Opinion : Why America usually succeeds, even when Presidents disappoint

Maybe we expect too much from our politicians.

Maybe we never were supposed to like our political leaders, even the ones we vote for.

I am as angry about the negative campaign of 2012 as anyone.

You are, too, it seems.

Imagine how we would respond to the following campaign words:

“If our opponent is elected, “there is scarcely a possibility that we shall escape a Civil War. Murder, robbery, rape, adultery, and incest will be openly taught and practiced."

You can tell by the wording that the above line is not from 2012; it’s actually more than 200 years old. The editor of the Connecticut Courant, a Federalist and supporter of John Adams, wrote those words about Thomas Jefferson, whom another Adams supporter called “a brandy-soaked hater of churches.”

A historical note: Unlike the present day, when we expect newspapers to be politically neutral (and most are), for more than 100 years after the founding of our country, most towns had two papers, one representing each political party. Ironically, in the town where I first worked in journalism, the Democratic paper was called the Conservative. The Republican-supporting paper was the Bulletin-Journal. This was also the practice in Vinton, when more than a century ago, one local newspaper editor wrote that he was surprised to see that a county supervisor from the other party was “sober” at the dedication of the then-new courthouse.

Imagine what would happen if a presidential candidate wrote to a friend, advising him that if he prefers not to get married, he should have an affair with an older woman, rather than a younger one, because older women would be more grateful for such an experience, less likely to become pregnant, and besides that, they are better conversationalists.

Chances are that whoever wrote something that offensive would be out of politics forever. But writing, “Advice to a young man on the choice of a mistress” did not hurt the political campaign of Ben Franklin one bit. (In fairness, I must point out that Franklin’s advice began with a very strong defense of marriage; he offered the rest his opinions to a man who refused marriage.)

You don’t have to study history very long before you begin to see that the kind of moral failures that affected the fortunes of John Edwards, Newt Gingrich, Bill Clinton, Gary Condit, Anthony Weiner and a variety of other modern politicians has always been a part of American history.

In 1884 Grover Cleveland’s opponents loved to chant, “Ma, Ma, where’s my Pa?” in reference to an earlier affair that produced a child. He won anyway, causing Cleveland supporters to reply with a chant of their own: “In the White House, ha, ha ha!”

Presidents Eisenhower, FDR, Woodrow Wilson, Warren Harding and JFK are among those who were labeled as womanizers. LBJ, according to some historians, really, really wanted to be one.

Some Presidents, like Grant and Pierce, were well-known boozers. Pierce, who was a general in the Mexican War, "won many a hard-fought bottle,” declared some of his enemies. Some say that after losing his bid for re-election Pierce said there was nothing left to do but get drunk. He died of cirrhosis.

And Pierce’s VP, Buchanan, had a long time roommate, a man, whom many in Washington considered to be his lover.

Abe Lincoln is regarded as one of our country’s best presidents; Ronald Reagan remains a favorite of many conservatives. Both had wives who believed in astrology, and tried to impose their star-crossed philosophy on their husbands while in the White House.

And I have not even mentioned the financial scandals that muddied the names of many other Founding Fathers and Presidents.

In recent years, there has been a push in society for those who are famous to be “role models.” Doing or saying something stupid can be a career-ender, even if the behavior that ends a career has nothing to do with that person’s line of work. Just ask Mel Gibson or Charlie Sheen.

Maybe, however, we are not supposed to like our actors, athletes or presidents. You don’t ask the man who fixes the brakes on your car if he has ever fudged a bit on his taxes, or cheated on his second wife with the woman who is now his third. You don’t run to the curb each week to ask the garbage man for whom he voted during the 1988 election. Why would you? The two are in now way related.

It’s did not matter, in the AFC Championship Game, that Tom Brady’s off-the-field dealings with supermodels would become an issue if he ever runs for President. All that mattered is whether he could read Ray Lewis’ mind in time to change the play at the line of scrimmage, and hit his receiver when he is open. (He did, in fact.)

If Tom Brady, like Bill Clinton with his interns, was bringing those supermodels to his workplace and making non-football related passes to them on Sunday afternoons, then the coach would have a reason to bench him.

Otherwise, as much as we seem to think otherwise, the performance of the occupants of the White House have not been affected at work by their pasts or their personal lives.

History has taught us that we, as a country, can survive having a president who in some way disappoints us.

In fact, we have survived that 44 times. The secret to our national success lies in finding a president who knows how, despite the inevitable disappointments, to point a country in the way it should go, and to take us that direction.

That should be THE issue of 2012.