(By Krista Kafer, ’76 Contributor) Would she sleep with him for $1 million? “Sure.”
How about $50?
“Of course not,” she snapped. “What do think I am?”
“We’ve established that,” he said, “Now we’re just haggling.”
The principle is the same at any price.
How about you? Would you vote for an unscrupulous, power-hungry candidate if he offered you a government job? Some people might, but you’re not that easy. What if instead of a job offer, it was your country at stake? The candidate was destined to pick the next three justices of the Supreme Court and those justices may determine whether you could fully exercise your First Amendment right to conscience and speech or your Second Amendment right to self-protection.
He or she would appoint heads of federal agencies, serve as commander-and-chief and sign or veto every law passed by Congress. And suppose the opposing candidate, the only other choice on the ballot, was also unethical, power-hungry, and divisive. Would you cast your vote for a man unfit to be president when the stakes were this high? That’s the million-dollar question.
I would not. The principle doesn’t change with the price. I will not vote for Donald Trump in the general election should he be the nominee.
It’s not because he’s not conservative. I’ve voted for liberal Republicans in the past. I generally vote a straight Republican ticket because the GOP promotes the principles of limited government, constitutional constraint, rule of law, federalism, personal responsibility, a vibrant civil society, and free enterprise, and it embraces the basic human rights of life, personal property, self-protection, free speech, and conscience. Mitt Romney and John McCain were moderate Republican candidates in favor of bigger government but were otherwise respectful, if not in support of, conservative policies and principles. I voted for them without enthusiasm, but I voted.
The same could not be said of Trump. He personifies big government and crony capitalism. He opposes entitlement reform and free trade. His solutions to illegal immigration (root out, round up, and deport millions of people) and radical Islamic terrorism (kill terrorists’ families) run counter to our national values. His admiration of socialized medicine and Vladimir Putin are disconcerting. Trump appears to have moderated his support for higher taxes and abortion, but who knows for how long? His policy preferences change frequently.
Like President Obama, Donald Trump has limited appreciation for separation of powers and constitutional constraints. The president cannot build anything great, huge, or fantastic without the approval of Congress.
Trump recently said of the speaker of the House, “I’m sure I’m going to get along great with him. And if I don’t, he’s going to have to pay a big price, OK?” Rather than an extra-constitutional pen and phone, Trump will employ what, a baseball bat? Haven’t we had enough abuse of power?
Ultimately though, it isn’t his liberalism or ignorance that makes him unfit for the presidency; it’s his character. It’s his demagoguery and opportunism. It’s his lies and exaggerations. It’s his immaturity and lack of judgment. Seriously, a man who makes fun of another man’s disability on stage for laughs should not have the nuclear codes.
Trump is not politically incorrect; he’s vulgar and encourages the same petty meanness in others. Children are disciplined for less.
Worse, he believes the ends justify the means: “In order to be victorious, frankly, I had to be tough and I had to be sharp and smart and nasty,” he recently said of his performance in the primaries. But it isn’t just his words, it’s his actions toward widows, wives, women in general, investors, legislators, candidates, and voters that attest to his situational ethics.
He’s wrong. The ends don’t justify the means. Means matter, even when ends are of enormous consequence. No American, Democrat or Republican, should cast a vote for someone who lacks the character for high office.
Hopefully there is still time to ensure we don’t face such a choice. Neither Trump nor Hillary Clinton meets the minimum standards. While I don’t blame anyone for taking a utilitarian approach in such a moral dilemma and voting party over person, I cannot. For me, the principle doesn’t change with the price.
Krista Kafer (tokrista@msn.com) is co-host of “Kelley and Kafer” airing 1 to 4 p.m on 710 KNUS and a professor of communication at Colorado Christian University.
The post Kafer: A conservative against Trump appeared first on Centennial Institute.
