The politics and rhetoric of courage.

• Author: Vatz, Richard E.
• Position: American Thought - Column

"Where was anyone who would speak out against the earmarks, pork, and extenders in the latest national budget agreement?"

ONE OF THE GREAT works in politics and political rhetoric is John E Kennedy's Profiles in Courage, a book that won the Pulitzer Prize in 1957 for "Biography or Autobiography." JFK himself showed courage in his bravery in World War II and his taking of responsibility for foreign policy failures in his own Administration. Courage always has been important to the Kennedys, who created the Profile in Courage Award in 1989, which, although usually liberal in its basis, has included conservatives among its recipients.

The book, which I first read decades ago and reread recently, concerns political courage irrespective of political party or philosophy. The topic always has intrigued me because, although I am thought of on my campus as a political conservative, my closest friends consistently have ranged from liberal to very liberal. Since I do not believe that liberals (or progressives) or even conservatives have a monopoly on truth, I am fascinated by how close our opinions are on so many--but not all--matters. It is no coincidence, to be sure, that the author of Profiles, then-Sen. Kennedy (D.-Mass.), was not a liberal, as that term often is conceived. The phrase for which he is most remembered, "Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country" reflects a classic conservative position--that people should not be supplicants to the government, that to do so douses initiative and creates dependency. Democrat Caroline Kennedy calls that phrase her father's preeminent "Inaugural Challenge."

However, let us get back to the matter of courage in political disagreement. The Kennedy book, to which everyone refers--but dare say not too many actually have read--is quite sophisticated and, I would argue, a critical piece on ethical lessons. Perhaps we never can be 100% sure when a person demonstrates courage. Even a courageous public official has obligations, which means that he or she cannot always vote his or her conscience. There are legitimate considerations that have to be weighed, such as one's party, constituents, and even special interests-these needs are not always understood without someone explaining them to a decisionmaker. Sometimes, when an elected official flouts the views of his party and constituents, it merely is because the position holds the prospect for satisfying a larger group of...