“I am very short-sighted, and if I don’t like a situation I take my glasses off.” – Jenny Eclair
If I were to make a list of the things that bother me in the world, it would be longer than Santa’s. But for a moment, allow me to focus my attention on one particular annoyance. I hate when people dismiss politics by saying something to the effect of “Oh, well it’s all crooked anyway.” These are the people who either don’t vote, thereby contributing nothing to our democratic process, or worse, they vote for someone who suits their interests, but has absolutely no personal character.
Joy Behar said something on “The View” last week that blew me away. I wasn’t shocked because of the content, but that a liberal would be so candid:
“People have to understand, it’s policy. Teddy Kennedy. Remember Chappaquiddick? Am I the oldest person in the room? Chappaquiddick. I mean, a girl drowns and he abandons her and she drowned and women still voted for Teddy Kennedy. Why? Because he voted for women’s rights. That’s why. That’s the bottom line of it in my opinion. I mean, I don’t like either one of them, to tell you the truth, Teddy or Bill. They’re both dogs as far as I’m concerned. But I still will vote for Bill Clinton because he votes in my favor.”
Take a moment to let that sink in. Now, this is what many liberals believe, and I know this to be true. However, I never thought I’d hear one admit it so frankly. It’s the only way they could possibly stomach voting for the candidates for whom they vote.
This is the most profound problem facing our democracy–more than that, any democracy. The moral decay of politicians at the hands of the voters. Sure, many politicians are less than scum, but guess who put them there? We did. Though ignorance prevails for the majority of the voting population, there are still a great many for whom personal integrity simply doesn’t matter on the part of the candidate. They’ll vote for anybody who claims to represent their interests regardless of who they are as a person.
Knowingly voting for a morally bankrupt person is an ethical crime. It’s a crime against your fellow man; it’s a crime against yourself; and it’s a crime that has extraordinary repercussions because guess what? Someone’s personal life is inseparable from their public life.
Joy Behar may believe that Bill Clinton’s personal life, his sexual dalliances, his “alleged” assaults, rapes, and other crimes don’t have any bearing on his political policy, but she’s the functional equivalent of a monkey. And anyone who thinks the same is her equal. Personal is inseparable from public.
Sure, people are great at hiding things, but that’s not what I’m talking about. If you vote for someone who is the ethical equivalent of Al Capone simply because they favor what you favor, what makes you think they won’t turn on a dime when the political winds blow in a new direction? There’s a reason circa 2004 Hillary Clinton was adamantly opposed to gay marriage, and 2016 Hillary is screaming “Love wins!” from the mountain top.
Let’s do a side-by-side.
In 2004, then-Senator Hillary Clinton said the following regarding marriage:
“I believe that marriage is not just a bond but a sacred bond between a man and a woman. I have had occasion in my life to defend marriage, to stand up for marriage, to believe in the hard work and challenge of marriage. So I take umbrage at anyone who might suggest that those of us who worry about amending the Constitution are less committed to the sanctity of marriage, or to the fundamental bedrock principle that exists between a man and a woman, going back into the mists of history as one of the founding, foundational institutions of history and humanity and civilization, and that its primary, principal role during those millennia has been the raising and socializing of children for the society into which they are to become adults.”
In 2004, Wall Street Journal/NBC polling had support for gay marriage at just 30%. 62% opposed gay marriage.
In 2013, Hillary said:
“LGBT Americans are our colleagues, our teachers, our soldiers, our friends, our loved ones. And they are full and equal citizens, and they deserve the rights of citizenship. That includes marriage. That’s why I support marriage for lesbian and gay couples. I support it personally and as a matter of policy and law, embedded in a broader effort to advance equality and opportunity for LGBT Americans and all Americans.”
By 2013, the polls had significantly….evolved. A Gallup poll from July 2013 had 52% in favor of legalizing gay marriage, with only 43% opposed.
Hillary shifted with the wind because she lacks ethics; she has a decades-long history of outright lies, and criminal behavior. Simple Google search to see what a worthless scumbag she is: “Hillary Bosnia.”
If for some reason gay marriage took a popularity nosedive a decade from now, I can guarantee she would find a way to flip back. Well, it was a lovely experiment, but fundamentally, we’re just not there yet. I’ve evolved.
My point is this: Voting is not simply an exercise in policy agreement, it’s a study of character. Unfortunately, we’re no longer students of behavior, we’re students of the now. But, she said gay marriage is cool and stuff like last year! What more do you want? How about consistency, and moral rectitude?
People like Behar would reply with, “So what? They vote for my interests.” To that I say, “For now.” If you can’t trust someone personally, you can’t trust them publicly. This leads to the other problem. They’re all crooked anyway! Hmm, I wonder why? Perhaps because you keep voting for people who, while at the moment agree with you, have no ethical foundation upon which they build their policy decisions. So, get ready to be upset when they change to suit their own political interests, and leave you behind. People like Behar both created the problem, and perpetuate it.
First, stop your whining that all politics is crooked, and vote for people with character. Maybe someday, because of your having voted for a decent human being, politics won’t be crooked, you dunce! Second, don’t be a moron and think that personal and public ethics are as separate as you believe church and state should be.
End of rant.