|
|
Wednesday, June 04, 2003FLS Backs Chichester In an unprecedented half-page editorial, the Free Lance-Star came down on both the side of the incumbent John Chichester but also against the negative campaigning tactics of Mike Rothfeld: The campaign to unseat state Sen. John Chichester, R-Stafford, by the boosters of his primary opponent, Mike Rothfeld, has been one long, shrill vilification of a serious public man who--agree or not with his politics--carries an earned reputation for devoted service and good character. The Chichester way is not one of venom. When in 1985 his handlers urged him to "go negative" in his race for lieutenant governor against Democrat Douglas Wilder, who had vulnerabilities, Mr. Chichester kept his punches up, losing with 48 percent of the vote. Yet forgiving anytime soon the orchestrated slurs of the current campaign would require that Mr. Chichester's name be preceded not by "Sen." but by "St." His supporters are roused for a warpath that stretches beyond Election Day. This paragraph means much more than what it says, because as the rest of the editorial implies, the real enemy of good politics isn't negative tactics, it is inflexible dogmatism from Christian conservatives: in their zeal to make a better society, conservative Christians can be tempted by expediency. As the great Christian apologist C.S. Lewis wrote, "[W]ickedness, when you examine it, turns out to be the pursuit of some good in the wrong way." Is he right? Well of course he is. But there's more: Several area political leaders who accept the label "Christian conservative" are thoroughly honorable women and men. They should amend their policy regarding primary endorsements, break their silence, and join House of Delegates Speaker Bill Howell, R-Stafford, in disavowing the Rothfeld campaign's methods and urging Mr. Chichester's re-election. There may be a higher imperative to do this than secular politics. Is that so? Here the problem with the argument, and especially from a Catholic point of view. The Republican Party is supposed to be a party of principle, right? When it comes to those principles, there can be no compromise. We are either pro-life, or we are not. We are either anti-tax, or we are not. There is no middle ground, only a responsible execution of these goals. The problem is that the principles are being confused with the tactics. Set the negative tactics aside. Of course, it becomes politically convenient to weigh down the conservative Christian argument with Rothfeld's tactics, but there shouldn't be a joining of the hip here. The principles should not waver, and those who are supporting Rothfeld on those principles shouldn't be given an "either-or" proposition in terms of their honor or reputation. Of course, the most humorous part waits until the end: A crushing Chichester win on June 10, in a primary open to voters of every party, would tell all the slick-jowled opinion-manipulators inside the Beltway that their direct-mail attacks and church-lot sleazesheets are--in a true community--a waste of suckers' money. "The Irish," groused Freud, "are the only people who don't benefit from psychoanalysis." Let the Fredericksburg area be likewise exceptional in resisting poisonous propaganda. Never let our streets become mean streets. GO IRISH! By and large I agreed with this editorial, and I am very content to hunker down until 11 June. Until then, I do intend to stand by my Catholic principles and work towards them accordingly. Public life demands men and women of principle. Just because there are those who would use that principle as cover shouldn't be a slight to those who live those principles as they were intended. I for one will stand by my principles and vote accordingly, no matter what the election.
|
|
JEFFERSONIAD POLL: Whom do you support for Virginia Attorney General?1) John Brownlee2) Ken Cuccinelli AboutShaunKenney.com is one of Virginia's oldest political blogs, focusing on the role of religion and politics in public life. Shaun Kenney, 30, lives in Fluvanna County, Virginia.ContactThe Jeffersoniad
ArchivesMarch 2002 April 2002 May 2002 June 2002 July 2002 August 2002 September 2002 October 2002 November 2002 December 2002 January 2003 February 2003 March 2003 April 2003 May 2003 June 2003 July 2003 August 2003 September 2003 October 2003 November 2003 December 2003 January 2004 February 2004 March 2004 April 2004 May 2004 June 2004 July 2004 August 2004 September 2004 October 2004 November 2004 December 2004 January 2005 February 2005 June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 November 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 April 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 December 2008 January 2009
|
|
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Home