January 28, 2008
by Robert Fantina
Mr. William Kristol, the New York Times' newest journalist, appears to have achieved the knack, vital for conservative, of speaking (or in his case, writing) much without saying anything. If one can judge by his most recent article, he has a new hero to worship beside his first god, George Bush, although why he chooses to heap praise upon this new icon is unclear, even after reading his article. In this latest commentary, Mr. Kristol praises Arizona Senator and Republican presidential candidate wannabe, John McCain, without really saying much of anything. Several quotations from the article are interesting.
Mr. Kristol quotes Mr. McCain thusly: "But nothing is inevitable in our country. We are the captains of our fate." This happy-face statement was in relation to the economic 'challenges' (Mr. Kristol's word; 'disasters' might have been a better description) that the U.S. faces.
Are we indeed the captains of our economic fate? When CEOs are given multi-million dollar bonuses for cutting jobs, or sending them overseas, are we the 'captain?' Are we in control when CEOs and other executives loot companies, thus causing long-term employees to lose their life savings? Are we the captains of our economic fates when salaries decrease as expenses rise? Mr. McCain captained his own economic fate by marrying an heiress. Unfortunately, that route is not open to all Americans.
"McCain comes from a generation that, in its youth, was made to memorize poetry." This seems to be a subtle remark about the senator's age; at 71 he would be the oldest person ever elected president. But Mr. Kristol does not seem to be referring to Mr. McCain's age. He talked specifically about how the poem 'Invictus' has inspired Mr. McCain, and points out that perhaps the senator gained strength from that poem while he was imprisoned in Vietnam. While thus imprisoned, Mr. McCain remained captain of his own emotional fate, if not his physical one.
Yes, that is certainly laudable. No one in any way negates the unspeakable horrors to which he was no doubt subjected during that tragic time in U.S. history. But one must question if his past, tragic victimization makes him the ideal candidate to run the world's last superpower. Where exactly the coordination exists between victimization in America's late twentieth century imperial atrocity, and the ability to manage the current one was not made clear in Mr. Kristol's article.
The 'captain-of-one's-own-fate' metaphor seems to end here. Mr. Kristol next compares Mr. McCain, superficially, to some of his GOP competitors.
(Article Continues Below)
Messrs Giuliani, Romney and Huckabee, he states, ".are impressive modern men all. But John McCain is a not-so-modern type. One might call him a neo-Victorian - rigid, self-righteous and moralizing, but (or rather and) manly, courageous and principled."
The juxtaposition of these first three terms with 'manly, courageous and principled,' is somewhat puzzling. Is Mr. Kristol calling Mr. McCain rigid, perhaps meaning unyielding even in the light of new information? It seems likely that he is doing so, since that is a characteristic of his other hero, Mr. Bush. He is not one to let newly unearthed facts, or even facts that have been available all along, change his mind.
Is Mr. McCain self-righteous and moralizing? Does he look to his own opinions as right, and everyone else's as wrong? Again, the shadow of Mr. Bush does not fall far from Mr. McCain.
How 'manly,' one might ask, does one have to be to send young Americans off to war? How much courage is required to sit in a comfortable office surrounded by bodyguards and arrange a war like a game, with oil the prize for victory? How principled does a man or woman have to be to lie to the world in order to start a war?
But wait! One always brings up the fact that Mr. McCain, unlike the current commander-in-chief, has actually experienced the horrors of war. Surely he would do all within his power to prevent war. Yet on October 22, 2002, Mr. McCain voted for Joint Resolution 114, which opened the door for Mr. Bush's immoral and illegal war for oil in Iraq. Perhaps someone who has experienced war so up close and personal is not necessarily the right candidate to promote peace.
It seems that those who were courageous on October 22 were the twenty-three senators and one hundred thirty-three representatives who voted against Resolution 114, few of whom are now running for president, and none of whom have any chance of being nominated. Perhaps those with courage are the same Congressional members who withstood Mr. Bush's fear-mongering, looked at the facts and said 'no' to war at that time and since. Perhaps those votes were based on principle, not politics.
But what is any of that? When Mr. Romney, as Mr. Kristol pointed out, was living in France and then studying at Harvard, Mr. McCain was in a prisoner of war camp in Vietnam. Apparently for Mr. Kristol, that experience alone suffices to anoint Mr. McCain president.
It is to be hoped that the American public will look carefully at Mr. McCain's record in the Senate, rather than at his tragic background which has no place in qualifying him for the highest office in the land. If that is done, his primary election victories will not lead to his nomination, and certainly not to his election as president. That Mr. McCain is 'captain of his own fate' is commendable; were he to be captain of America's fate, it would be disastrous.
If you enjoyed this post, please make a donation to help keep this website active:
Click Here for the Free Populist Party Newsletter
Robert Fantina [send him email] is a long-time activist for peace and social justice. He has worked with the Coalition for Peace Action in New Jersey. Following the 2004 presidential election, he moved to Canada, where he now resides. Robert is the author of Desertion and the American Solder: 1776-2006.
More Articles from Robert Fantina
