TR was a "progressive conservative," and wanted to diminish the then rampant power of monopolies. He had to fight many in his own Republican party to do this. He was a consummate politician, and in the game of politics he was occasionally the king, never a mere pawn, and at worst, perhaps, a bishop. He was not above using the threat of tariff reform (to which many in his own party were highly opposed and about which he did not much care) to secure railroad regulation, particularly of rates and rebates, as a way to fight monopoly power. He was determined to curb not only the power of the railroads but also of the very powerful trusts which got preferred rates from the railroads and thereby perpetuated their power. The McCain website dealing with economic policy does not mention the word "antitrust," and neither does the section on Government reform, even though we need antitrust enforcement today just as badly as we did in TR's day. I think TR would be disappointed, and not only in Senator McCain's comparatively low skills at playing the chess game of politics.
TR was an environmentalist, studied nature during most of his life, appreciated the scientific method, and and did quite a lot to promote conservation of the nation's environment. The notion of anthropomorphic global warming had not surfaced back in the late 19th - early 20th century, and TR probably never thought about it. Had he done so, it seems quite unlikely that he would have jumped on the quasi-religious global warming bandwagon as Senator McCain seems to have done. TR might have paid it lip service, as he did to tariff reform, but it would most likely have been a throw-away, to secure some other and, in his view, more important objective.
TR had a strong sense of morality; "Wishy-Washy" and "Flip-Flopper" are not terms one could seriously use in referring to him. In 1912, he proclaimed a need to cashier both the Democratic and Republican parties, and to start afresh with the Bull Moose Party. He said, in his "Armageddon speech,"
Neither the Republican nor the Democratic platform contains the slightest promise of approaching the great problems of today either with understanding or good faith; and yet never was there greater need in this Nation than now of understanding, and of action taken in good faith, on the part of the men and the organizations shaping our governmental policy.Would, could, or should Senator McCain express a comparable view today? Are the two political parties and their candidates the best we can do?
Clearly Roosevelt believed in the Decalogue and judged in its terms. When the time came, it was natural for him to stand at Armageddon — he had never stood elsewhere.Senator McCain demonstrated a strong set of personal values during his captivity in Vietnam, and that is very important. I wish I could see more willingness to "stand at Armageddon" for moral principle rather than for politics as usual in dealing with the problems of the country now, thirty-five years later.
Article comments
1 - Lee Richards
Congratulations on one of the most thoughtful and well-written articles I've read recently.
Two huge differences: TR was a vigorous 42 and his own man, McCain a less than vigorous almost 72 and beholden to interests and influences as all our current politicians are.
2 - Dan Miller
Thanks, Lee, I very much appreciate the kind words and will go out and buy a bigger hat :>.
Still, TR is an interesting choice as Senator McCain's "conservative role model," and should he live up to the standards set by TR, he will be a pretty good president.Yep, one of my bigger concerns about Senator McCain is his age -- hell, he's five years older than I am. That's one of the reasons I will be very interested in his VP choice. One of my other concerns is that Senator McCain seems to lack TR's spirit and his sense of fun -- his exuberance and joy for life. TR was definitely a mixed bag, and in his last years became less admirable than when he was president. As Blum put it,
Dan
3 - bliffle
Good article.
Yes, it's hard to imagine McCain as similar to TR. Aside from the similarity of military roles there seems to be little in common with their views. Even the military relationship is strained, as McCain, being merely a pilot, was more like a foot soldier than a leader of troops.
4 - Dan Miller
Thanks, Bliffle
We seem more often to disagree than to agree, and that's one of the fun parts of the blog.
Dan
5 - Baronius
Dan, you got Lee, Bliffle, and me to agree on something. Very nice article.
Look at McCain's anti-big business rhetoric, complaining about corporate greed. I think you'll see some TR in it. Likewise, with campaign reform, McCain seems to see the Constitution more as an obstacle to be overcome than a set of principles to be adhered to.
You see Teddy Roosevelt as someone who could play the chess game of politics. Well, he was also someone who could overturn the board when he was losing. And I definitely see that in John McCain. (I'm speaking as an alienated conservative here.)
6 - Leonardo
"Government should take care of those in America who can not take care of themselves." Really? Mr. McCain?
Try this;
"Government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem." - The great communicator himself, Ronald Reagan.
I read somewhere that "Governments are instituted to protect rights of the individual." I think it's call the United States Constitution.
Liberty for Life...
7 - Dr Dreadful
It's in the Declaration of Independence, Leonardo, not the Consitution.
And would you mind explaining exactly how your third quote doesn't reconcile with your first?