Prudence, as it were, can be interpreted as sagacity or shrewdness in the management of affairs. It was interesting, for me personally, to hear about John McCain's prudence in advising Barack Obama not to threaten to engage Pakistan militarily.
One might be moved by considerations of world peace to acknowledge the wisdom behind John McCain's exhortations for restraint. That is unless that considerate person was John McCain.
It is, of course, a humorous anecdote, or at least it would be if it did not involve war, and the certainty of catastrophic death that necessarily follows.
One might be moved to remember the actions of past presidents who when faced with conflict showed proper restraint, such as JFK during the thirteen days of the cuban missle crisis, or were reputed to be most forceful in their detente (the obvious, and walking softly too). It is John McCain in fact who most often recalls Ronald Reagan's policy of so-called "Peace through Strength."
Which, of course, only calls into question the prudence of making an exhortation of peace while jestfully insinuating the lighthearted "bombing of Iran."
It was this more recent statement of McCain's world view, that made me wonder if John McCain was not simply the logical conclusion moral relativism, the belief that nothing is absolute, that there is no right or wrong, or, perhaps more relevantly, that there are two equally plausible and merited positions on either side of any argument. How often has John McCain held both sides of the argument? How often has he been both "for it" and "against it?"
During the country's current economic crisis John McCain has argued for bipartisanship while blaming American monetary woes on Barack Obama and democrats. He has also claimed to have been in favor of stronger regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac while simultaneously asserting his "laissez faire" philosphy.
Perhaps, it is not so much the latest incarnation of Rovian tactics (taking your weaknesses and campaigning on them as if they are your strengths, after all if you're on both sides of the argument your weaknesses are your strength) as it is the consecutive extension of the idea that "truth is subjective." Over turning Roe v. Wade is both right and wrong! Capital punishment is like Ying and Yang. Even Slavery would need to have pros and cons.
It is interesting to note that John McCain has been in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade after he was against it.
I am not alone am I in my observation of the absolute rigidity (to the dogmatic extent) of the statement that "there is no truth."