SYNDICATED COLUMN: Teddy Roosevelt Saw This Coming

The Decline and Fall of an American Icon

Why did our political system become so corrupt and unresponsive? How did we end up with such a rigid, Old European-style class system—in which you can’t get ahead unless you were born that way? America: What Went Wrong?, a 1992 paperback by Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele, went a long way toward answering those questions.

It may be, however, that America was doomed long before then.

The historian Edmund Morris recently published the final entry of a magisterial trilogy about the life of Theodore Roosevelt. Though frequently listed among the greatest American politicians today, TR was an “accidental president” who ascended to power thanks to the murder of William McKinley. His blustery and impolitic style—his supporters called it speaking truth to power—would never have allowed him to win a presidential election.

Roosevelt sussed out the perils of unregulated capitalism early on. “The great corporations which we have grown to speak of rather loosely as trusts are the creatures of the State, and the State not only has the right to control them wherever need of such control is shown but it is in duty bound to control them,” he said in 1901.

No president since Nixon has followed TR’s advice. The result of unbridled corporate corruption is disparity of wealth worse than much of the Third World, and 20 percent unemployment.

Morris’ book Colonel Roosevelt addresses TR’s life after leaving the presidency in 1909: his 1912 run as on the independent Bull Moose ticket, his disastrous expedition through the Amazon, and finally the decline of this legendary dynamo after the start of World War I reordered the international landscape and doomed him to political irrelevance: a career bookended by assassins’ bullets.

Few presidents are as revered by both the left and the right. Liberals love TR for his record as an environmentalist and trust-buster. Conservatives like his unapologetic imperialism: the American empire as we know it began with Roosevelt.

Although it describes events that took place a century ago, this new biography shines light on many of the systemic ills that afflict the United States today.

On the domestic front it is brutally disheartening to read that even a figure as historically transcendent and contemporaneously popular as Theodore Roosevelt found it impossible to break the lock of the two major parties on the political process. As schoolchildren learn, the Bull Moose Party marks the apex of third party attempts in presidential politics. In 1912 it was an empty farce.

Along with their allied press barons, the Republican and Democratic Party machines blocked the charismatic (albeit longwinded) ex-Rough Rider every step of the way, rendering Roosevelt’s third-party defeat as much of a foregone conclusion as Nader’s.

During the Bull Moose run Roosevelt was shot at close range as he arrived for a campaign appearance in Milwaukee. The bullet, slowed by the printed text of the 50-page speech folded over in his jacket pocket, had nevertheless “pinked” the former president.

Morris’ description of TR’s grace under fire inspires awe: “Don’t hurt him. Bring him here,” Roosevelt shouted to men restraining his would-be assassin as he hoisted himself to his feet.

“Let’s go the hospital,” urged an aide.

“You get me to that speech,” Roosevelt replied, Morris says, “with a savage rasp to his voice.”

“[The bullet wound] was a ragged, dime-sized hole, bleeding slowly, about an inch below and to the right of his right nipple. The bullet was nowhere to be seen or palpated. The whole right side of his body had turned black,” Morris writes.

TR took the podium. “It takes more than that to kill a bull moose,” he said, going on to speak for an hour and fifteen minutes.

We have lost so much. Contrast TR’s courageous performance after being shot to our so-called “leaders.” On 9/11 George W. Bush abandoned Washington, fleeing into internal exile, hopscotching the nation like a coward before slinking back to the capital half a day later.

Roosevelt spent his last years hurling scathing critiques of Woodrow Wilson’s reluctance to enter World War I on the side of Britain and France. Nearly 100 years ago, however, the bellicose Roosevelt harbored no proto-neocon-like delusions about American exceptionalism—the nauseating combination of high-blown rhetoric and gutter-rat real-world actions that characterizes foreign policy of the United States and sparks outrage around the globe.

“He scoffed at the hypocrisy of Wilson’s grand-sounding phrase ‘self-determination for all peoples’ [in Wilson’s Fourteen Points], noting that the President was in no hurry to grant liberty to Haiti or Santo Domingo.” Both were under U.S. military occupation.

Were such self-awareness in greater supply in the U.S. today, we might not be fighting wars of aggression on three fronts at the same time we’re lecturing other countries about sovereignty and human rights.

Roosevelt’s martial spirit was his blind spot.

Unlike most Americans today, he had served valiantly. His bravery was unquestioned. One of his greatest disappointments was Wilson’s refusal to allow him to fight in the Great War.

Despite his experience in battle TR shared with today’s armchair “support our troops” “U-S-A” warriors an excess of willingness to send others to face shells and poison gas—without fully internalizing the consequences.

Despite being sidelined, Roosevelt pushed his sons to enlist and get to the fighting. Then his son Quentin, a pilot, got shot down. “Quentin’s mother and I are very glad that he got to the Front and had a chance to render some service to his country, and to show the stuff there was in him before his fate befell him,” he told the press.

But the cold reality of Quentin’s permanent absence marked the beginning of the end of a man known for his vigor. “The old side of him is gone, the old exuberance, the boy in him has died,” a friend noted the day after he learned of his son’s death. “I am not what I was,” TR confessed to his sister.

Two years later Roosevelt was dead, a victim of the American militarism he extolled and symbolized.

(Ted Rall is the author of “The Anti-American Manifesto.” His website is



  • nom du jour
    June 2, 2011 9:55 AM

    Accidental Presidents have made some of the biggest changes in American history. In this century, besides TR, Lyndon Johnson did a huge amount of social reform that may have been pushed aside by JFK in the interests of getting re-elected in ’64.

    Likewise, Harry Truman had monumental decisions thrust upon him in the first 100 or so days in office saw bigger decisions that were made than a machine-pol from Missouri would have thought possible.

    This is only looking at this through the rose colored glasses I was issued at my Amerikan high school. I am sure that if you look at other countries, many changes were made by leaders who were not supposed to be in charge.

  • Bruce Coulson
    June 2, 2011 11:38 AM

    I would put the beginning of Empire slightly earlier. To be specific, the Spanish-American War. At its conclusion, America had a choice; to free the former Spanish colonies and let the local people chart their own destiny, or to enter the world stage as a nascent Empire by claiming those colonies as our own. This was a topic of quite serious discussion at the time, as more than a few politicians realized the momentous step that was being considered. And conservatives of that time argued against claiming the Phillipines, Cuba, and the rest of Spain’s aging empire. They feared (rightly so) as to what this might mean for American ideals and society.

    The decision taken was made primarily by McKinley; although Teddy certainly approved of the initial outcome. All TR did was carry out the expressed will of the former President and those who wanted to become a Great Power; to be important on the World Stage.

    Had America done the right thing, and let those former colonies decide if they wished to become a part of America, or become their own independent countries (and, quite likely, very friendly towards a country which helped free them from oppression) not only would we have remained true to the ideals of our country (as expressed by John Adams), but there still would have been a great deal of profit made from overseas trade, etc. So, we gained an Empire; all it cost was our ideals.

  • Tyler Durden
    June 2, 2011 1:12 PM

    Teddy would have statred a national healthcare program, methinks.
    What would Rand Paul/Teabaggers/Republicans have to say if Upton Sinclair’s “The Jungle” was released today?
    Dorme bene.

  • Tyler Durden
    June 2, 2011 1:13 PM

    Oops, typo.
    Good article Ted.

  • If Palin heard about TR being a “Bull Moose”, she would shoot and eat him. 🙂