The Protector of the Senate's Escutcheon; Or, The End of Good Manners

By DHinMI

The NYT has a decent article about the most unhip 87 year old beneficiary of MoveOn's fundraising prowess, WV Senator Robert Byrd.  There's nothing groundbreaking in the article--the obligatory mention of his brief, regrettable and long regretted dalliance with the KKK, his penchant for archaisms--like escutcheon, which literally means shield, but metaphorically means reputation--his prodigious knowledge of and prowess with Senate procedure, and of course, his central role in opposing the Republican's likely resort to the "nuclear option," the elimination of the filibuster, which will prevent a minority of Senators who represent a majority of voters from blocking the actions of a majority of Senators who collectively received over 2 million fewer votes than their Democratic colleagues. 

Two things struck me when reading the article.  First, the rank hypocrisy of the Republicans continuing to make hay over Byrd's past in the KKK, which he has continually repudiated and apologized for over several decades.  It's not that they're so out of line in mentioning it, it's that they're such hypocrites in raising it as something for which Byrd should be defeated when for decades they countenanced the presence in their caucus of Strom Thurmond, who ran for President as a segregationists and never renounced his racist past.  And it's not like Trent Lott and John Ashcroft don't have garb that looks suspiciously like a robes hidden in their closets. 

But the other thing that struck me was this smarmy comment but Rick Santorum:

"Such a sweet old man," Senator Rick Santorum said sardonically in an interview. Mr. Santorum, the Pennsylvania Republican who ranks third in his party's leadership, went on: "Facts are facts, and the fact is Senator Byrd has singularly used this tactic more than any other leader in the United States Senate. To come in and feign outrage over a technique of which he was the master is even a little much for senators to swallow."

Such a sweet old man?  How absolutely condescending.  Would a Republican have made such an agist comment when Ronald Reagan was President?  When Bob Dole was Republican leader?  Maybe, but I have a hard time believing that age would have been such an easy target. 

One of the the things that drives me crazy about the current Republican leadership is that they are, almost without exceptions, people who've never struggled in life and learned appreciation for what they have. Most of them entered politics on a jihad against government, and became successful by demonizing the institution that provided them their success.  They don't know anything about struggling to work odd jobs and cobble together an education and working their way up in life. Even the older generation of Republicans tended to know something about hardscrabble backgrounds, people like Reagan and Dole, or they possessed a sense of noblesse oblige, like Rockefeller, the elder Chaffee, and Gerald Ford. 

Now we're stuck with families like the Bushes, who view government as a means of enriching allies and a position from which to exercise a dynastic right to rule.  We have people like Santorum who come from a middle-class background and delved into politics immediately, but seemingly purely for self-enrichment rather than a sense of public service to all their constituents (like one could argue is the case with his colleague Arlen Spector).  You have a huge contingent of chicken hawks who've never made a single sacrifice for their country or anyone not exactly like themselves.  You have people like Tom DeLay who are just plain mean, hateful people who think that every success in life was theirs and theirs alone, and nobody ever contributed to their achievements.  And just about anyone with enough empathy and respect for others to try to understand people not just like themselves, especially if that empathy and respect for others came in part from living life with people not just like themselves--such as veterans like McCain and Hagel--is viewed as suspect, a squish, somebody not to be trusted. 

In essence, what Santorum's comment triggered was an impulsive desire to tell him he's being disrespectful.  I'm not that old, but growing up with my working class grandparents, I was lucky enough to be taught to treat people with respect, to respect your elders, and to respect those who worked hard to get where they are, especially if they're the type of person who remembers where they came from and shows appreciation for everyone who gave them a helping hand.  And while they were never so eloquent, my family taught me, as Atticus Finch teaches Scout in To Kill A Mockingbird, that you should always try not to judge another person "until you climb into his skin and walk around in it." 

In short, Bush, DeLay, Santorum and the rest act as if they weren't taught good manners.  Sure, maybe they know the proper spoon to use for the sorbet palette cleansing course before the entree arrives, but they either don't know or don't care to learn how to treat others as they themselves would like to be treated.  They're rude and disrespectful.  They don't try to understand other people.  I've watched these guys now for several years, and I've yet to see any evidence that they really care about those who aren't exactly like themselves.  And while I would, were I ever to meet them in a professional setting, grant them a modicum of professional courtesy, as human beings, I dislike them as much as anybody in public life. 

What it comes down to is this--George Bush, Tom DeLay and Rick Santorum are a bunch of punks.

Comments

[scott]

I like the way you think :)

[downtown]

That KKK red herring gets more disgusting with
each iteration (when was that? in something like
the '20s, as I recall). Right up there with Swift
Vets smears. But that's not really what I wanted
to say.

I enjoyed three of the headiest weeks of my long
life in West Virginia as a Kerry volunteer last year.
West Virginia-born and -bred, I've spent my so-called
adulthood as a NY Dem, one whose activism pre-2004
was limited to voting in every election. The
uncontested peak moment of my campaign adventure
was finally getting to see Senator Byrd speak--and
of course pull his copy of the constitution out
of his pocket--then to meet him for the first time,
shake his hand, and invite him to move to New York
so I can vote for him. Never mind if he didn't quite
get what I was proposing, and that my best efforts
failed to turn West Virginia blue again (the
candidate made that goal hopeless).

Other hands shaken on the same rope line: Teddy
Kennedy, Jay Rockefeller, and firebrand UMW President
Cecil Roberts. Think about it. Accustomed to hearing
the expression Only in New York a few times a week,
I'll long treasure the memory of that Only in West
Virginia moment.

[rolfyboy6]

That sweet old man won't forget Rick when the time comes. The Dean of the Senate is not toothless and has big cred with the rest of the Dem Caucus. When the time comes in the filibuster/nuclear option fight Robert Byrd will be there. His is the kind of majestic voice and presence that will help the Dems at just the right time: When Main Street is watching. Wonder if we'll get to see the fiddle. He does Cicero so well. I'm hoping the opportunity to embrass Santorum comes up, Byrd won't hesitate.