November 26, 2005
OVER, UNDER, THROUGH, BUT NEVER AROUND:
'Reform. Reform. Reform.' (Stephen Moore, Opinion Journal, 11/26/2005)
Throughout our chat [McCain] has referred to Theodore Roosevelt in almost reverential terms and glows when I ask about him. He calls TR "my hero . . . and one of our greatest presidents," and at one point he excitedly searches through his briefcase and pulls out a book that he is reading on the famously tumultuous election of 1912. That was when TR bolted from the Republican Party (which Mr. McCain concedes was "a mistake") and formed the Bull Moose Party to dethrone William Taft. When I mention TR's trust-busting (which was mostly counterproductive economically), Mr. McCain really comes to life, exultantly points his finger in the air, smiles and cries out: "He called the trusts 'the malefactors of wealth.'"And in this very moment it becomes clear to me that John McCain aspires to be a modern-day TR. The similarities are unmistakable: Both were war heroes, mavericks within their own party, reformers and defenders of the little guy.
But here in a nutshell lies the danger of the McCain view of the world. Where some see the vast virtue of entrepreneurial wealth-generators and job-producers, he too often sees "robber barons."... He views himself, I believe, as a kind of modern-day Robin Hood, a defender of the downtrodden and tormentor of the bullying special interests ...
But Teddy Roosevelt actually believed in Big Business, as he believed in Big Government; McCain seems to reject both in favor of Combative Government. McCain shares a few traits with Al Gore, who in the Senate was regarded as a moderate but who planned in the White House to indulge his taste for battle with "powerful forces." Unfortunately, that meant battling his fellow Americans. The voters wisely chose George Bush, a peaceable man, to lead the country.
Where McCain closely resembles TR is in character. Both were narcissistic and combative, both impelled themselves to the center stage, both preferred to disperse flocks than to fly in them, both showed little regard for the opinions of those who stand in their way. I noticed this anecdote:
[T.R. was] told that no law allowed him to set aside a Florida nature preserve at will."Is there any law that prevents me declaring Pelican Island a National Bird Sanctuary?" T.R. asked, not waiting long for an answer. "Very well, then," reaching for his pen, "I do declare it."
This is the same respect for law and political opponents that gave us campaign finance reform.
It's ironic that at a time when the Democrats are stuck in the 1930s, a McCain presidency would offer the 1910s. And yet McCain, more artfully and with greater charm than Hillary Clinton, has clothed his message in conservative dress the last few years. It may be enough to win conservative support - perhaps, even, a presidency.
Posted by pjaminet at November 26, 2005 9:39 AMI will stay home.
Posted by: Sandy P at November 26, 2005 10:09 AMThe media can repeat it all it wishes but a person who sides with the liberal establishment on Tuesday and conservatives on Wednesday is not a "maverick."
Posted by: David at November 26, 2005 10:48 AMThe only thing "centrists" and "moderatates" and "mavericks" seem to be able to accomplish is to keep fights going. Without them, the two sides would usually agree to a "divide the difference" type solution, but then comes along the "moderate" to give both sides hope of gaining more. They end up where they would probably have ended up anyhow, but only after long periods of nasty fighting, usually involving the courting of the moderates, who often switch sides just at things would have settled down. In the end it just makes all sides bitter, including the moderates, who never quite seem to achieve the power they crave.
Sen. Keating-McCain is a classic example.
Posted by: Raoul Ortega at November 26, 2005 1:15 PMIf McCain can bring back the levels of government, regulation and taxation we had in the 1910s, I'd be happy. But I doubt it....
Posted by: PapayaSF at November 26, 2005 3:04 PMI've been one of the biggest skeptics of McCain, and probably will continue to be, but here in IL, the Bush/Mehlman/Rove cabal has (or is in the process of) annointed the corrupt Toopinka.
I've been reading about the exploits of Abramoff et. al. and have come to the conclusion that Bush is out of gas, and the party is too corrupt.
Frankly, we could use a Bull Moose Party. Though I doubt McCain is the person to lead that movement, he apparently sees the opportunity in the moral and financial bankruptcy of both parties.
If he ran as 3rd party, he would out poll one of the two other parties. He could even win.
Posted by: Bruno at November 26, 2005 3:23 PMPJ: I'm not particularly thrilled to note it, but the voters chose Gore. Only the Constitution and G-d's special providence saved us, once again, from the voters.
Bruno: The Bull Moose campaign was a disaster for the nation and, arguably, the world. It allowed the election of Wilson, the most evil of all Presidents.
Posted by: David Cohen at November 26, 2005 4:16 PMWilson, the most evil of presidents? There's a fair case to be made for Buchanan, Pierce, and Filmore (the Slave Power's best friends) and Carter (who set out to surrender western civilization to the commies).
Posted by: Mike Morley at November 26, 2005 4:20 PMWhy are Buchanan, Pierce, Filmore the worst, if your criteria is slavery?
Why not the actual Slave-owning Presidents, Washington, Jefferson, Monroe, Madison, Jackson, Van Buren, Harrison, Tyler, Polk, Andrew Johnson, and Ulysses S. Grant? Neither Buchanan, Pierce, nor Filmore owned them.
By the way John McCain's ancestors owned slaves and operated a plantaion in Carroll County, Miss., where McCain's great-great grandfather William Alexander McCain owned a plantation, and later died during the Civil War as a soldier for the Mississippi cavalry. (not that he's not capable of denigrating and insulting his own family to gain the presidency)
Sandy,
Don't fret: McCain has been known to take the big corporate bucks in his recent campaigns, as anyone familiar with Qwest dealings knows.
As did TR: TR used to accuse John Pierpoint Morgan of every nefarious thing you could imagine in those days. Ol' JP gave to TR's 1904 campaign.
We are all antsy about 2008, aren't we? Have we all sucuumed to Peggy Noonan syndrome?
Posted by: Brad S at November 26, 2005 9:01 PMI have no particular desire to defend Buchanan, Pierce and Filmore, but they were defending the Constitution as they saw it. Carter wasn't competent enough to be evil.
Posted by: David Cohen at November 26, 2005 10:04 PMDavid:
Yes, he is doing better (with evil) as a former President.
Posted by: jim hamlen at November 26, 2005 10:16 PMh-man:
In the decade before the Civil War, the Southern states pushed hard for a federal "slave code" which not only would have preserved the peculiar institution where it held sway, but would have effectively imposed it on the free states of the north. This was the period in which the Fugitive Slave Act was enacted. Those three presidents were totally with the program.
Posted by: Mike Morley at November 27, 2005 8:33 AM