Don't Confuse Courage With Wisdom

Let’s talk about the 2008 Presidential candidates, shall we? We shall indeed, but in an indirect manner. Indulge me as I spew some discount store philosophy. Somebody I know and admire said something that shocked me today. Yes, it’s the same person who just yesterday shocked me by pointing out that some folks mock me for what I write, for the opinions I express. Yesterday, I wrote that “None of the candidates you are about to vote for are cowards.” My friend said today, “The candidates don’t have courage, they’re all spouting somebody else’s ideas.” Or something very close to that, it’s a close paraphrasing. You get the idea. This set me to thinking once again. I do that now and then. She’s half right. They are spouting the ideas of others. But so what? Some of what they say is cowardly. But it takes courage to say it. Confused? Of course you are, so let me explain. Do not confuse courage with intelligence or wisdom. I maintain that anybody willing to go before the public and advocate an idea – whether their own or that of somebody else – has courage. Think on a smaller scale. It is a well known fact that the biggest fear of many people is public speaking, regardless of the subject being spoken about. For the purpose of this post, I lump public writing in with speaking. Therefore, when I write “public speaking” or “speaking,” you can consider the public writer as well. Now couple that with speaking about ideas that you know will not be accepted by everyone who hears you. You’re not only speaking publicly, you’re setting yourself up for ridicule by those who do not agree with what you say (or write). As to the merits of the candidates, I agree that all of them spout ideas that are not entirely their own. But then, how many of have fully original ideas? The person who invents a new device to clean the windshield of your car, for example, is probably playing on the premise of the squeegee. And the device would certainly never have been thought of if not for the inspiration of the windshield, which would not have been invented without the inspiration of the automobile, which in turn probably would not have been invented without the precedent of a horse drawn wagon. The wagon would not have been invented without the invention of the wheel. Get it? So when a candidate puts forward an idea, he or she might be putting a new twist on an old idea. Or not. It is unfair, however, to fault somebody for pushing an idea that is not entirely their own. To do so would be hypocritical and stupid. Every single day, you and I use ideas and devices that we had no part in creating. If a friend of your recommends a particular restaurant, would you criticize the friend for promoting that restaurant because they had nothing to do with the creation or the operation of the restaurant? Of course, you would not. If a politician says that we need to improve our local water supply, or curb pollution, or lower taxes, would you proclaim them to be an idiot for repeating what others have said? Again, you would not. If people like an idea, they will naturally promote it. Others will like it as well, and the idea may become popular. However, just as courage should not be confused with wisdom or intelligence, popularity should not be confused with correctness. In other words, just because an idea, a product, or a political candidate is popular does not necessarily mean that that thing is good. Furthermore, “correct” or “good” are relative terms. One person may find more government desirable, whereas the more rational person will always find it repulsive. Some people consider black velvet oil paintings of Elvis Presley to be good. Those people are sadly and profoundly mistaken. There are some people who believe that socialism is good. Those people are either ignorant of what socialism truly is (they are “useful idiots”) or they are eager to bring about a change of society and government in such a way as to usher themselves into the position of being able to tell you and your family how to live – and to not live – your lives. Beware: A Communist is a Socialist who really, really means it. The candidates are in two major groups, obviously: Democrats and Republicans. On the Left are the liberal Democrats, now represented by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, are equally socialist. On the Right are the conservative Republicans. No, wait. Check that. One of the major Republican candidates is on the Right. That is, he is a conservative. He is Mitt Romney, former governor of Massachusetts. The other major candidate is John McCain, U.S. Senator from Arizona. McCain is not truly a conservative. His voting record qualifies him as a liberal. Make no mistake: McCain is not a moderate. He is a Liberal. To conservatives, true conservatives who understand political philosophy and have a general knowledge of the past 100 years, John McCain is a poser. He is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. This matters greatly. It matters because if John McCain gets the Republican Party’s nomination, he will be running against either Clinton or Obama. This is bad news for Republicans and, more importantly, conservatives. It is bad because McCain doesn’t stand a chance against either of them. Nearly as bad, if he did somehow become President, we nearly might as well have Clinton or Obama at the helm. Of course, Huckabee has no chance to beat Obama or Clinton. He is merely sucking away votes from Romney. Huckabee has become a spoiler. His supporters must accept this and not waste their votes on him. If you support Huckabee, throw some cold water on your face, look in the mirror and ask yourself: Can Huckabee defeat Clinton or Obama, and would you rather have Romney as President or one of the Democrat Socialists? This matters for reasons too numerous and complicated to go into fully here. But to distill it, Clinton and Obama both want bigger and more government. Both hate tax cuts, both want more taxes. Both speak against “the individual” and both advocate socialist policies (although neither has the courage to call them that). Both Clinton and Obama favor open borders and have worked to hinder our national security efforts. McCain is guilty of all of that and more. Obama, like a black velvet oil painting, is very popular right now. So is Clinton. So is McCain. None would look good in your living room, none would be good in the White House. Romney is the only viable candidate on the Right who offers a true alternative to the Leftists being offered by the Democrat Party. Obama, Clinton and McCain have the courage to run. They do not have the courage to speak truth. They do not have the wisdom to be the First Executive of this nation. FURTHER READING: Bill: "We Just Have to Slow Down Our Economy" to Fight Global Warming ABC News - Jan 31, 2008 - I don't really think there's much debate that, at least initially, a full commitment to reduce greenhouse gases would slow down the economy… Bill Clinton Wants An Economic Slowdown Obama Ranked Most Liberal Senator in 2007 NPR - Feb 1, 2008 - It may or may not be a trophy that he wants to pick up right now. Obama: to the left, to the left Boston Herald - Jan 31, 2008