Matt Collins
08-02-2010, 03:44 PM
http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/cimages/8dbac5d3199a7199c9b1055e59e9e768/facl_banner1.gif
Dear Matt ,
Politically, what is the difference between a friend and an enemy?
Some folks want to look at this or that issue and say, 'if they agree with me on that (or disagree), then they are my friend (or enemy).'
Others look at personality and emotional attachment to a particular style as a basis of friendship.
Many combine the two in some way.
I suggest neither of these is a primary, or even secondary, basis of analysis.
WHO BENEFITS?
Instead, I recommend a broader -- and more cold-blooded -- assessment of who is helped and harmed by the overall stance and activities of the person or group.
This is primary.
Commitment to a code of conduct is to me the secondary question.
All other questions are at best tertiary.
Let me illustrate what I mean.
WHAT ENEMIES LOOK LIKE
Most of you understand that the engine of the organized Left in the United States is -- and has been for decades -- Big Labor. Union bosses literally spend a billion dollars or more every election cycle (mostly extra-legally). In addition, they provide voting blocs and an army of paid "volunteers."
Union bosses want: More power to force workers to join and pay money to unions and more government spending (for heavily-unionized teachers, for union-controlled projects and for government bureaucrats who increasingly are the backbone of Big Labor).
Any politician or group allied with Big Labor, or helpful to union bosses overall, is an enemy.
That means Congressmen Alan Grayson (D-FL) and Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) are enemies, even though for this or that issue they may align with you.
Similarly, for me, no issue is more important than the sanctity of unborn babies.
Congressman Chris Smith (R-NJ) is consistently, even outspokenly, pro-life.
However, Chris Smith is wrong on virtually every other key issue I care about -- guns, forced unionism, big government, etc.
He is an enemy.
CONDUCT OF AN ENEMY
The question of character is also a factor.
Newt Gingrich over many years, many marriages, many shifting positions, many inside deals and sell-outs has proven that he is, as a leading conservative called him some twenty years ago, "Philosophically rootless; irretrievably so."
Newt is an enemy.
The National Rifle Association recently cut a private deal with Nancy Pelosi to have itself exempted from the DISCLOSE Act (a few mammoth left-wing groups also would benefit).
In return for its private deal, the NRA withdrew from the coalition of conservative, libertarian, pro-gun and pro-liberty groups fighting DISCLOSE.
This is the conduct of an enemy.
TREATMENT OF ENEMIES
When enemies are on the wrong side of an issue or fight, there is no problem.
But occasionally, enemies end up on the same side; e.g. Kucinich on questions of privacy (at least until Obamacare).
How do you handle that?
Here are some simple rules:
*** Do not enter into public coalition with them.
This enhances their credibility with people who agree with you, making it harder to fight the enemy on other battles.
Perhaps worse, it causes doubt and distrust amongst those who are most likely to want to support you and your efforts. The old saying in politics remains true: You don't make friends of your enemies, by making enemies of your friends. Or to state it in the positive, and perhaps clearer, form: You make enemies of your friends, when you try to make friends of your enemies.
*** Do not enter into private coalition with them.
Simply put, if they are fundamentally aligned with forces for bigger government, they are likely to trade your issue or information with others. Ditto if, like Gingrich, they lack personal integrity.
This does not mean you reject or attack them. Quite the contrary, allow them to support the position you share for their reasons and in their ways; and you do so for yours.
*** Do not praise them.
This will only add to their credibility and can never be effectively rescinded.
Imagine praising Newt Gingrich's "vision" for some stance that he found expedient; for example, expanding domestic drilling. Now imagine the Newter putting your praise on his Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina Republican flyer when he runs for President.
The bottom line: Enemies are to remain enemies even when, for a period time, they align with something you know to be good and true.
Stalin was an enemy in the 1930s; he remained one until the day he died. World War II never altered that.
In the future, we will talk about friends -- real friends.
Best regards,
Mike Rothfeld
Foundation For Applied Conservative Leadership (http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/4464224:6686501400:m:1:196453956:EBD1EE47039040205 0014E0342DA2988)
Dear Matt ,
Politically, what is the difference between a friend and an enemy?
Some folks want to look at this or that issue and say, 'if they agree with me on that (or disagree), then they are my friend (or enemy).'
Others look at personality and emotional attachment to a particular style as a basis of friendship.
Many combine the two in some way.
I suggest neither of these is a primary, or even secondary, basis of analysis.
WHO BENEFITS?
Instead, I recommend a broader -- and more cold-blooded -- assessment of who is helped and harmed by the overall stance and activities of the person or group.
This is primary.
Commitment to a code of conduct is to me the secondary question.
All other questions are at best tertiary.
Let me illustrate what I mean.
WHAT ENEMIES LOOK LIKE
Most of you understand that the engine of the organized Left in the United States is -- and has been for decades -- Big Labor. Union bosses literally spend a billion dollars or more every election cycle (mostly extra-legally). In addition, they provide voting blocs and an army of paid "volunteers."
Union bosses want: More power to force workers to join and pay money to unions and more government spending (for heavily-unionized teachers, for union-controlled projects and for government bureaucrats who increasingly are the backbone of Big Labor).
Any politician or group allied with Big Labor, or helpful to union bosses overall, is an enemy.
That means Congressmen Alan Grayson (D-FL) and Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) are enemies, even though for this or that issue they may align with you.
Similarly, for me, no issue is more important than the sanctity of unborn babies.
Congressman Chris Smith (R-NJ) is consistently, even outspokenly, pro-life.
However, Chris Smith is wrong on virtually every other key issue I care about -- guns, forced unionism, big government, etc.
He is an enemy.
CONDUCT OF AN ENEMY
The question of character is also a factor.
Newt Gingrich over many years, many marriages, many shifting positions, many inside deals and sell-outs has proven that he is, as a leading conservative called him some twenty years ago, "Philosophically rootless; irretrievably so."
Newt is an enemy.
The National Rifle Association recently cut a private deal with Nancy Pelosi to have itself exempted from the DISCLOSE Act (a few mammoth left-wing groups also would benefit).
In return for its private deal, the NRA withdrew from the coalition of conservative, libertarian, pro-gun and pro-liberty groups fighting DISCLOSE.
This is the conduct of an enemy.
TREATMENT OF ENEMIES
When enemies are on the wrong side of an issue or fight, there is no problem.
But occasionally, enemies end up on the same side; e.g. Kucinich on questions of privacy (at least until Obamacare).
How do you handle that?
Here are some simple rules:
*** Do not enter into public coalition with them.
This enhances their credibility with people who agree with you, making it harder to fight the enemy on other battles.
Perhaps worse, it causes doubt and distrust amongst those who are most likely to want to support you and your efforts. The old saying in politics remains true: You don't make friends of your enemies, by making enemies of your friends. Or to state it in the positive, and perhaps clearer, form: You make enemies of your friends, when you try to make friends of your enemies.
*** Do not enter into private coalition with them.
Simply put, if they are fundamentally aligned with forces for bigger government, they are likely to trade your issue or information with others. Ditto if, like Gingrich, they lack personal integrity.
This does not mean you reject or attack them. Quite the contrary, allow them to support the position you share for their reasons and in their ways; and you do so for yours.
*** Do not praise them.
This will only add to their credibility and can never be effectively rescinded.
Imagine praising Newt Gingrich's "vision" for some stance that he found expedient; for example, expanding domestic drilling. Now imagine the Newter putting your praise on his Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina Republican flyer when he runs for President.
The bottom line: Enemies are to remain enemies even when, for a period time, they align with something you know to be good and true.
Stalin was an enemy in the 1930s; he remained one until the day he died. World War II never altered that.
In the future, we will talk about friends -- real friends.
Best regards,
Mike Rothfeld
Foundation For Applied Conservative Leadership (http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/4464224:6686501400:m:1:196453956:EBD1EE47039040205 0014E0342DA2988)