SEARCH BLOG: POLITICS
Now let me say that I don't ascribe to that notion. Certainly there are unprincipled politicians. There may not be general agreement about who they are, but most people will nod their head "yes" that there are. One man's principle is another's unprincipled.
Principles are often the basis of positions that many view as problematic.
In two recent posts, the issue of principles came up. The suggestion that Ron Paul be the Vice President choice of Mitt Romney perturbed principled Libertarian partisans. It would be unprincipled for Ron Paul to accept a position in the administration of a Statist. Then I questioned whether the actions taken by Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin were based on conservative principles or those of an unprincipled conservative.
It seems that the problem with principles for politicians is that they must answer to the people of their party. This pushes them on to paths that prevent cooperation or compromise or compassion. Some would argue that is a good thing. Perhaps. Ronald Reagan did not compromise with the Soviet Union. He remained true to his principles and precipitated the demise of our greatest political adversary... the Evil Empire.
Principles that unite a country against an adversary are different from principles that divide a country internally. Politicians, once elected to the leadership of a country or a state, must weigh whether their actions are proper for all. It seems to be the common tendency to take actions that are highly favorable to your party and extremely punishing to the other. The common excuse is that it is being true to one's principles. To that, I can only infer that such principles are less than perfect. Perhaps that is because they are the principles of politicians... and not those of leaders.