The Perils of Giving 'Em Hell

By Hugh Sidey

There is a rich literature of political assault. "We love him for the enemies he has made" was the boast of Grover Cleveland's supporters in 1884. Teddy Roosevelt gloried in confrontation with tycoons ("malefactors of great wealth"). F.D.R. had his "economic royalists" to pummel. Harry Truman is still celebrated as a man who liked to "give 'em hell."

Jimmy Carter is writing his chapter. Not being eloquent, robust or profane, Carter is making his critical mark by sheer scope. Within the past few days he has given Russian President Brezhnev the brush-off over the neutron bomb, thumped his own civil service for administrative horrors, thundered against lawyers for greed, attacked bureaucrats again, this time for being bureaucrats, accused the Russians of racism and assaulted doctors for associating too closely and raising prices. In his first months, too, Carter and his people potted away at such inviting targets as the oil-and-gas industry, tax-deductible-martini drinkers, Congress, unmarried couples who live together, smokers, tax-depreciable yachts. Carter, it has been suggested, may now be approaching the point where it will be easier to list those he has not officially frowned on--morticians, country singers, Boy Scouts, missionaries and Billy.

Political bombast can be marvelous theater. It helps the ratings. Cutting up rascals is a joy because there are so many of them around. A lot of what Carter said happens to be true. And just about everybody loves to see somebody else get a well-deserved whack. Of course, Carter's new presidential tack has also produced some lively criticism, particularly from those who are disappointed in him.

An eloquent voice in Carter's defense is former Secretary of State Dean Rusk, now a professor down at the University of Georgia. Rusk sees much of the Carter problem as arising from the very noble motive of standing beyond the grasp of any interest or bloc.

"President Carter is trying to look at the national in terest," Rusk said. "Somebody has to. There is a frenetic quality now about the demands of the special interests. If you add up all the demands being made, they would destroy the nation.

The military wants billions more. The mayors call a 60 billion program a 'first step,' farmers want to plant all they can and be guaranteed a profit. This insatiability could devour us."

Rusk makes a good point. But Carter has enlarged his own problem. He is uncomfortable with bigness and complexity. He is suspicious of wealth and achievement, wary of tradition, protocol and many of the rituals of advanced urban society. In his populist fevers he sometimes seems mistakenly to champion mediocrity rather than excellence. Some of his prejudices seem to arise more from his small-town background than from reason and experience in a diverse world. A Congressman who went to the White House to argue tax reform with the President came away feeling that Carter made good sense until he began to explain why first-class air fare should not be allowed as a business expense. "There was something funny about the way he talked," said the puzzled visitor. "It was more than just an objection to a tax deduction. I could not follow him."

Unwary politicians have been known to be seized by a malady normally found among spiritual leaders. In their relentless pursuit of evil, the lonely champions who bring enlightenment sometimes convince themselves that the more they suffer the better they are. In recent months, time and time again, Carter has pointed out that his decline in the polls has been due to his determination to do what others would not do, to be right when others were wrong.

In the pulpit or during pursuit of the clearly identifiable philistines of exorbitant indulgence, such an approach to leadership may be effective. But the recent record suggests that it can be an extremely hazardous way to run a republic that has brought the vast majority of its people undreamed-of wealth, poise and awareness.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.