The value of political compromise.

I recently heard Condoleezza Rice explain away what I consider to be slimy political tactics by saying that America has a rough and tumble political system and it is critically important that we thoroughly vet the candidates.  I suppose that her view is the correct one given that the position of President of the United States is clearly the most difficult job in the world.  It does not, however, mean that I have to like the kind of thing that happened to Herman Cain.  Until the charges of misconduct are proven, I would argue that he should not be dismissed as a candidate.  To do so is to permit character assassination to continue in this country unchallenged.  As I have said before in this blog, I do not support Mr Cain because I believe that he lacks the experience necessary to do the job, but I assure you that it does not have anything to do with the unproven charges of inappropriate behavior.  Before any more liberals get up on their high horses and complain about unproven allegations against Herman Cain, I want them to run their excuses for Presidents Kennedy and Clinton by me one more time.  (They can leave Teddy Kennedy and Chappaquiddick out of the discussion, because I will not change my mind about that one.)

At the present time, we have two front runners in the polls and the mystery of Iowa still ahead of us. Like the rest of America, including those living in Iowa, I have absolutely no idea what the political landscape will look like in another month or two, let alone after New Hampshire, but I am basically content with the way things appear to be going and can easily support either Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich as the Republican candidate.  They are two very different individuals and their leadership style would be very different, but they hold out the promise of one critical qualification - the desire to unite the country around center-right principals.  I have heard Romney address the issues that apparently make it difficult for many conservatives to support him and I can accept his answers.  As for Newt's "political and personal baggage" I am willing to let bygones be bygones.  I don't know what really happened in his private life and I am not overly concerned because he had some ideas that turned out be less useful than he had originally thought. 

I know of very few people who have lived a perfect life and have never had to change their minds about anything.  I am looking for a president that can first and foremost pull this country together and govern from the center.  I am very supportive of the Tea Party sentiments as far as encouraging a smaller footprint for government and I definitely want to get our massive debt under control before it sinks the ship of state, but I continue to believe that we need to bring all of America together in support of these values.  We can not do that by electing another person to the presidency that is doctrinaire about ideology.  We did that last time around and look what it got us.  While I am on this subject, I should mention Congressman Ron Paul.  In many ways, he is the most doctrinaire candidate still in the political mix and that includes Barack Obama.   Paul has a lot of support in Iowa and might do well in the upcoming Caucus vote.  I love to hear the congressman debate the other candidates and viscerally relate to many of his positions, but I do not support him for president.  The world is an infinitely complex place and a doctrinaire approach to all of it's many faceted problems just will not work.  Difficult as it is to accept, we need to learn to value political compromise.