By Kevin Rollins
Constitution Party presidential candidate Michael Peroutka got in trouble for quoting Council of Foreign Relations chairman Peter G. Peterson's new book.
On his blog, he said:
Both of the two major parties are responsible and guilty for the economic, budgetary mess we are in, and this is documented in detail in a new book by Peter G. Peterson titled "Running On Empty: How The Democratic And Republican Parties Are Bankrupting Our Future And What Americans Can Do About It."
Apparently, some supporters were disturbed by their far-right hero happily quoting the leader of the New World Order!
In a subsequent e-mail to his supporters, Peroutka wrote:
Following my message entitled The Parties of Big Government, I received a number of emails asking whether I realized just who Mr. Peterson is.
The answer is, truthfully, no -- I didn't. And I am grateful to those of you who have detailed Mr. Peterson's credentials to me.
However, in a sense, it just makes his revelations all that more interesting since even he is saying something that, properly understood, would lead one to stop wasting votes on those who have demonstrated their lack of fidelity to Constitutional, fiscally conservative, government.
Mr. Peroutka is quite right. But, this illustrates the problem that politicians have in acknowledging good ideas when they come from the other team. Every movement has their quotable saints whose truths are indisputable and their villains whom they cannot tolerate. Politicians want to keep good company in the eyes of their electorate.
Former governor William Weld(R-MA) has lamented his Senate race against John Kerry -- that Kerry ran not against him, but against House Speaker Newt Gingrich.
How recently have you heard Republicans invoke Bill Clinton even though he's been out of office for 4 years? Hillary Clinton is now all Democrats, in the eyes of conservatives.
These are important to recognize because they impair our ability to see the truth. Something is true or it is not true, who is saying it does not change its validity. But, of course, with limited time, we rely on editors and trusted sources to give us our version of reality. I'm not suggesting abandoning this, but to recognize our partisanship and to aim to be more transpartisan, recognizing truth regardless of who is saying it, that is a worthy goal.
For those politicians who are committed to the truth, but find themselves confronted with the realities of campaigning, I suggest, that they might follow Mr. Peroutka's example.
If a villain says the right thing, you should proclaim that even a person with so little grasp of reality can catch on to a self-evident truth. If they advocate for it, and threaten to adopt your issue as their own, become even stronger on it. Use your record against their's. But, don't abandon your position just because "the enemy" now believes in it too.
Unlike a business, that drops and adds products, programs, and divisions according to their profit margin, political leaders are charged with doing the right thing, even if it is hard to win with it.
Be careful whom you quote, but don't fear allies from unfamiliar places.
Kevin D. Rollins is Publisher and Editor of the Free Liberal.