Posted by
Andrews on Monday, April 21, 2008 1:40:04 PM
Back in my younger days, I dated a young lady who was both a die hard communist and a born again Christian*. (Obviously, she did not follow the atheist part of communist doctrine.) At the time I thought it was strange to hear someone espousing communist doctrine and then telling me about her personal communication with G-d, and, to be honest, I still do. But at least now I realize that people are complex, and sometimes hold concepts we would think contradictory. Sometime they manage to integrate them and satisfy themselves that they are not contradictory, other times they simply accept that their beliefs are not consistent.
Why do I mention this? Because I think some, especially on the conservative side, have forgotten that we are dealing with humans and not ideas when we have elections. Lately I have seen more and more posts mentioning McCain's ties to Juan Hernandez, or his liberal position on one issue or another, and reiterating the same old arguments for sitting out the election.
My point is this, McCain, like everyone else, is complex, and holds some contradictory ideas. He is wrong on a number of issues, but he is also right on a number of issues. Those who bring up Hernandez or the Gang of Fourteen forget this. Instead, the say "he is wrong on X, so he is wrong". They assume that McCain is inhuman, and if he holds one wrong idea, he must be fully consistent and thus wrong on everything.
Life is just not that simple.
Humans are far from perfect, and they are hardly even completely consistent. If we continue to hold out for the perfect exemplar of all conservative beliefs before giving an endorsement we might as well disband the Republican party and hand over the keys to the Democrats. Even the sainted Reagan** withdrew from Beirut, failed to eliminate -- or even reform in a lasting way -- the income tax, put O'Connor on the bench, and made any number of other missteps. We need to accept that we get the rind along with the fruit, the chaff with the wheat, whatever analogy you prefer. Sometime we have to accept a less than perfect candidate.
And, yes, I am aware McCain is a lot less perfect than some alternatives. (On the other hand, with the
possible dissent in the Democrat ranks, a moderate may be a good choice, for strategic reasons at least, as he can attract Democrat defectors better than a more right wing candidate could.) McCain has a lot of flaws, and much to complain about, but he also has many good traits.
I just think we should not dwell on McCain's bad points to the point where we put in someone such as Obama and Hillary, with whom we do not agree at all. I know that many are waiting for the ideal candidate, the champion of conservative values, but, even so, does it make sense to anyone to throw away a 50% conservative, or even a 10% one, to get a 0% conservative?
Or to steal (and paraphrase) a quote, in this case the perfect seems the enemy of the good.
--------------------------------------------------
* For those who care, this is the same ex-girlfriend I mentioned in very
early comments as a relative of Che Guevarra.
** I call Reagan "sainted", as a very distorted image of him has become the recent idol of conservatives. Of course those worshiping this imaginary Reagan manage to overlook all his faults and mistakes and attribute to him much more than he deserves. Now, do not think I have a complaint with reagan, he was the best president in my lifetime, and one of the greats in the whole history of the nation, but he was nowhere near as flawless as some think he was.