Re: “Pence has something to prove”
First let me say that I have been a reader and supporter of WND since its inception, and when you put out the call for renewed support, I told my daughter when she asked what I would like for a Father’s Day gift. I said “subscription to Whistleblower” magazine – and she did so.
Second, I like Mike Pence a great deal. I have liked him for a number of years. I wanted him to run for president, and he would have been my first choice for many reasons. I sent his office an email urging him to endorse Ted Cruz prior to the Indiana primary. I was pleased to see him named as Trump’s choice for vice president, although I would have also been happy if Newt Gingrich had been selected.
All this leads me to say your column about Pence extremely disappointed me. To begin with, it wasn’t accurate. Pence didn’t relent or cave because of media pressure. He caved because of business pressure. As we have seen more and more often in other states, corporations that used to stay out of politics and were more conservative than liberal have become both political and liberal. And they are using their power of employment, revenue and public visibility to clobber politicians and office holders who try to stand up for those things that both you and I agree on. Pence was subjected to immense business pressure with a number of key corporations threatening to leave the state and to oppose both him and Republicans in Indiana. I know, because one of them, Angie’s List, I wrote and complained to them about their stance. The exchange of emails with them was interesting, and eventually they offered about as close to an apology and admission of being wrong as possible without explicitly doing so.
Now, the question of whether Pence should have caved to business interests is certainly debatable. I admit that I was disappointed, but like with so many other governors and legislators in other states who have to face that type of business opposition, I understood their position. Just as I understood Sarah Palin’s decision to resign due to her concern that frivolous lawsuits were becoming extremely expensive for Alaska and not allowing her to do her job, sometimes the best course of action is to set aside personal interests and principles for the overall good of the people that you serve – at least for the moment and temporarily – and live to fight another day. Certainly, Ronald Reagan had to do that on occasion. George Washington did, too. Washington was accused and discredited at the time for several actions/inactions that undermined his principles and those of the Revolution. But he knew, for sake of survival and posterity, that he had to choose the course of “discretion being the better part of valor.”
This is why as the late talk-show host Lee Rodgers used to always say: “Never fall in love with a politician – they will always disappoint you.” The fact is, in any major leadership role – and you have to know this from your own personal experience – you will never make everybody happy, and you will at times have to make decisions that go against your grain, at least for the time being. There are, of course, choices so fundamental and so critically important that it’s worth going to the wall and fighting no matter what. That law in Indiana, though important, was not one of those. In contest, it is a minor part of the attack on religious freedom. The attacks on God and Jesus Christ in the public square are our primary concern. Until we win that war back, the other battles are merely tangential – important but tangential. We must first win hearts and minds and control institutions. That lets us first to legally and proudly proclaim “In God We Trust” and to publicly offer prayer and reverence to our Creator. We do that, and laws like the Indiana one won’t even be necessary.
But the most disappointing thing about your column was its emphasis and timing. It should be the absolute goal of every Republican, every conservative, every Christian and every reasoned person to beat Hillary Clinton and prevent her from ever becoming president. It does not help when people like you poison the well about Trump’s VP selection, especially right out of the gate. There are so many ways that you could have handled this better – even if you have strong disagreement over Pence’s handling of that law. There are numerous positive things that you could have started with about Pence – things where you and he are in high agreement. The handling of the law could have been an afterthought or it could have been even a focus like in this column, but presented down the road after presenting the positive things.
We know Democrats will highlight and try to make a major issue out of that incident. Why are you playing into their hand by trying to make your conservative readers equally suspect of Pence? How does that help defeat Clinton? Why instead didn’t you focus on the excellent job that Pence has done economically in Indiana, recognizing that his neutering of that law was part and parcel of that economic success?
Regardless of whether Pence conceded because of media or business pressure, I can’t argue that it wasn’t upsetting. We all want our leaders to act on complete moral principles and not put other interests ahead of those principles. Yet, the overall benefit gained compared to the cost is always a matter of degree and has to come into play. I would love everyone to accept my moral standards, and I would like to never have to waver on them. But real life doesn’t allow that.
You have to give at the margins and prepare to stand firm on the core. If not, you become nothing more than the fanatical theocratic psychopaths that we see in the Islamists, seeking to stamp out every seeming affront to their religious tenets. In a pluralistic society such as ours, let’s put our strongest efforts to winning the hearts and minds of our people and not into eating our own.
Sorry, Joseph, for being critical, but with so much on the line with this election, it’s disturbing to see conservatives and Republicans engage in the circular firing squad. Let’s first stop Clinton and we will have plenty of time to dissect each other.
Best wishes,
Bob Crandall