Thursday, January 31, 2008

Goats   [John Derbyshire]

Today's fashion leader in e-mail openings: "I'm no way a McCain supporter, but …"

Fair enough. I'm teetering on the edge of McCain Derangement Syndrome, I'll admit, especially after reading Michellle's exposés of that Mexican-government shill McCain hired as his "Hispanic Outreach Director." I will stay home rather than vote for John McCain. Still, fair's fair, and I'm building up an impressive reader-e-mail folder of reasons to leave McCain's military career totally out of bounds. Samples, on the topic of his career at the Naval Academy:

• I'm no McCain man, but according to this book, there's something to be said for those at the bottom of their class at the military academies.
• 703rd out of 899 would show mere dullness. 894th out of 899 suggests a finely-honed sense of what one can get away with without paying a price — no small virtue in a politician, or a blogger. My understanding is that, in fact, the young McCain was a disciplinary minimalist who could have done much better had he wanted.
• John, I am really disappointed in you. Surely you know the history of America's academy graduates and their respective class ranks.
  
  US Grant 21st out of 39.
  Eisenhower 61st out of 164.
  Hyman Rickover father of the nuclear submarine 106th of 539.
  Stonewall Jackson 51st out of 72.
  George Patton 46th out of 102.
  
  Now compare them to George McClellan, #1 and one of the highest scoring cadets in history, and William Westmoreland, #3 in his class.
  
  There are a few people who were at or near the top of their academy classes who turned out great; MacArthur was number 1, Robert E. Lee was only cadet ever to go four years without a demerit and Nimitz was 7th. The service academies are boys schools. Finishing at the middle or even bottom of your class is no shame.

Lots more to be said about that. Hands up those who — regardless what you think about his generalship — believe Patton would have made a good president. Anyone? …

01/31 03:16 PMShare