A spirited debate broke out at a book club this week about Bev Perdue’s vote to keep illegal immigrants out of the community colleges.

A craven cave-in, fumed one (now-ex) Bev supporter. “I may as well vote for Pat McCrory.”

Hold on, a still-strong supporter of Bev weighed in: “Don’t you agree that immigrants would be better off with Bev Perdue in office instead of McCrory?”

The disenchanted ex-supporter was unyielding: Bev “has sold her soul.”

Which led another participant to pose a question that rose from the book being discussed: Rob Christensen’s The Paradox of Tar Heel Politics.

In the 1960 governor’s race, Terry Sanford said he opposed integration. When Beverly Lake, his opponent, accused him of supporting integration, Sanford said that wasn’t true: “I oppose integration and so does Doctor Lake. The difference is I know how to handle it and he doesn’t.”

Sanford won. And he handled “it” by becoming one of the South’s most progressive governors on race. He sent his own children to an integrated school.

In other words, Sanford said what he had to say to get elected. Or, less charitably, he lied.

If he hadn’t, Lake might have become governor.

Now, I knew Terry Sanford. I worked with Terry Sanford. Terry Sanford was a friend of mine. And Bev Perdue is no Terry Sanford.

But liberals (or progressives or whatever you prefer) have to understand that your candidates don’t have the luxury of the right-wingers: They can’t always say exactly what they believe – and still get elected.

In politics, as Winston Churchill once said about war, victory sometimes requires a bodyguard of lies.

Click Here to discuss and comment on this and other articles.