|
|
|
|
|
To be labeled a flip flopping politician is one of the worst political fates here in the United States. It isn't difficult to understand why the public dislikes those who flip-flop in their positions. The term means to change ones mind on an issue or issues, and it's assumed this is done solely for political purposes. As voters, we are left wondering if the candidate has any true beliefs, and what they are.
However, if the flip flopping label is applied to all politicians who change their minds on any issue, can it really be such a bad thing? I don't think so. In fact, I recently heard a comment from presidential candidate John McCain that was to me far worse than changing one's position.
"Look, I have never changed any of my positions," he proudly told a reporter, in order to differentiate himself from those other candidates who had changed positions on the issues.
That's a terrible thing to be proud of! McCain has been on the political scene for a long time. Has he really learned nothing that has changed his mind on any issue? Did he figure out exactly the right positions and opinions thirty years ago? Do you agree with everything you thought thirty years ago?
With time, normal humans change their minds and opinions according what is learned and experienced. It is referred to as growing and maturing. Short-term, there is normally a consistency in ones ideas and opinions if one is a rational thinker. But to have all the same beliefs and opinions over a long time almost certainly indicates a closed mind. It's just a matter of probabilities: How likely is it that there has been nothing new learned or experienced that would affect a person's thinking over the course of ten or thirty years?
Now, what if we assume that McCain really had no new information, experience or thoughts that should have altered his opinions over the years? His obvious pride in staying the same is still a problem, isn't it? What if he discovers something new that should change his mind? Will he ignore it in order to keep his "non-flip-flopping" status?
Note: This wasn't meant to be anti-McCain. He just happened to be the one who made it a point of pride to have "never changed." Early in his career, I considered him to be one of the most honest men in Washington. And if you have ever read about his experience of being tortured for five years in Vietnam - and then forgiving his captors - you know he was courageous, open-minded and intelligent.
Obviously, if there is a better way to do something, or an idea that is more in accord with the truth, a person - even a politician - should choose it. Assuming we can learn, then, one's opinions and a politician's positions should change once in a while. Of course, it seems likely that the changing positions we see during election time are not honest reassessments, but political calculations. But in any case, here's a scenario I would love to see, just once:
An honest politician (I'm feeling optimistic today) is accused of changing his position on an important issue. He did it for good reasons, however, so instead of defending himself with the usual tortured logic showing how his position didn't really change, he takes the offensive;
"Yes, I have changed my position," he says, looking straight into the camera. "I was mistaken, and I see that this is a better way. And I promise you that I will always change my position when necessary. I will not stubbornly cling to my opinions or positions for pride or political points when I see that there is a better course for the country."
Don't expect to see that happen any time soon. The scenario above requires not only an honest politician, but one who is courageous as well. In the meantime, though, let's hope the political climate evolves just enough to allow some honest "flip-flopping" to go unpunished.