Principles Aren't Everything

Hillary Clinton is often criticized for lacking core beliefs. Her detractors claim that she changes her views based on whatever is the popular position at any given time, rather than her principles. Her husband received similar criticism, though to a lesser extent. Most people would consider this a negative quality of hers, and it a lot of ways it is, but there some positives aspects of it, which I think are overlooked

"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."

-Friedrich Nietzsche

Many politicians cling to their principles because they’re not smart enough to tackle complex problems. For example, if your political beliefs are limited government, being strong on defense and that “traditional values” should be promoted, then you can simply apply these beliefs to any issue, without actually understanding it. If the economy isn’t going well, then you rely on your limited-government principle to tell you that taxes should be lower, or if America is under a terrorist threat, then you rely on your strong-on-defense principle to tell you to invade some country.

George W. Bush is the perfect example of a president who is too principled. Throughout his presidency, he has remained almost unwaveringly faithful to his principles, even while his principles have failed miserably when put into practice.

Don’t get me wrong. It’s important for a president to have principles, just not at the expense of intellectual curiosity. A president shouldn’t constantly second-guess himself, but while he is crafting his proposals he should explore a large variety of different viewpoints. This is a mature way of approaching the issues. Sadly it is an approach that has been absent from Washington in recent years. Hopefully that will change soon.