When Party and Principles Collide

Ron Suskind's new book describes the White House as a hostile place for women to work. One such charge came from Anita Dunn, Mao enthusiast. Dunn made a comment to The Washington Post denying that she had ever said anything of the kind and told Mr. Suskind the polar opposite by telling him "point-blank" that it not true. Apparently the interview was taped and that tape has been played in part to the some reporters over at The Washington Post.


While it is sort of understandable that you would want to protect the president and leader of the party from embarrassment, how far do you compromise your principles to do so? The democratic party in general, and progressives in particular, spend a great deal of time about talking about "fairness".

It isn't fair that woman get paid less, it isn't fair that someone may be "punished" with a baby that they had not planned on, the billionaires don't pay enough taxes, and on the list goes. For some reason that they are unable to explain to me they seem to believe that government can actually make the world fair, a feat that God himself is unable to pull off.

What does it say when Ms. Dunn puts Obama's presidency ahead of the principle of fair treatment for women in the workplace? I have never personally believed that Obama is truly a principled man. He worships at the altar of big government. By worshipping at said alter the very last thing it represents is freedom for women. Because it then gives government more control over the choices in your life. In many school systems you cannot decide for yourself what it is that your child eats for lunch. You see you are too stupid to feed your children healthy food. While I am sure that there are some people who don't understand nutritional values of food, I would venture to say that most do. But it doesn't matter, you can't make that decision yourself. They know your child better than you do.

It is very disappointing although not all surprising to learn that the people who surround President Obama are more concerned for the party than they are for the principles that they espouse on a daily basis, but have yet to shown that they themselves are willing to live by.