Of course, Ike's pledge was worthless. He not only did not cut spending, he utterly failed to combat the expansion of leftism domestically. Sen. McCarthy exposed him as the "Emperor with No Clothes" on the issue of Communist infiltration. Rather than deal with the problem, he decided to make McCarthy "America's problem." So much for a patriot.
"Where Taft and Eisenhower differed was in foreign policy, with Taft tending toward isolationism and wanting to avoid overseas military commitments against the advance of communism. Taft was even a critic of NATO and the US commitment to help defend Europe. Do you approve more of Taft or Eisenhower in that respect?"
"Whatever your views though, modern American conservatism is anti-communist to the core. Unlike Taft, Ronald Reagan and most conservatives favored NATO and the use of American military power to resist and defeat communism. Indeed, no small part of the case for American conservatism is its role in fostering the ideas and policies that helped lead to the essentially peaceful overthrow of the USSR and the other communist regimes in Eastern Europe."
Since Taft would've had the 5 months of serving actively and the last month+ unsuccessfully battling terminal cancer, there's no way to conclude how Taft would've reacted in the long run. At the time, there was no way to operate as an isolationist President, so I can only theorize had he lasted in office, he would've taken a more internationalist stance. A President MacArthur would've unquestionably been aggressive across the board. He knew our enemies and would bring the battle to them.
"Eisenhower's conception of himself as a small government conservative is supported by the historical record. Conservatives did not fully realize it at the time, and some, like the National Review circle, were almost relentlessly disparaging, but Eisenhower as President actually believed in the Constitution and limited federal powers."
And again, what he "conceived" himself to be didn't match the record. Expansive government, high taxes and failure to combat Socialism is not "Conservative" any more than I'm a fudgesicle. Although he may have regretted it later, Eisenhower's contribution to our courts, Earl Warren, was the singlemost destructive appointment in the history of the Supreme Court and served to throw the Constitution and this "limited federal powers" right into the shredder.
This reminds me of our imbecilic Socialist Democrat Senator here in Tennessee, Jim "Daff-uh-Zit" Sasser (1977-1995). Term after term, he'd come home every 6 years and preach to everyone how "Conservative" he was across the board. Concerned about the daff-uh-zit (deficit), riding around in a cop car showing he was tough on crime. It was all Kabuki theater. After helping to push Bush, Sr. into breaking his 1988 pledge on taxes and his relentless pursuit to become Majority Leader (for which he was about to be designated as following George Mitchell's retirement in 1994), he trotted out his "I'm a Conservative" campaign, which was met with derisively laughter from Memphis to Mountain City. His riding in a cop car looked like Dukakis in the tank, and the film footage was close to a decade old. Law enforcement was not supporting him. Tennessee kicked Sasser out on his ass in favor of the non-politician Bill Frist (whom ironically would get the Majority Leader job). What you think you are, what you roll people into believing you are and what you actually are, as with the case of Sasser and Eisenhower (and Nixon) don't always jibe.
"A few years ago, National Review more or less recanted in "Why Like Ike - Conservatives got Eisenhower wrong the first time around," by Kevin D. Williamson. If you want, use the private mail function here to send me your email and I will provide a PDF copy. Perhaps, like NR, you might conclude on reconsideration that you like Ike."
I believe I've seen that article. NR is not what it used to be by any stretch, and it seems quite pleased and content to see the election of Hillary Clinton and the complete pandemonium that will follow in her wake. But even a cursory glance at Ike and everything that followed under his reign of error makes me an unapologetic Taft-MacArthur supporter. We'd all have been better off had he retired to his ranch by 1952.
A few small disagreements and additions. William Brennan was a worse appointment to SCOTUS even taking into consideration that Warren was CJ with a lot more power than an AJ. Brennan was a poison who lasted much longer and racked up far more casualties. There is a book, The Brethren, which describes his key, behind the scenes role as SCOTUS's utility infielder for the radical left. Another phony "Catholic" who was presiding over the horse trading of votes on other cases in exchange for support for Blackmun's desire for abortion on demand as a "constitutional right." Potter Stewart sold out for votes favoring Pete Rose being favorably described in the Curt Flood baseball antitrust case. Stewart was also appointed by Ike. 60+ million dead babies and counting. Thanks, Ike!
Barry Goldwater (of whom I am no fan) called Ike's administration "The Dime Store New Deal." He was right about that.
As outlined in books by Bill Buckley, M. Stanton Evans, Anne Coulter and many more, McCarthy was a genuine American hero. This was verified by the release from the soviet archives of the Venona Papers. Throwing him under the bus to suck up to fashionable elitist opinion makes former Ivy League Columbia University President Dwight Eisenhower a bum.
Ike conceived of himself as a small government conservative????? So what? If he conceived of himself as Secretariat, he would not have won a single race. What was he? A political transgender?
Eisenhower and McCarthy. McCarthy was badly flawed, but he deserved better. Eisenhower seems to have regarded him as a treacherous publicity hound and a burden to efforts to establish sound procedures to weed out the disloyal and insecure. Worst of all was McCarthy’s attack on the US Army and reckless slams on George Marshall, Eisenhower’s friend and mentor. Is it any wonder that Eisenhower was antagonistic toward McCarthy?
Taft’s foreign policy views if elected. Really? Taft should be preferred to Eisenhower because Taft would have repudiated his own isolationism if elected -- and then been succeeded by MacArthur, who was intent on waging a massive war in China? Why not simply elect Eisenhower in the first place?
Earl Warren, etc. Eisenhower also thought Earl Warren proved to be a terrible appointment. More broadly, your rhetoric against Eisenhower echoes the Old Right rhetoric against Taft.