One of the things that’s been sort of perplexing in the post-election environment is the question: What now?

There’s been such a sea change in American politics, goosed along by the still-unfolding financial collapse. For years, my interest in politics has sprung from the belief that the conservative movement was reckless and destructive and needed to be stopped. Now - for the moment, at least - it has been.

But as a commentator, you find yourself stuck in the old rut. So we know what I’m against.

What is it I’m actually for?

It’s something I’ve been thinking about a lot lately, though I haven’t necessarily written about. At least not in detail. But that has to be forthcoming, and it will be, at some point. It’s not enough to simply oppose the excesses of movement conservatism, to rip on the wingers. Don’t get me wrong - we’ll always rip on the wingers, as need be. But that can’t be the “there” there. There has to be a positive agenda. The lack of one is the very thing that killed the conservative movement itself.

Whatever I might think that positive agenda should be will ultimately clash with what others on this side of the fence think. But that’s fine. I’ve never been completely comfortable with the “liberal” label anyway, because while in some respects I’m extremely liberal, in others I’m pretty conservative. As some perceptive readers have sussed out over the years.

I believe, for instance, in the need for personal fiscal responsibility. We’ve been writing about that around here lately. At heart, I’m something of an isolationist. This Wilsonian business about policing the world, bringing democracy to the poor and oppressed in every corner of the globe at U.S. expense - I don’t believe in it. Never have. Particularly now, I don’t think we can afford it. This was one of the biggest reasons I opposed the war in Iraq.

I think it absolutely needs to be the policy of this country to wean the nation off oil, foreign or otherwise. It’s environmentally damaging, we will never find sufficient domestic stocks even if we drill off every U.S. shore; and our need for this resource has necessitated our involvement in the most unstable region of the globe, with that involvement contributing to the instability. Enough. People need to drive less and when they drive they need to drive vehicles that are more fuel-efficient. And it should be governmental policy to promote this.

And that’s gonna cause people to whine because we LIKE our big SUVs and the Government Shouldn’t Be Telling Me What To Do Or Drive!!! But unless the government does - particularly now, as gas prices have fallen back down - Americans, collectively, simply will not make the wise decision. And that hurts our country.

And on, and on. Perhaps the toughest aspect of this, because it’s all interrelated, is what this “positive agenda” means on the local level. Because if you believe that the country needs to drive less, maybe there needs to be a corresponding increase in funding for public transportation. What does that mean here, in Lancaster County? More buses? Light rail?

Trolleys?

Not saying it does mean that, or should, but you get the idea. We’re smack in the middle of what really does look like a watershed moment in American history. It’s a time of crisis - but there’s always opportunity in crisis. A chance to think bold thoughts, do bold things. We need to figure out what those thoughts and things are. It’s a work in progress - and I’ll probably use the blog as a sketch pad, as I did in the past, before we all got so caught up in the election. Times change. Some of us dinosaurs simply got to change with them.