all forms. Condoleezza Rice stakes out an in-between position, dancing toward the Vice President or the President to manage the reactions of a particular audience or media criticism. On Sunday's Meet the Press, Madeline Albright criticized this obvious lack of consensus. But Republicans are sliding under the press inconsistency radar compared to Democrats. So what's going on here?
First, those in power have become masters of a little known but very potent political strategy -- systematic inconsistency. It involves saying different things to different key constituents to keep them reasonably quiet and appeased. In business, each of several key, diverse stakeholders might be told just enough of what they want to hear. This doesn't work if they're all at the same meeting. They need to be far apart where they aren't likely to compare notes. Rice speaks in Europe, Bush addresses military groups, and Cheney simply walks out onto the White House lawn because the people who agree with him aren't revealing their identities. The three don't speak at the same podium about torture or at the same time. And, luckily for them, the media much prefer moving on to retrospection.
Then there's the important research-supported observation that authoritarians, by nature, aren't impressed with consistency. Their primary concern is doing the bidding of those in charge. That's why George Bush asserts so often that he is Commander-in-Chief and why his followers argue for presidential prerogative. Authoritarian Republicans accuse the Democrats of inconsistency, but don't look back to the past or sideways to gauge their own actions; they look up. That's what "Brownie" was doing. And FEMA's still at it. Accuse such Republicans of inconsistency with what they said earlier and they essentially respond, "And your point is?"
Emerson wrote: "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" and he included "of little statesmen" too. Metaphorically speaking, the Democrats need to go back and read about who they were and learn from that. They should replace the bulb on their old beacon composed of fairness, security, freedom, equality, a hand up and fair shake. Around this all Democratic boats could then sail, some side-by-side, others on their own irregular course, but all in relative proximity to the light and most anchored well beneath it in times of crisis.
More than consistency the Democrats need greater organization, better communication with all members, a crash course in dealing with subversive politics* -- and they need these soon. But, I'll take a work in progress with good intentions any day over Social Darwinism or the dark consistency of callousness and collusion.