Situational Hypocrasy

I heard this story when I was in the Navy 20+ years ago.

A lawyer proved that it was unconstitutional to bring dogs onto military ships in order to search for drugs.  At some time after that, the very same lawyer, now working for the other side, proved that it was constitutional.

What does this say about the lawyer?  To me, nothing other than he was good at his job.

However, let's take a politician and look at a similar story.  I will pick Mitt Romney simply because he is close at hand, not because this example is worse than any other.

Mitt Romney successfully pushed through health care reform in Massachusetts while he was the governor there.  Now, as Obama signs into law, a nearly identical reform, Romney, a member of the GOP is assailing it as unconstitutional. (see: http://www.masslive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2010/03/editorial_chameleon-like_mitt.html)

Now, I am all for someone having a strong opinion.  I am also for someone changing sides.  When a baseball player is traded, he tries to win for the new team not the old one.  However, this is different.

It's different because the stakes are disproportionate.  On his side of the table, Romney pushes in his political capital.  He is betting he can become president.  On the other side of the table, millions of people push in their physical and financial well being.  Both sides cannot win.  He is in this for himself while we suffer the consequences.

I see the entire GOP in this light.  Just to be fair, I also see the entire Democrat party the same way.  I also see the Catholic Church and nearly every other church this way.  I see Muslims doing this just like everyone else - or should I say, "the rest of us."  I am sure I do this as well although I cannot think of an instance off hand.

Situational Hypocrisy is taking a position based on the situation at hand even though you believe the other side is right.  How many concessions has the church made over the last century to keep membership (and funding) alive?  How can two people read the Koran and one comes up with "kill" while the other read "love".  The killer sees what he wants to, just as the pacifist does.

I love shows like Countdown where people actually get caught in the act.  The other day, Glen Beck was accused of saying, "Obama is leading us to slaughter."  Beck quickly denied this, so Countdown played the tape (2 days old) where Beck is saying, "Obama is leading us to slaughter."

What amazes me is not that Glen Beck has no shame.  He is just making a living.

What amazes me is that anyone still listens to this guy and believes what he tells them to believe.

Therein lies the problem.  We forget.

I think it would be great if every time a person or institution changed its position, they would have to explain.  I am not talking about explaining why I change lanes on the highway.  I am talking about why yesterday, a politician said "Blue" is what we need and today he is saying "Yellow."  When asked why, they should have to tell the truth.  I wonder how many would say, "This new position keeps me in power even though it is not what is best for the country."