If you were to follow Dante Alighieri’s conceptualization of Hell, you would have good cause to assume that Satan will very soon be forced to grow a fourth head so that he can gnash eternally on the tormented soul of Zell Miller.
This man is a Senator from Georgia, and a lifelong Democrat. Last night, however, he served as the keynote speaker at the Republican National Convention in New York. Yes, you read right: Republican. As in the party of George W. Bush, the man who stands about as far away from any Democrat as it is possible to stand on just about any issue you can name. He is so far from a Democrat that the light emitted by a Democrat would take 10,000 years to reach him.
But wait a minute, what’s a Democratic Senator who has allegedly never voted for a Republican candidate in his life doing addressing the RNC? Why, he’s swearing his black oath of allegiance to our very own incumbent president, while at the same time denouncing Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry and indeed the Democratic Party as a whole. Kerry, Miller claims, is a dangerously indecisive politician whose flip-flopping will weaken America. The unabashed irony of this statement being made by a man who has apparently just changed sides in the most profound possible way goes unaddressed, naturally.
So, Zell Miller is a Republican now? Well, no. The Republicans know that the public hates traitors, and for Miller to explicitly switch sides would make his word about as meaningful to the American public as Gerard Depardieu’s film career. So Miller, who is not seeking re-election anyway and therefore will suffer no personal political fallout, says he is remaining a Democrat, and in so doing attempts to cast himself as a heroic figure, a loyal patriot risking everything to take an important stand in a crisis situation.
Puh-leeze.
This charade might actually convince a few people, but when you grant closer examination to Miller’s words, his credibility begins to unravel like a too-oft-picked-at sweater. The keys are in two assertions he made last night: the first, that he has not changed, but that in fact it is the Democratic Party that has changed out from under him. Second, in the very same speech he includes Senator Ted Kennedy as one of the focal points of his anger, blasting him for being weak and wrong on too many issues too often. Do you see the problem here? The kind of politics Ted Kennedy represents have been cornerstones of the Democratic Party since before Zell Miller even got into politics. So how can he say that his party has changed, while at the same time lambasting a man who practically defines what the party has been for decades? The answer, of course, is that he is full of shit. Miller’s war is not really in defense of George W. Bush, it’s in frustrated rage against Massachusetts-style liberal politics. Something tells me that the fine tooth comb that will inevitably be used by the media in the coming days to trawl Zell Miller’s voting record will sift out a long history of Conservative tendencies. One thing is certain: whatever protestations he may make, Zell Miller is no Democrat.
The core argument by Miller and indeed every other RNC speaker in favor of extending the presidency of George W. Bush is that he is the sort of man who sticks to his guns and never wavers in his convictions, no matter what happens. In fact this is exactly why he is such a poor president.
Changing one’s mind after learning more about a subject is not a weakness or a failing. On the contrary, it is the best evidence of strong character. Those who take time to examine John Kerry’s voting record will discover that he has changed his mind, and his vote, about a number of issues over the course of his political career. He does not even attempt to hide this fact, and why not? Because he is not afraid to reevaluate his stand if new information comes to light. That’s not flip-flopping. If one were to turn up evidence that he voted one way, changed his mind, and then changed it back again, that is flip-flopping. George W. Bush, conversely, will go to his grave swearing that it was the right decision to redirect our Armed Forces’ resources and attention to Iraq, at a time when we had not (and still have not) taken out the people who were responsible for the attacks of September 11. Stubbornly clinging to a single and unwavering point of view no matter what you may learn later on is not a strength. It is foolhardy, arrogant, and dangerous.
