OpinionTop of the Ticket

Rachel Maddow plots America's 'Drift' to easy war

PoliticsUnrest, Conflicts and WarRachel MaddowMSNBC (tv network)Sean HannityRonald Reagan

SEATTLE -- This weekend, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow and I sat down in a couple of armchairs and talked about how America drifts to war.

Maddow is on a frenetic cross-country tour to publicize "Drift," her new book that shot to the top of the New York Times bestseller list as soon as it was released. She flew in for a few hours in Seattle on Saturday, and I interviewed her in front of a standing-room-only crowd at Town Hall. In liberal Seattle, Maddow is a rock star, and she got a rock star's greeting when she walked onstage in her very casual clothes (including sneakers with Halloween-orange shoelaces).

She's the one commentator on MSNBC, other than Chris Matthews, perhaps, that Republicans can tolerate. She is as opinionated as any of them, but she doesn’t rant. Her commentaries are backed by solid research, and her interviewing style is accommodating and respectful -- fun, even -- rather than sneering and confrontational. She’s no Sean Hannity, in other words.

Her book very much reflects the way she comports herself on TV. It is smart and deeply documented. It is entertaining and occasionally whimsical. (In any other book about national security issues, you would not find the word "whoopsie," nor would the word "ally" be rhymed with "schmally" in one phrase.) And, far from being a left-wing screed, it presents a sharply argued commentary that many conservatives could buy into.

Maddow's core thesis is that in the decades since the end of the war in Vietnam, there has been a steady and dramatic shift in the way the United States goes to war. There was a time when Congress stepped up to its constitutional responsibility to say when the country would send troops into battle. Once engaged, the entire country took part. Now, Maddow writes, the president can churn up a war anytime he wants, Congress rolls over, and only a tiny fraction of Americans do the fighting while the rest blithely carry on with their normal lives.

No one schemed to make this happen. It was brought about in incremental steps, each responding to a particular political quandary or international crisis. Maddow describes those steps in a way that makes her book a real page-turner, at least for a history-and-politics wonk like me.

Her retelling of the scandalous Iran-Contra saga is especially good -- almost like a breezy spy novel. She presents a cavalier cast of characters -- including Oliver North, John Poindexter and, of course, the star, Ronald Reagan -- and explains how they took a twisted path from a public commitment to never make deals with terrorists to the deal they secretly made with terrorists.

And there is a surprising climax to this chapter. The scandal did not end with the president being brought down. Instead, it ended with the political world buying into the "unitary executive" theory of then-Atty. Gen. Ed Meese -- the curious contention that the president, as commander in chief, can do whatever he wants in the realm of national security.

Iran-Contra was just one kink in a long, knotted string of developments that took us from where we were to where we are, and the culpable parties are Republicans and Democrats.

The best thing Maddow does is resist portraying the drift to unfettered war power as a conspiracy concocted by an evil cabal. These choices were made by intelligent men and women who seemed to truly believe they had the best interests of the country in mind. These very smart, patriotic people promoted really foolish policies because they were guided by poor information, blinded by ideology or driven by political expediency. With rare exceptions, they were not motivated by actual wickedness. (For pure wickedness, check out Maddow's chapters covering the misdeeds and greed of private contractors in the Balkans and Iraq.)

Rachel Maddow is wise enough to recognize that, even at the highest levels of government, human folly explains far more than any conspiracy theory. It's really all about "whoopsie" moments on a disturbingly grand scale.

Copyright © 2014, Los Angeles Times
Related Content
PoliticsUnrest, Conflicts and WarRachel MaddowMSNBC (tv network)Sean HannityRonald Reagan
  • Dave Jones for state insurance commissioner
    Dave Jones for state insurance commissioner

    The two candidates running for state insurance commissioner present a stark contrast. The incumbent, Democrat Dave Jones, has used his regulatory authority to push insurers to slow the growth of premiums for auto, home and other property and casualty insurance. His challenger, Republican...

  • The bad-old days at LAUSD
    The bad-old days at LAUSD

    At L.A. Unified, tensions are high and crisis is in the air. The relationship between Supt. John Deasy and the school board that oversees him is at what is perhaps an all-time low. Deasy is again muttering about quitting; others are grumbling that he should be fired.

  • Is Urban Outfitters waving the bloody shirt?
    Is Urban Outfitters waving the bloody shirt?

    It was the hand-me-down from hell: a Kent State University sweatshirt, faded, hole-filled and splattered with red dye — or was that blood? — offered online by Urban Outfitters last weekend for $129.

  • A persuasive case for saving the Salton Sea, California's biggest lake
    A persuasive case for saving the Salton Sea, California's biggest lake

    Even in its reduced and unlovely circumstances, the Salton Sea is the biggest lake in California. It may also pose the biggest quandary for the Southern California ecosystem. Its champions declare that California needs to spend several billion dollars now to save the saltwater sea, or pay...

  • CalPERS can't kill hedge funds

    The news this week that the California Public Employees' Retirement System was liquidating its hedge fund portfolio brought accusations from critics of these private, unregulated funds that their time in the sun was finally over. For the anti-hedge fund crowd, these vehicles are more...

  • D.C. statehood: an appropriately lost cause
    D.C. statehood: an appropriately lost cause

    There isn’t a Committee of Lost Causes in the U.S. Senate. Too bad, because it would have been a more appropriate venue for a hearing on statehood for the District of Columbia than the panel that did examine the question Monday, the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

Comments
Loading