Fight Fire with Fire? (Ideologue vs. Ideologue)

This past week I asked my brother and three of his sons what they thought of Rick Perry. They all live in Texas. Their responses were all about the same. A lot of talk but not a lot of substance. My one nephew said he was a lot better than Michelle Bachman. I had to ask him why. His response was "She's another idealogue .... We've just elected one of those, and it isn't working out well."

His comment has made me take a close look at the concept of an "ideologue". I know that the term carries a very strong negative feeling in today's media and politics. To confirm my understanding of the word I looked it up in Merriam-Webster:
       Definition: IDEOLOGUE
       1. an impractical idealist : THEORIST
       2. an often blindly partisan advocate or adherent of a particular ideology
       Synonyms:
       CRUSADER, FANATIC, ZEALOT, MILITANT, PARTISAN, RED HOT, TRUE BELIEVER

I can understand the negative thoughts of the terms: impractical idealist, theorist, zealot, fanatic, militant and blindly partisan. But I wonder what is wrong with: idealist, advocate, crusader, partisan, or true believer.

The term "impractical" could be in the eye of the definer. Was it impractical to believe that the Butler Bulldogs could go to back to back NCAA finals in basketball? Was it impractical to think that the rag tag militia of the colonies could defeat the greatest military power in the world, England, to win their independence? Impractical is not always bad. I thought dreamers are what helped make this country what it was. After all, we always talk about the "American Dream". One of the problems with this world is all the negative thinking and the "can't do" attitude. We need to be careful not to equate "impractical" with "impossible". They are not the same thing. This country has gone so far off course that just maybe we need some ideas and actions that may seem impractical compared today's normal.

A common tactic of the adversary is to accuse us of being blind to the issues. The truth could be that we don't accept the premise not that we don't understand it. Knowing more wrong ideas does not make the truth any truer. Truth is a constant and is unchangeable (D&C 93:24). The adversary has done a wonderful job of confusing right from wrong, truth from untruth. We know that one of the many signs of the times would be the calling of good, bad and bad, good or right, wrong and wrong, right. Knowing the truth, believing in the truth and holding fast to it is one of the best anchors to have in today's storm of false ideas. So, I say grab hold and never let go. Does that make me an ideologue?

It seems that most of our nation's leaders are children as described by Paul in Ephesians 4:14. I want and hope for one that is an adult and is steadfast in their believes. Is that an ideologue? My nephew is right, we did elect an ideologue for our current president. The problem is that his ideology is all based on false doctrine and evil intents. Does that mean we should not elect an ideologue who's ideas are based on true principals and good logic? Just the term "ideologue" by itself does not have to be bad. We need to examine the ideas and not run from that which is right and true just because the media or political pundits tell us it not popular. We need leaders of sound principles and solid convictions running this country to get it back on course. Sometimes we must fight fire with fire. Ideologue or not, I want a leader that is of moral substance and sound values. I don't know who that would be, but I am hopeful and will keep looking.