Posted on 09/26/2003 8:37:29 AM PDT by repentant_pundit
The late Mother Theresa, among others, advised us to prioritize faithfulness above success. In other words, we must remain true to principle, as opposed to how successful we think we will be. Then we can look ourselves in the mirror with respect. The California governor's recall election is illustrating the dilemma we face when choosing between principle and success.
Radio talk show superstar Sean Hannity, a pro-life conservative, says he will announce a week before the California election whether he is endorsing Republican In Name Only Arnold Schwarzenegger or conservative Tom McClintock, based on which one of them is showing higher in the polls at the time. Hannity has for several weeks been hyping Schwarzenegger, and it's pretty cut and dried that he will continue supporting the movie star. The fact that an icon of the conservative ideology would compromise on principle in such an undisciplined manner is remarkable.
Where is the honor in only backing frontrunners? Even if McClintock overtakes Schwarzenegger in the polls, and Hannity switches his allegiance to the conservative, what does that say about Hannity's devotion to principle?
Hannity's first mistake is assuming that Arnold Schwarzenegger is a real Republican. The only thing Republican about the actor is the "R" next to his name on the ballot. For all intents and purposes, Schwarzenegger is a Democrat In Republican Clothing. Hannity claims that Schwarzenegger is fiscally conservative, but "fiscal conservative" is merely a label that identifies Republicans who compromise on social issues. The term "fiscal conservative and socially liberal/moderate" is an oxymoron.
Placing success ahead of faithfulness, as Hannity has done, is putting the cart ahead of the horse. A woman caller on Hannity's radio program excoriated him for not sticking to principle at a time when his support for McClintock could have helped the only true Republican in the race. McClintock and Hannity have similar values, so why didn't Hannity support the conservative from the start of the recall campaign? His priorities were skewed from the start when he looked beyond his own value system to whom he thinks has the best chance to win.
Hannity talks blue-sky platitudes about all the virtues that will spring forth from a Schwarzenegger gubernatorial administration. If Schwarzenegger wins the governor's race, what will Republicans have gained? I suspect that Hannity will answer that question differently several months from now than he would today. By then, it will be evident that Gov. Schwarzenegger is a Hollyweird version of Gov. Jessie Ventura: far and distant from anything remotely resembling the Republican Party. Hannity ought to use his syndicated radio program to extol the virtue of conservativism. Instead, he cuts and runs for cover when a key conservative candidate trails in the polls. If Hannity backed McClintock now, his California listeners might be persuaded to support McClintock.
Relating to the California recall, Hannity is making the mistake of giving more weight to Schwarzenegger's party than to his ideology. Is it the responsibility of conservatives to support the success of pseudo-Republicans?
In the 21st century, renegade Republicans are grossly watering down the GOP. The Log Cabin homosexuals and the pro-abortion WISH List are foremost in this category. These RINOs have attached themselves to the Republican Party to mock the party's leadership and its pro-life, conservative platform. Is the schizophrenic GOP for family values and the unborn or against them? Instead of preserving the party's conservative corporate culture, leadership welcomes in apostates. The party has become less and less about faithfulness and more about success. If that can be done in an intelligent way, fine. But when principle is sacrificed in the process, what is gained? On paper, the difference between the parties is profound. In reality, the Republican Party is becoming more like the Democratic Party.
When an icon for the conservative movement cannot see the inherent problems in supporting a candidate with an agenda taken from the opposition, a red flag ought to go up. A vote for Schwarzenegger is not a vote of support for the family, it is not a vote of support for traditional values, it is not a vote for faithfulness, it may or may not be a vote for fiscal responsibility, and it certainly is not a vote of support for the Republican Party. But it may be a vote of success and an indication of the GOP's progress in the cause of compromise with the left.
Millions of Americans face dilemmas in the voting booth on election days. "Do I vote for the liberal Republican, the liberal Democrat, write in a name or just leave it blank? If I don't vote for the Republican, the Democrat will win. But if the Republican wins, he will legislate as a Democrat. What recourse does a conservative have?" The allure of supporting liberal Republicans who are competitive in the polls doesn't come without a price. The devil always comes to collect.
The concept of faithfulness must be our guiding principle. Our responsibility as conservatives is to vote according to the pro-life, conservative principles we say we believe in. The success of pseudo-Republicans is not our responsibility. "What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul?" (Matthew 16:26)
Kucinich should be their man if they had any integrity.
"People tell me all the time that 'you care more about your principles than you care about winning'. First of all, I believe that if you stick to your principles, you will win. And secondly, if you don't stick to your principles, what is the point of winning?"
"When I entered this race, I made a promise to stay in right to the finish line. I keep my promises."
Tom McClintock
September 24, 2003
Weird guy....
That Mother Theresa was such an extremist. She was more worried about remaining faithful to God's platform than about working with people and really leading. Didn't she know you can't enact your agenda by stubbornly sticking to your principles?
He's proving the article's point by repeating the same tired old mantra that supporting the true conservative means that we actually want the Leftist to win. It's a smear tactic that takes the focus away from Arnold Schwarzenegger's LACK of conservative beliefs.
If, by the admission of the participants, massive numbers of Californians plan to vote for a candidate whose politics are quite removed from their own, this attempt to manipulate the political process for a contrived 'win' itself becomes the main corrupting force on the process.
An election measures the will of the people. When large numbers of voters cast their ballots for candidates who do not reflect their will, they themselves destroy the integrity of elections and any hope for reasonably honest governance.
That kind of thinking is why California is in this mess to begin with. The mess will continue, no matter what the result of the election, until Californians start voting in a manner that reflects their will and not their expectations of how others will vote.
California Republicans, you have no one to blame but yourselves.
Oh, that's because he belives in core conservative values like Ronald Reagan did, as opposed to the pro-abortion, pro-Brady Bill, wishy-washy Schwarzenegger.
Is Hannity a Kalifornian? If not, why is he endorsing anyone?
Uh, huh... Sure.
I suppose you think Michael Bloomberg is a good mayor too?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.