Trust the Man, Trust the Plan
Mistrust the man, recommend every article against him
By Neil Stevens Posted in 2008 | Character | Republicans | Trust — Comments (10) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
A man, a plan, a canal, Panama
Of all the issues, and all the debate, and all the faction wrangling this party has seen this year, I find it appropriate that the evaluation of each candidate is still boiling down to the same single issue. It was a core issue of our party in the 1990s, and for a while I thought it was gone. But it's back, and this year it's the decider.
Republicans are looking at each candidate's statements of positions, but ultimately are deciding whether to trust those statements based on their evaluations of the candidate's character, and I'm glad of it.
Character counts as much as ever.
Read on...
Consider Rudy Giuliani. Taken at his word, by virtue of good timing the man would do more to fight abortion than any Republican President since Roe v. Wade by appointing a fifth and possibly a sixth justice to the Supreme Court who would stay true to the Constitution. He also claims he would continue various executive actions opposed to abortion. And yet, despite these promises that he would deal with abortion essentially as President Bush has done, he is despised by many anti-abortion activists.
Why? Many just don't trust him. They look at his personal life, and they openly question whether he can be trusted in public life more than he's shown he can be trusted in private life.
Look at Mitt Romney. On issue after issue, the former Governor has staked out positions that place him to the right of his competition. And yet, despite setting himself up as a frontrunning conservative, the man faces strong opposition from many conservative sources.
Why? Given the way he ran for the Senate in the past, his run now just leaves some Republicans with the feeling that he's as trustworthy as a slimy car salesman. "What will it take to get you into this car today?" he might as well be asking them, when he asks for support.
Similiar stories can be told for other candidates. John McCain is branded unstable and pandering, Mike Huckabee soft and corrupt, and Fred Thompson lazy and superficial. And yet, on the issues, all of these candidates have strengths, especially where others have weaknesses. But because Republicans are looking at character first, they never get far enough to evaluate those policies.
Character counts, and while I make no claims here about who is right and who is wrong on which candidates can be trusted, I'm glad the party still works that way. The last thing we need to happen is to let our own Bill Clinton get into office, and let his personal faults distract his administration from the security of the nation.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | The Winds of Change — Comments (14) »
Trust the Man, Trust the Plan 10 Comments (0 topical, 10 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
A can see your analogy with Clinton possibly applying to him. Like Ol' Bill, he a talented man with some character flaws.
--
We would also like to know your advice for somebody like my daughter, who's going to graduate in two years, advice that you would give a young person.
SEC. RUMSFELD: Advice for a young person. Study history.
If it was all character and consistency on the issues, then Paul, Tancredo and Duncan Hunter would be in the lead.
Let's be honest past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior--Giuliani governed very conservatively, but was a disaster on social issues, Huckabee and Romney were very mixed and inconsistent, McCain likes to play to the media and defy the base of his party, and Fred Thompson was consistent but helped the trial lawyers and supported McCain-Feingold.
This race is one big melting pot of character, both bad and good. People are sampling from the pot and walking away with what tastes best to them. The fun part is that there are many pots: character, policy, experience, showmanship, etc. It makes for one very messy fondue party. I'd definately want to be at our party verses the Dems.
Character is the second most important issue for me. It plays into each prong of the GOP platform. It's important to SoCons because of Bill Clinton type scandal reasons. It's important from a fiscal perspective because "Bridge to Nowhere" incidents, both because corruption increases pork and because, just as bad big government people use tax dollars to build pet projects enriching their lives and career, bad "small government" (I put that in quotes, because sometimes it's big government being done in the name of small government) people can sneak loopholes and subsidies that are designed to benefit them personally, which gives us a bad name. Character is also important on a national security front for reasons we saw in the lead up to the Iraq war, where diplomats opposing the war were being bribed by Saddam.
because you can't predict what challenges the President will face. Situations change, issues change, and positions on the issues change.
National Security was barely a blip during the 2000 campaign. Who knew that within 9 months it would become the single defining issue of the Bush Presidency?
A leader's character does not change. Clinton's ethical and moral failings in the White House were entirely predictable, given his history of philandering. Yet we were told that his alleged (now proven) affairs as Governor were "not relevant" and that we should stick to the issues.
Granted, character can be in the eye of the beholder. But integrity is reallly a black-white issue.
"If all men were just, there would be no need of valor."
- Agesilaus
This is why we come here and post comments and criticisms. We all have differing opinions about the characters of those running. The character of each man is set and what it is. Since we can not perfectly discern that character, we all read, evaluate and contribute to each individual reader's perception of what the characters are which we behold.
Character is perhaps the second most important virtue I look for in these elections, though I wonder if it has really been that important in all of this. It doesn't seem to have hurt the likes of Giuliani or Thompson in terms of their divorces or philandering with women, for instance.
I'd say results matter far more in how I look on things. Such is the case with any job. I'll take a few character flaws in someone who can demonstrate an excellent skill set and a stirling resume. And not just someone who has said the right things and voted the right way, but someone who has taken the reigns of leadership and lead.
I find it remarkable at times how little past success seems to play into the equation for some, though. It's as if it should matter in every avenue of work save the Commander of the Free World. That makes no sense to me whatsoever.
"Don't ever be afraid to see what you see." ~Ronald Reagan
Once you can fake that nothing is beyond you.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
It's not just the things Romney said and did in 1994, but also 2002, and in some cases as recently as 2006 or 2007.
"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill