Both words in the label “conservative pragmatist” are important. McDonnell is indisputably a conservative — a Reaganite whose social-conservative credentials are impeccable (just ask the Washington Post, which has been crusading against him for these views, expressed pungently in his long-ago graduate-school thesis). But he’s also a wonk who has focused on crafting policy to address the everyday concerns of Virginians.

There isn’t enough in this column to give me a good picture of what Mr. McDonnell believes in a host of issues (i.e. litmus test), but the word “social conservative” gives me a pause.

Given how … alienated they are, I would imagine it would be relatively easy for a demagogue to woo and win the Religious Right, the conservative flavor of statists. They are by no means friends to liberty (at least no more than liberal Democrats are) and I am afraid too many of them use the label “social conservative” to describe themselves.

It seems to me, if a conservative is stooping to a host of statist agenda (such as welfare and government subsidy of higher education), it sounds like it’s not pragmatism; it’s opportunism.

It’s pragmatism to give up hardened, illogical socially conservative positions—especially the ones, at the end of the day, have little to do with individual liberty of persons living in this country. It’s pragmatism to make occasional compromises for the greater good—such as when President Jefferson overstepped his presidential authority in allowing the negotiated terms of Louisiana purchase (more than what the Congress authorized, but still a bargain given how much land we got).

It’s opportunism when you sell liberty for political capital.

Update: Mrs. Palin endorses McDonnell, so he can’t be all that bad …

Update 2: he bothers me on some of the issues, such as the … micromanaging of education, but then, I guess as long as he’s focused on the economy, lowering of taxes, and getting the money out of the bureaucracy, there’s more I can support him on than be suspicious of him.