We tend to either reject compromise as unprincipled on its face or to reject principle as impractical in its outcome.  It needn't be that way.

     With each issue there is a place where the principled meets the practical.  It's not going to make everyone happy, but if there were a place where everyone could be happy there wouldn't be a disagreement in the first place. 

    So how do we find that place where almost everyone can be satisfied even if nobody's wants are completely met?  I think it lies in progress - not progressivism of course - but movement towards our shared goals of individual freedom, responsibility, constitutional principles, and national prosperity.

    Many conservatives have been satisfied to accept as compromises policies that do less harm than other alternatives - whether it's new unaffordable programs, grants of power, or infringements on rights -but that incrementally slide us further down the slope of statism and overweening government. 

    That has to stop.

    Compromise means giving up something you want - or even accepting something you don't want but that won't violate your basic principles - in exchange for advancing your overall beliefs or interests.  But principles should always be the backstop to compromise, and that means there's a a point at which you can no longer tolerate giving no matter what you get in return.  I think we're well past that point.

   But you also have to meet people where they are and accept the fact that we didn't get in this situation of unsustainable, prosperity killing, and extra-Constitutional government growth overnight.  And we therefore are not going to turn it around overnight.  It's going to be an incremental process, even if this must be when and where it begins.

    Here's what that means to me: No conservative who understands the Constitution and basic economics should be supporting anything that grows government in size or reach.  Government has a role, but it's powerful enough and spends enough to fulfill that role already. 

    And no conservative who reads history should think we're going to turn this ship on a dime.  Hopefully one day we'll all sail off into the sunset where our common objectives lie.  But that won't happen overnight, or at all if we keep drowning each other in the wake.   

    Unity of effort means that we allow each of our organizations, movements, and principled individuals to work towards success in their areas of interest and skill.  At some points we'll gain more by joining together and massing to advance common causes.  But as often as not we'll move at different paces and emphasize different battles.  We should see that as a strength, not as a weakness.  And as long as someone is moving in the right direction, how about we pick another battle and let them find their way?