Hey New York Times Reader: Have a Conniption Fit Over This!
[guest post by JVW]
Because the moon must have passed through the Sixth House of Mars during its waning gibbous phase in the Chinese Year of the Dog or something, the New York Times Op-Ed page saw fit to commission a piece from Charles Kesler, the wonderfully prolific scholar and editor of the Claremont Review of Books. In his own delightfully contrarian way, Professor Kesler took up pen and paper (OK, finger and keyboard) to shock the delicate sensibilities of the prissy NYT crowd with a defense of the idea of wreaking havoc in Washington, DC. Headlined Breaking Norms Will Renew Democracy, Not Ruin It, Professor Kesler sets about scandalizing the cosmopolitan left:
Hardly a day goes by without President Trump being accused of breaking a presidential norm or two, doing something that no president has ever done — nor, it’s implied, ever ought to do.
He tweets. He runs down the F.B.I., the intelligence community, his own attorney general. He makes fun of other politicians. He hires and fires cabinet secretaries, lawyers and communications people with abandon. He revokes a former C.I.A. director’s security clearance. He fails to disclose his tax returns. He picks his Supreme Court nominees from a list prepared by outside groups. He alternately threatens and sweet talks foreign despots.
Guilty as charged — but so what? All norms are not created equal. Hence breaking norms is neither good nor bad except as the norms themselves are good or bad. We elect presidents partly to separate the wheat from the chaff: to energize government by shedding or retiring norms that no longer serve the public good, and by adopting fresh ones that do.
Professor Kesler then leads the reader through a learned disquisition on the period after the ratification of the Constitution, as the earliest United States governments were trying to figure out how to implement Articles I, II, and III and set up norms as to how our government would operate, lacking the traditions and enforced manners of the established European governments. He points out that not all of the protocols that were established by our first President, George Washington, were continued by his successors, even though we do generally acknowledge that the Great Man established most of the parameters of the office, as much by his humility and reticence as by his boldness and vigor. In a subtle yet pointed jab, Professor Kesler points out that two 20th Century progressive Democrats — Woodrow Wilson, beloved most especially by those who long for an aristocracy of the credentialed, and Franklin Roosevelt, the hero of the modern regulatory welfare state — are the most guilty of abandoning Presidential norms to further their own agendas. But from there he suggests that perhaps many norms ought indeed to be broken:
Presidents are often called upon to adjust norms; it’s almost part of the job. The crucial question is how the norms in question stand in relation to the Constitution and the common good. Are the norms President Trump is accused of breaking vital to American democracy and constitutionalism, or are they vital rather to the way government operates in contemporary Washington, which, like the way government was operating in the 1820s, may have surprisingly little to do with either democracy or the Constitution?
Most of Mr. Trump’s alleged transgressions, measured by those standards, seem picayune. They offend against the etiquette of modern liberalism and modern liberal governance, not the Constitution. For example, choosing from a list of potential Supreme Court nominees prepared by outside experts at his request, before deliberating with his advisers and interviewing several finalists, hardly amounts to a dereliction of presidential duty. And haven’t several Democrats subsequently called for a new court-packing plan to retake control of the judiciary — a far greater norm-buster than anything Mr. Trump has done or proposed?
While acknowledging that, yes, Trump often behaves in a crass and petulant manner, Professor Kesler ends his piece by reminding the reader that Donald Trump’s successors are under no obligation to adopt his blustering and bullying style, though they too might find it liberating not to be tied to what passes for conventional thought in a stultifying capital.
Besides, future presidents will be free to ignore or repudiate Mr. Trump’s views and his blunt manner of doing business. This occupant of the White House seems to enjoy breaking norms, and he has been conspicuously more successful at breaking them than at devising and blessing new ones for our troubled times.
But if he is to make America great again, President Trump will have to cherish his legacy as a norm-builder, too.
As we always say, read the whole thing, if only to let the NYT know that publishing conservative opinions is good for pageviews.
Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.
– JVW
And of course, read the comments to Professor Kesler’s piece to see how much it truly vexes the American nomenklatura.
JVW (f932bd) — 8/24/2018 @ 1:06 pmBecause the moon must have passed through the Sixth House of Mars during its waning gibbous phase in the Chinese Year of the Dog or something
Or something. Actually, in the evening skies across the U.S., there is a grand procession of sorts after sunset; Venus, Luna, Jupiter, Saturn and Mars– all easily seen at a reasonable hour for adults with binoculars.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/24/2018 @ 1:17 pm> though they too might find it liberating not to be tied to what passes for conventional thought in a stultifying capital
Yep. We’ve learned compromise is for suckers, satisfy your base and shove as hard as you can, while you can are the best approaches.
Universal Medicaid, disbanding ICE and workers on corporate boards are just for starters, baby.
fender (90b57c) — 8/24/2018 @ 1:18 pmIt was a lot more fun when good government liberals acted as a punching bag and controlled the democratic base leftists. now no more be quite maxine waters, al gore says we must except conservatives on supreme court stoping the vote count and giving the election to bush. this time when maxine waters says “go get um” and pelosi and schumer tells her to shut up democratic base tells pelosi and schemer to shut up you go girl auntie maxine. no more mr nice guy! on lefty blogs like the bell forum.net, oet and jackpineradical.com their even rethinking their anti second amendment stance!
wendell (47b1fe) — 8/24/2018 @ 1:35 pmAs long a president’s “norms” do not conflict with the oath to “faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States” and, to the best of his/her ability, “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,” I don’t see a problem.
Paul Montagu (9dcfd2) — 8/24/2018 @ 1:42 pmThe NYT claimed that ebcause the Founders discussed imoeaching a president for bribing Electors, it is legitimate to impeach him for paying off people to kill a story.
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 8/24/2018 @ 1:46 pmthey were fine when Obama was upbraiding the supreme court re citizens united, when Clinton singled out private citizens re Oklahoma city, what changed?
narciso (d1f714) — 8/24/2018 @ 2:01 pmNo tan suits. That’s a bridge too far.
Davethulhu (fab944) — 8/24/2018 @ 2:19 pmIt was a lot more fun when good government liberals acted as a punching bag and controlled the democratic base leftists.
Yes indeed. Good government progressives seem almost quaint these day. Unfortunately, they allowed the unionization of government employees which brought ridiculously broad protections from being disciplined to the public sector along with a very easy and tempting pot of campaign funds for those who served the interests of AFSCME, SEIU, AFT, NEA, etc. So now the Democrats have put themselves in a position where they by and large have to tolerate indolence and incompetence from the bureaucratic class. No matter what the budding young socialists think, I can’t imagine Americans are going to tolerate Big Government for long if it is administered in such a slipshod fashion.
JVW (42615e) — 8/24/2018 @ 2:24 pmWhite House Press Briefing
Best thing I’ve seen all day.
Dustin (ba94b2) — 8/24/2018 @ 2:29 pmNo tan suits. That’s a bridge too far.
I know there were a few unpleasant grumps who kvetched about Obama’s tan suit, but apart from the bloviating Peter King and a couple of no-names on cable news and Twitter, there was nowhere near the outrage that Obama’s fan club claimed had been ginned up by it. Besides, the right reveres a President who liked to wear brown suits, and in his post-Presidency dressed like an absolute boss.
JVW (42615e) — 8/24/2018 @ 2:34 pmBest thing I’ve seen all day.
I try to avoid politics on Facebook, but that damn clip is going up on my wall right now. Thanks Dustin.
JVW (42615e) — 8/24/2018 @ 2:36 pmLove that video too. The guy who is trying to win Sarah’s affections with his “sensitive yet dangerous and makes nachos” is the best!
And those suits, JVW, lol. They scare me.
Patricia (3363ec) — 8/24/2018 @ 3:25 pmIf I had wanted someone who would break everything and leave it busted, I would have been behind Trump from the beginning. The breaking is needed but also the putting-back-together and as Kesler notes, Trump is not doing much of that. This isn’t a mistake, it’s a blunder. The administration had an opportunity to effect change and all it is going to be remembered for is the destruction and rubble.
Now, for some (and I’m looking at you mg), destruction and rubble are goals in themselves. But except for the judges, there is nothing that Trump is going to leave behind but turmoil, broken coalitions, and political desolation. An opportunity wasted.
Kevin M (5d3e49) — 8/24/2018 @ 3:53 pmWell I contend it’s Obama who broke many institution, and trump has been putting them back together, that is the reason for cross fire hurricane.
Narciso (246203) — 8/24/2018 @ 3:57 pmTrump ‘broke’ the Paris climate swindle and the Iran nuke deal. He also broke the plan to make the SCOTUS liberal for the rest of my lifetime.
PLEASE leave those things busted.
harkin (c0421f) — 8/24/2018 @ 4:52 pmThe eu by their actions, most recently grant 18 million eus to Iran, were never going to go along.
Narciso (396056) — 8/24/2018 @ 4:54 pmTrump ‘broke’ … the Iran nuke deal.
Did they send the money back?
Kevin M (5d3e49) — 8/24/2018 @ 7:14 pm“ARBORO, N.C. (WTVD) — Parents of a fifth grader are concerned after their child was punished for referring to his teacher as “ma’am.””
NYTimes editorial writers can wish white folk death but a little kid saying ma’am get punished.
Congrats Lefties.
harkin (c0421f) — 8/24/2018 @ 7:26 pm“Did they send the money back?”
Nope but the NYTimes said this:
“May 08, 2018 · WASHINGTON — President Trump declared on Tuesday that he was withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal, unraveling the signature foreign policy achievement of his predecessor Barack Obama, isolating the United States from its Western allies and sowing uncertainty before a risky nuclear negotiation …
harkin (c0421f) — 8/24/2018 @ 7:28 pm