As Cohen observes in recollecting the happy warrior Ronald Reagan, “The spirit of a president who celebrated America as a city on a hill that was generous abroad, welcoming to newcomers, and self confident at home, has been replaced by the sour meanness of a party chiefly of men, who build walls to keep the world out, erect tariffs to destroy free trade, despise the alliances that keep Americans secure, and sanction the deliberate plucking of babes from their mothers’ breasts in order to teach illegal immigrants a painful lesson. In such a world, decorum and courtesy are irrelevant.”
The temperament that Cohen and I define as conservative has nearly vanished on the right — or will when another tranche of Republicans retire or lose this year. The Republicans who remain will be angrier, loopier and more belligerent than we see even now. (Think about the Republican Judiciary Committee without Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona.)
Cohen is doubtful, as am I, that the GOP can recover. “It is impossible at this moment to envisage the Republican Party coming back,” he writes, “Like a brontosaurus with some brain-eating disorder it might lumber forward in the direction dictated by its past, favoring deregulation of businesses here and standing up to a rising China there, but there will be no higher mental functioning at work.” He concludes that the GOP “will plod into a future in which it is detested in a general way by women, African Americans, recent immigrants, and the educated young as well as progressives pure and simple.”
Are we then destined to see a face-off between left- and right-wing populism, both angry, disrespectful, irrational and prone to conspiracy theories? We will all have to permanently turn down the volume on our TVs if Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and President Trump are the Democratic and Republican presidential nominees, respectively.
Well, we saw a few expressions of a first-class temperament (let’s call it “first-class temperament” rather than “conservative temperament,” which ironically now means “unhinged”). Flake was willing to learn something from his experiences (female friends sharing their experiences, two activists confronting him in a Capitol elevator, his observation of Christine Blasey Ford) — a sign of personal humility — and forge a pact with other senators. Humility, comity and empathy: Those are the signs of a first-class temperament.
We saw superior temperament in a somewhat different manifestation when Sen. Christopher A. Coons (D-Del.) spoke to the committee on Friday, methodically laying out the facts. He showed no anger toward colleagues. It is easy to see why his words moved Flake to go forward with a deal:
Reliance on facts, composure and no assumption of ill will evidence the sort of temperament we should be looking for in elected officials.
Only a few others in public life consistently manage to exhibit grace, rationality and good humor under pressure — Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), calmly persisting with her questions after Kavanaugh’s mean-spirited attack (asked if he had any alcohol-induced blackouts, he spat back, “Have you?”); Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-Tex.) saying genuinely nice things about his opponent — twice (!); popular blue-state Republican governors who reject the herd-mentality; the congenial and dignified former Tennessee governor Phil Bredesen, the Democratic Senate nominee from Tennessee; and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, calm and precise in speech, refusing to bootlick as his fellow Cabinet members do.
Perhaps instead of ideology or even experience, candidates for spots in any branch of government, at any level, should be assessed on temperament. Without cooler heads in elected and appointed offices, our descent into rage, extremism and meanness will continue. Government by screeching bullies is not a political system any of us should desire.
Read more from Jennifer Rubin: