Editorial: Arrogance defined by McCain
PDF | Email
The Washington DC Examiner Newspaper, The Examiner
May 2, 2006 7:00 AM (4 hrs ago)
WASHINGTON - James Madison, the prime mover behind the U.S. Constitution, and his colleagues among the Founders rightly feared arrogant men like Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., so they limited the central government to a few, well-defined powers. As further protection, Madison and the first Congress approved the First Amendment to the Constitution to protect forever the right of every American to freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly and petition.
Why do we think of the Arizona senator when arrogance is mentioned? Dictionary.com defines arrogance as “overbearing pride evidenced by a superior attitude toward inferiors.” McCain incited a blogstorm Friday with this comment, which epitomizes political arrogance:
“I know that money corrupts … I would rather have a clean government than one where, quote, First Amendment rights are being respected, that has become corrupt. If I had my choice, I’d rather have the clean government.”
An especially virulent arrogance lurks within the person who proclaims his or her particular understanding of something so imprecise as “clean government” to be preferable to the five core freedoms without which liberty and democracy are lost. McCain will protest this reading of his statement, but the First Amendment is too precious to keep giving him a pass on this issue, as too many in the media have done for too long.
Who decides when government is “clean” enough? How “clean” must government be before politicians like McCain will let the rest of us regain our First Amendment rights? Why does McCain think he knows what’s best for Americans better than we Americans do? History teaches the lesson our founders knew so well — those who put their private political vision above everybody else’s essential freedoms cannot be trusted with the reins of power.
What is equally striking here is McCain’s double standard. “Money corrupts,” he claims applies to the rest of us but it’s different when, for example, the money goes to the Reform Institute, a nonprofit run by McCain’s main political advisors. Don’t bother asking for the identity of anonymous “donor number eight,” because the Arizona senator’s buddies refuse to say. Being a nonprofit, it is legal for the group to keep its donor’s identity secret, but is the most famous name in campaign finance reform hiding something embarrassing?
Let it be noted that the 2006 congressional elections are subject to the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform law’s muzzling of political speech as expressed in advocacy spots within 60 days of the November vote. With barely two dozen or so races actually competitive, few incumbents now have reason to fear being defeated come Election Day.
Arrogant politicians like McCain show why Congress desperately needs term limits.
Examiner
