Loyal Opposition is a political term that is a hallmark of a strong political system. When political decisions need to be made there are usually multiple options. Reasonable people may disagree on what should be done. Honest disagreement is good thing if the reasons for disagreement are raised and discussed. This allows people to spot weaknesses and omissions in one's position, resulting in either the position being dropped or modified to address these problems. Decisions made in this manner are usually much stronger than decisions made with full agreement. This truism is so notable that many wise leaders appoint someone to play the role of Devil's advocate if no loyal opposition exists.

The loyal opposition is called loyal for two reasons. The first reason is that their participation makes the resulting decision a better one, as discussed above. The second reason is that once a decision has been made, the loyal opposition then supports the majority. Even if they think the decision was not optimal, once the decision is final they do their best to help it succeed. This is why there may be strong disagreement before a war is declared, but the population pulls together once the war is unavoidable. An example of this should be evident in the polls toward the upcoming military action. Depending upon the poll, 55% to 70% of Americans supported military action to liberate Iraq before President Bush’s announcement. Now that a decision has been made, I expect polls will generally show 70% to 85% of Americans support liberating Iraq.

The remaining 15% to 30% fall into two categories. I’ll call the first camp the principled camp. It consists of those who disagree with the decision so much that they could not support it and remain true to their identities. Keeping with the Liberate Iraq example, some pacifists and isolationists are so committed to their positions that they will not support a war no matter how many people it liberates.

The second camp may be accurately called the bitter camp. It consists of those who disagree with the decision-maker so much, that they cannot support his decision. They would rather violate their own principles rather than support a person they scorn.

I am thankful that I live in a nation where differences in perspectives are mostly encouraged and we are free to discuss them. I am thankful that the overwhelming majority of Americans are principled people who support the tough decisions no matter who makes them – whether it was President Clinton saving Muslims in Kosovo over UN objections or President Bush liberating Iraqis despite those who would prefer a policy of appeasement. And I pray for a sense of humor when dealing with the 10% or so of my fellow countrymen who fall into the bitter category. I suspect they will be especially strident in the time between President Bush’s announcement and the official commencement of hostilities.