And why they're dropping him now
Social conservatives got behind Rudy initially because they were mislead into believing he was a good moral person. They're dropping him now because they're learning that he's not.
In other words social conservatives have consistently judged Rudy according to their number one standard--moral character--throughout this whole campaign. Many of them got it wrong at first, which is understandable. But that doesn't negate the fact that moral character has always been priority number one with social conservatives. You economic conservatives let this be a good lesson learned.
2 comments:
Terry,
I don't know that I'm a social conservative as that term is generally used, but I certainly agree that a candidate's character is a legitimate issue -- while making allowances for the human frailties shared by all of us who aren't saints.
And I have no quarrel with those who see Giuliani's public behavior as disgraceful.
But to say that moral character is "priority number one" is not the same as saying it's the only quality that matters. We aren't electing the Chief Boy Scout. Politics is about politics.
Presumably, almost everyone would agree Mahatma Gandhi had moral character. He also did a great deal of bad as a politician. He may have been full to the brim with satyagraha and all that, but it is possible to have a sneaking suspicion that he hated the British.
He was notoriously uncooperative with the British in their fight against the Japanese in World War II. I read that he even secretly collaborated with the Japanese. Whether that is true or not, he certainly was no help in the struggle against a power far worse than the colonialist British (who in fact were of far more benefit than harm to India).
Gandhi's mania resulted in premature independence for his country, which could only be accomplished by partition that produced a Hindu-Muslim mutual holocaust. One British officer said its atrocities were worse than anything he'd seen in the war.
My point is that personal virtue doesn't make up for political stupidity, and the other side of the coin is that personal failings are not necessarily a deal breaker if the candidate has the best political views. The issues are too vital, the times too perilous, to indulge in the politics of sanctimony.
In Rudy's case, there is no conflict in my mind. He is not a very good person, and he would as president likely be another vote-buying, tough-talking Muslim appeaser, and almost surely another open-borders and amnesty trickster.
I don't mean that as a compliment.
But to say that moral character is "priority number one" is not the same as saying it's the only quality that matters. We aren't electing the Chief Boy Scout. Politics is about politics.
Post a Comment