McCain’s curious anti-government rhetoric

In Hershey, PA, John McCain repeated his theory that he deserved votes because his opponents, “have faith in government…” He’s saying he wants to be in charge of an organization he doesn’t value. We’ve heard similar rhetoric from other politicians, including the now-infamous Representative Michelle Bachmann (R-MN). I’m mystified by that theory.

Running away from Bush

Granted, when your party has controlled the White House for two terms and orchestrated the unprecedented growth of the federal government we’ve seen since Bush took office, most Republicans won’t claim close ties to those decisions during  the midst of an economic crisis.  Republican Senators from Gordon Smith to Norm Coleman facing re-election are anxious to be seen as models of bi-partisan cooperation who virtually embraced their counterparts across the aisle in ways that would have made Newt Gingrich call for their replacement (if the claims were demonstrable.)  Polls and anecdotal experience confirm that most voters are in the mood to work for changes in D.C.

We know, too, that despite changes to his stance on immigration reform and other “socially conservative” planks, McCain’s never had much support from those who call themselves Republican based on their cultural identity rather than their fiscal/economic thinking.  In the midst of national and global economic melt-down McCain’s admission that economics is not his forte was a bold revelation, but paired with his track record of voting with Bush it can hardly have reassured economic conservatives.  Strategists don’t need advanced degrees in statistical analysis to determine that the Senator has to lure some voters outside those former bastions of pro-Republican support if he hopes to salvage a coalition that can retain the White House for his party.

Of Presidents and Plumbers

Unlike certain regulated trades such as plumbing there’s no licensure necessary to lead most organizations. We recognize that a High School Principal needs specialized training, but we trust a college or university’s board to select a President who will serve that specialized niche – they are rarely promoted from within, and in fact the skills that make the best college professor are not sufficient to perform the tasks associated with the leadership role.

When we need a plumber we’re not concerned with leadership ability, who they’d endorse for president, or their understanding of the cashflow of the business (even if the plumber is self-employed,) we’re after a person with training, understanding, and talent with pipes and fixtures. We presume a plumber has faith in the value of plumbing. We trust the plumber enjoys the benefits of hot and cold running water and indoor toilets at home. We generally assume whoever runs the business end has similar faith in the value of both plumbers and record-keeping.

What we need

We value former military personnel working within our government, but in the leadership roles within the Food and Drug Administration, for example, we have more need of those experienced with research and medicine than we do of those whose education and career have focused on developing tank commanders or enduring the rigors of submarine duty. It’s not enough to have leadership acumen, we need familiarity with the scientific method and the subject matter (at FDA.)

Similarly we need college presidents who have faith in the value of education, and the ability of their own institution to provide it. Logically the pool of applicants can be very broad indeed. In practice such institutions typically restrict their hiring to those who have diverse skills and experience, but seldom gamble on highly successful entrepreneurs who have no college degree.  They want worldly, intellectual leaders who have faith in the educational system.

Is it so different selecting a President of the country?

McCain’s been advised to steer clear of issues he can’t win votes with, such as the economy.  We’re not surprised that he wants to try to re-apply labels such as “tax and spend liberal” that have tipped some elections in favor of Republicans in the pre-Bush era, although using them now exhibits a certain willingness to deny reality which has become less effective for a variety of reasons. Sound bites still have appeal to the commercial media, but over time access to more diverse sources of information is producing a better-informed electorate.  We have the luxury, now, of being able to parse as much (or as little) as we want from virtually unlimited purveyors of information rather than being effectively constrained to the echo chamber of relatively few media organizations.  TiVo, C-SPAN, YouTube, blogs, and even Comedy Central insure access to information that’s not pre-digested into one-minute overviews that once dominated most people’s awareness of politics. Currently the former power brokers are not the sole arbiters of information.

Understand, I’m not making any pretense here.  Though I’ve voted for candidates from both major parties and sometimes even the not-so-major ones, I’m pleased to have the opportunity to vote for Obama in the general election. As one of those who doesn’t simply vote along party lines over the years, however, I have to say McCain’s arguments seem to lack substance, and the disconnect between his smears and his rejection of smear-mongering beggars the imagination. Maybe that’s because the arguments are mostly cast in terms of why he wants voters to reject his opponent rather than embrace McCain’s values and platform, as some have suggested. Frankly, for me the reasons he’s conducting his campaign so differently than I anticipated have become almost irrelevant, though I’ve continued to observe the evolving rhetoric coming from the Senator and his obvious surrogates.

Sound bites

My father used a carefully mangled term at times in polite company when rhetorical arguments added up particularly poorly. At the risk of offending some with delicate sensibilities, I’ll nonetheless redeploy it to convey my dismay considering McCain’s position that calling his opponents “tax and spend liberals who have faith in government” when he’s seeking to lead it can be remotely logical.

Senator, you’ve got it bass-ackwards.

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

I’m voting for Obama for a variety of reasons. But, even if I didn’t see important differences between the two on deregulation, foreign policy, taxes, foresight with regard to the economy, health care reform, etc., I’d still be picking the guy who has faith that the organization he wants to lead can effectively matter to those it governs.

The fact is, taxes and government are here to stay. Much of our political process urgently needs reform, but Senator McCain evidently can’t articulate any positive value government can provide to the voters and citizens of the USA.

Digg this article.