Throughout last year’s long, arduous presidential primaries, Bill Clinton more than once defied the pundits and rebounded from a series of revelations which would have ended the political careers of most mortals. His capacity to weather these storms was due, in part, to his affable personality and an easy going style to which many people related.
But, it was also a function of his apparent commitment to certain ideals, some of which were controversial and highly unpopular. While not quite promising all things to all people, he did make very specific pledges to many diverse blocs of voters. During the general election campaign, candidate Clinton, with the defacto assistance of Ross Perot, was able to waltz around the implementation realities of his more contentious proposals by reminding all who would listen that, “It’s the economy, stupid!”
Within days of moving into the White House, Bill Clinton set out to implement one of his campaign promises … a commitment to end the ban on gays and lesbians in the military. While a divisive issue with which many Americans disagreed, the new president earned a grudging measure of respect for an apparent willingness to stand by his convictions.
However, as the flames of this highly emotional issue were fanned, irrationally at times, President Clinton quickly began to retreat and hedge his previous statements, a characteristic which has become a hallmark of his administration. Similar scenarios have subsequently occurred in both policy arenas and in his support of some of his administration’s controversial nominees.
His supporters are quick to argue, where matters of policy are concerned, it’s better to compromise with political adversaries and achieve partial success than to remain unwavering and risk loosing a battle altogether. Other observers of his political career have pointed out Bill Clinton is a master at staking out an often unpopular course of action and then ceding whatever is necessary to be able to claim at least a partial victory.
However valid and pragmatic such observations might be, all individuals are regularly confronted with situations where their views and values are challenged. Ultimately, each will be judged, not so much by having achieved a series of often shallow victories, but by their willingness to stand firm by their convictions and fight for their beliefs. By such a standard, President Clinton’s first six months in office leaves large questions as to just what values and positions he really cherishes.
In this week’s retreat, the President announced his “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Don’t’ Pursue” policy under which homosexuals will be permitted to serve in the military. Despite months of “study” and a well-crafted promulgation speech, his policy is already under fire from members of Congress on both sides of the issue. Moreover, it is not clear whether its effect will materially change anything for gays and lesbians now serving in uniform … and the entire policy may be both unworkable and fatally flawed on several legal fronts.
If so, then the battle lines have just been redrawn. In the process, the advocates for change have seen their most potent ally take cover behind the pragmatism of compromise … despite the president’s remark during his speech at Fort McNair on Monday, “this issue has never been one of group rights but rather individual ones”.
The ability of men and women to govern a large and diverse democracy such as America is based on both compromise and conviction. In matters of purely economic, social and political concern, disagreements, differences of opinion and prioritization of issues can only be reasonably resolved through a give-and-take process and the willingness to compromise individual positions for the greater good.
However, where individual liberties and freedoms are concerned, there can be no compromise! Already, too many of our precious rights have been eroded because our national leaders have been more concerned with order than with justice. Their political compromises, tragically endorsed by the short-sightedness and apathy of the public, has placed many American ideals in jeopardy.
This president must reevaluate his style, reorder his priorities and ultimately be far more willing to stand by his convictions, even if he knows he’ll loose certain battles. A failure to do so will condemn his administration to be little more than a stalking horse for the narrow goals of a nation of special interest groups … while accomplishing little in the process.
