The odd couple

I'm confident the Democrats will win in the 2008 election.

It's not because they have an amazing candidate waiting in the shadows. It's not because they have a great strategy to get out the vote. And, as thrilling as the lockbox was, it's certainly not because they've developed any exciting ideas in the last decade.

Barring major political scandal or international catastrophe, the Democratic candidate should be able to go through the motions toward victory.

Why? The Republicans' current majority is predicated on the biggest lie in American politics since Watergate: That one big tent can sustain a coexistence of laissez-faire conservatives and morality-driven evangelicals.

These two camps have more inherent differences than they do similarities. What bound them together was a desire to win and attain power -- the moral malfunction of Bill Clinton with Monica Lewinsky opened the door, allowing a contradictory character like President George W. Bush to step into the White House.

The imagined kinship, developed to unite religious and business-minded communities, is nothing new. It was instigated at the grassroots level as a backlash to the liberal idealism of the 1960s and culminated in Ronald Reagan's victory over devout evangelical Jimmy Carter.

But the end of this unlikely yet successful union is fast approaching. Both sides feel frustrated that the other's agenda is prevailing in Bush's confused and misdirected cabinet. Karl Rove has done an admirable job of hiding the inherent divisions by exploiting fears and prejudices, but the use of implicit and explicit xenophobia is coming undone.

Several religious organizations have begun to ask, "What Would Jesus Drive?" -- and the likely answer is not an SUV. It will take more hot summers, witty bumper stickers, Al Gore movies and American soldiers to come home in coffins before the don't-you-dare-regulate crowd gets the picture. By then, they will be on the wrong side of an increasingly significant issue.

While the theory of war in the Middle East promises to both hurry the coming of the rapture and strengthen the military-industrial complex, both of these facades are peeling faster than Bush's poll numbers. In Our Endangered Values: America's Moral Crisis, Jimmy Carter wonders about Christian values in America's human rights abuses and stingy foreign aid (he points out that Christ is the "prince of peace, not war"), and is flabbergasted at the hypocrisy of churches promoting trickle-down economics.

An example of the Republican odd-couple being unable to coexist can be seen in Bush's attempts at social security reform. Although they held a strong majority in both chambers, the Republicans could not find enough of a compromise between risking retirement funds and providing financial security for the most vulnerable.

The religious right may not become the religious left, but eight years of Bush should disillusion the faithful enough to lead them to conclude that church and state are not one in the same.

The upcoming midterm elections may show signs of the impending divorce, but the presidential primaries will force individuals to toe the line between valuing people, the market and the Bible. Rove's shortsighted strategy, in which the intended ends seem to always justify the means, has alienated many in this fragile coalition. He will need to add some content to his message because there is too much at stake for the next president to be elected based upon who folks would rather have a beer with.

That's why all Democrats need to do at this point is expose this irrational alliance and coin a catchy alliteration to combat compassionate conservatism (I recommend "Practical, Patriotic Progressivism.")

A fresh idea or inspiring candidate would be a much-deserved, though unnecessary, bonus.