Are Sanford and Ensign pragmatic? I think not. In the diary Stop Telling Me I'm Not Progressive UPDATED CatM says
There are at least two classes of progressives: pragmatic progressives and progressive idealists.
Progressive idealists are the mirror image of Teabaggers and other conservative purists. They believe in the goals more than the process, and many are willing to employ extremist tactics (like work with Grover Norquist) to get there. . . .
Idealists whether progressive or not, are not necessarily the "mirror image of Teabaggers," Some Teabaggers are idealists, but not all. There are two types of idealists, those that express their ideals and those that do not express their ideals. Both live up to their ideals.
Then we have those who express ideals and fail to live up to them. There are also those who do not live up to their ideals. And finally there are those who do not live up to their ideals and call themselves pragmatists.
Most of the time one's understanding of reality is at best approximate. Further, one's understanding of reality does not make choosing a course of action that is completely and utterly consistent with ones ideals. In a democracy choosing what to vote for is rarely 100% consistent with one's ideals.
For example, if I was in Congress my ideals would make voting for or against the current Senate health bill a very difficult decision. I would probably vote for the current Senate version and hopefully be more in favor of the merged Senate and House version. But that is only by 50.00000000000000000001%
I believe that in their own perverted beliefs George W., Dick C., Donald R., Sarah P., are all idealists. Ensign, Coburn, Sanford, Craig are all ass holes who express ideals they do not follow. I think they believe in their ideals, but they consider themselves pragmatists. I see Bernie Sanders as an idealist, who rarely gets most of what he wants, but he keeps nudging us towards his ideals.
So there you have my thoughts. Enough Bull Shit and lets continue working towards our ideals.