The Palin Pick -- The Devolution of McCain
In one of our many conversations as we crisscrossed the country during his campaign for the 2000 Republican presidential nomination, John McCain said to me, "I've always tried to act on what I thought was the best for the country. And that has guided me.... The only thing I can do is assure people that I would act on principle."
I traveled with McCain for weeks that political season, stayed in Arkansas with him, Cindy, and their children, and - for a Vanity Fair cover profile -- filled dozens of notebooks and tapes with observations from and about a potentially heroic politician who seems far removed from the man running for president today.
Three weeks after the 2008 Republican convention, on the cusp (maybe) of the first presidential debate, it is time to confront an awkward but profound question: whether in picking Sarah Palin as his running mate, John McCain has committed -- by his own professed standards of duty and honor -- a singularly unpatriotic act.
"I would rather lose a political campaign than lose a war," he has said throughout this campaign. Yet, in choosing Palin, he has demonstrated -- whatever his words -- it may be permissible to imperil the country, conceivably even to "lose" it, in order to win the presidency. That would seem the deeper meaning of his choice of Palin.
Indeed, no presidential nominee of either party in the last century has seemed so willing to endanger the country's security as McCain in his reckless choice of a running mate. He is 72 years old; has had four melanomas, a particularly voracious form of cancer; refuses to release his complete medical records. Three of our last eleven presidents (and nine of all 43) have come to office unexpectedly in mid-term from the vice presidency: Truman, who within days of FDR's death was confronted with the decision of whether to drop the atom bomb on Japan; Lyndon Johnson, who took the oath in Dallas after JFK's assassination; Gerald Ford, sworn in following the resignation of Richard Nixon. A fourth vice president, George H.W. Bush, briefly exercised the powers of the presidency after the near-assassination of Ronald Reagan.
Given that history, what does John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin -- the cavalier, last-minute process of her selection and careless vetting; and her over-briefed, fact-lite performance since -- reveal about this military man who has attested to us for years that he is guided by his personal code of honor? "Two things I will never do," McCain told me, "are [to] lie to the American people, or put my electoral interests before the national interest" -- an obvious precursor of "I would rather lose a political campaign than lose a war."
McCain, I wrote for Vanity Fair, "often speaks of the duty to follow his conscience in politics, rather than polls or party discipline. This, he says, comes from having escaped death and becoming 'more aware of the transience of everything we do.'"
"I've always had a pretty good idea about how to define something as to whether it's right or wrong," he told me. "I don't mean that I'm better or worse than anybody else. I just mean that when I see an issue and think about it and talk to people, I do generally have the ability to know what's the right course of action, even if it may not be what the majority wants. So I have a certain amount of confidence that I don't have to have a majority opinion on my side."
It does not take a near-death experience to know that Sarah Palin is not qualified to be commander in chief, or that -- in choosing her -- McCain has ignored his own oft-avowed code of conduct. "McCain made the most important command decision of his life when he chose Sarah Palin as his vice presidential nominee," noted David Ignatius in the Washington Post. "....No promotion board in history would have made such a decision."
--------
Above all, the John McCain I covered in 1999-2000 was -- he said -- convinced that two factors were undermining the interests of the United States: its cultural wars, causing political gridlock in Washington and civic discontent across the land; and the unbending agenda of the right-wing of the Republican party that, in his view, had been captured by the Christian conservative movement and bore disproportionate responsibility for the poisonous state of American politics. Exhibit One: the scorched-earth campaign that George W. Bush was then waging against McCain's insurgent run for the Republican presidential nomination.
Yet, McCain, is, in fact, running the kind of campaign against Barack Obama that George Bush ran against him in 2000, which he regarded rightly as dishonest, dishonorable and diversionary in terms of the truth about him and about the nation's problems.
The conservative commentator George Will has been especially incisive of late about the "dismaying," "un-presidential temperament" of McCain and the sleazy tenor of his campaign. Karl Rove (!) has responded to the incessant lying of McCain's ads (one claims falsely that Obama has promoted "comprehensive" sex education for five-year-olds -- he had, in fact, endorsed legislation to insure that kindergartners were warned about sexual predators), by saying, yes, the McCain camp's mendacity has "gone one step too far."
Meanwhile, McCain's frequent invocations of the need for bi-partisan statesmanship are interspersed with the angry themes of cultural warfare and of the Republican convention orchestrated by his handlers, the most dominant of them practitioners from the campaigns of George W. Bush: attacks on "tax-and-spend Democrats," on the dependable liberal bogeyman, on "the angry Left," on Constitution-rewriting federal judges (including, incongruously, three of the Supreme Court justices who voted to uphold McCain's singular legislative achievement: the campaign-finance act he authored with Democrat Russ Feingold).
"If hypocrisy were gold, the Capitol would be Fort Knox," McCain once famously said. "Some of those guys," he said, referring to his fellow senators, "have they even had lives? What have they done?" He added, "Aw, jeez, this is exactly the kind of thing that gets me into trouble." Indeed.
McCain's first choices to be his running mate were former Gov. Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania and Senator Joe Lieberman, the Democrat-turned-Independent from Connecticut, and former vice presidential nominee of his former party. Neither passed the ideological litmus test of the Republican-Right -- "The Base" -- because each holds pro-choice views. Certainly both are qualified to step into the presidency in terms of national security credentials -- regardless of whether one agrees with their particular politics -- in the event of the death of the president. McCain's "Hail Mary" pick -- Palin -- was hastily decided on the next-to-last day of the Democratic convention, by which time it was evident that Obama's convention was winning over independent voters; all that remained was the final night and the opportunity for Obama to deliver a speech that would further work to his advantage, and debilitate the McCain campaign. Only by exciting "The Base" could McCain remain competitive and win, it was calculated.
The distance from McCain's ads and assertions about his presidential opponent and Democrats generally, and his decision to run a "persona-based" campaign, as opposed to being specific on the issues, is of a piece with his choice of Palin to be his running mate. As another conservative commentator sometimes critical of McCain -- Peggy Noonan -- has noted, the "narrative" of a life [McCain's, Palin's], takes over from existential political fact in the type of campaign run by McCain and his handlers. We have heard an awful lot in the past few weeks, especially from Sarah Palin, about John McCain "The Maverick," just as we did in the convention narrative. But what McCain has actually been doing in this campaign, rather than actually being The Maverick, is conveying the appearance of iconoclasm, and playing to the crowd. (Hence, perhaps, "suspending" his campaign -- and trying to postpone the first presidential debate while his poll numbers are sinking -- to deal with the financial crisis?) At this point, the maverick claim seems no more genuine than Sarah Palin's charade foreign-policy tour of Manhattan with no witnesses -- reporters -- permitted to observe the proceedings.
The issue of Palin's relative ignorance about international affairs and the larger world beyond America's shores (compared to previous vice presidential nominees), her attendant arrogance in seeming to revel in it, and McCain's decision to subject the country to it in choosing a possible president -- is the biggest question in this election, or perhaps ought to be. It goes to the core of who the John McCain of this campaign is.
Another conservative commentator, David Brooks, wrote last week: "Sarah Palin has many virtues. If you wanted someone to destroy a corrupt establishment, she'd be your woman. But the constructive act of governance is another matter. She has not been engaged in national issues, does not have a repertoire of historic patterns and, like President Bush, she seems to compensate for her lack of experience with brashness and excessive decisiveness."
The more we learn, the more we realize the vetting process was -- given the rush of the circumstances -- hopelessly inadequate: McCain didn't know many aspects of Palin's record or her reputation (none of which is to say she wouldn't be a congenial fit as, say, Secretary of Interior in a McCain administration). McCain's first choices for a running mate -- Ridge and Lieberman -- were light years ahead of Palin in the vice presidential-qualification department. But they didn't meet the ideological test, exactly the ideological litmus test that McCain has attacked his whole political career and told us he would never succumb to.
John McCain is a serious man, as anyone who has spent time with him knows. But he has not run the kind of serious campaign he once promised.
Not for the first time, as many of his fellow Republicans (as opposed to friendly reporters and sympathetic Democrats) had long maintained, McCain's more reckless inclinations and lesser impulses prevailed. A great political movement that would transcend rabid partisanship and hard ideology does not seem in the cards.
And if he wins the election, Sarah Palin -- who in her first post-convention discussion of foreign policy indicated a willingness to go to war with Russia over Georgia -- stands a heartbeat away from the presidency.
Ultimately it is the choice of Palin, made in the moment when action speaks loudest, that may undermine a quarter-century of assertions by John McCain about the preeminence of duty, honor and country in his political schema.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
The bottom line is that this women was picked by the republicians party and the only thing John McCain need to do is to continue to be white because he will be elected president and sarah Palin will be Vp. This thing about country and duty is for the little people; the ruling class already know that a majority of americians are a bunch of dumb ass fools.
The Palin pick is simply astonishing. In watching her interviews and her jockeying to comprehend and then formulate an answer to a question - one easily views the "deer in the headlights - lemme fake it the best I can" look seen in the eyes of lazy high schoolers who have obviously not "read the chapter assigned for the prior night's reading." We have all seen it and perhaps we have all been there. We recognize the faking it out. But high school is high school. This woman is running for Vice President of the United States of America. What have we come to as a country that a person so ill prepared and sadly ill informed has risen to one of the the highest offices in the land? She informs Katie Couric she "will get back to her " regarding an example of John McCain's regulatory voting. Does America not see that the Emperor indeed has no clothes? Give her a talk show, make her the next Oprah, crown her Arctic Pipeline Queen, build her her own National Church with nationwide TV ministry - but for Pete's sake keep her away from that red phone and button.
You can't blame Palin. She jumped at the opportunity of a lifetime- like winning political lotto. It was McCain's brash decision pure and simple. This should really make the American people think about his judgement. McCain is an out of control ragealholic that will have this country in constant war. War feeds his need for rage and that is a very dangerous position to put this country in. Very, very dangerous.
Most of the press knows that Palin's nomination, while constitutionally correct, is a fraud and farce. Thanks to Carl Berstein for saying what must be said. Why haven't everyone in the press not be asking how Palin can be qualified a Vice President when she isn't qualified to go on Meet the Press or This Week...?
Bernstein's theme that McCain's choice could be unpatriotic hits a a true chord. McCain obviously desperately wants to be President. But to possibly put the country in the hands of one so completely unqualified is truly unpatriotic.
Where is the rest of the press. They claim to be the watchdogs of democracy, but seem to be afraid to say what is necessary to say.
You are so right!! The press has cowered to the preemptive strikes, fashioned by Rove, McCain and the conservatives, accusing the media of "liberal bias" . Only Maddow, Olbermann and Cafferty refuse to play stupid !! The rest of the media needs to get some courage and speak the truth. This is no time to elect a McCain-Palin ticket. One is unstable the other unable.
great article Carl, i am too young to know all what you did back with watergate but I have always watched you on CNN and always admired your prospectiv
"...(none of which is to say she wouldn't be a congenial fit as, say, Secretary of Interior in a McCain administra
yup- she could bring her witch hunter pastor out to find all of us witches- (that means the left!_) and force us out of the country.
Bernstein is right. I have less trouble with Palin per se than I do with the fact that McCain picked her. This is a guy who claims "Country First." But if he gets elected and dies or becomes disabled in office -- a not-unlikely scenario given his age and medical history -- he will have left the country he "loves so much" in the hands of an incompetent buffoon at a time of war and domestic crisis. That's putting country first?
see: http://rhe
Howdy, Carl! The problem with letting you define patriotism is that it leads to incorrect conclusions. Which is why the left end of the political spectrum has such a tough time understanding "supporting the troops" and "patriotis
Bernstein doesn't define patriotism; he is pointing out McCain's hypocrisy.
Some of those troops you say liberals don't support are their own children. I suspect they support them!
Your last sentence makes no sense unless you're trying to describe the neoconservative philosophy of rationalizing whatever they do as right. And in that case it still makes no sense.
SailFree,
See my screen name?
Do you know who the Spartans are in an American context?
No, they are not some high school sports team.
They are the 3BCT (3rd Brigade Combat Team—just in case you don't get it) of the 10th Mountain Division.
My son was honorably discharged from the Army and is now on disability due to the injuries he received in forward positions in Afghanistan. A friend's son is at Arlington. Another's is off to Iraq in a few months.
How dare you suggest that I and other liberals, progressives, even socialists do not support our troops.
We support out troops by buying and shipping gerber tools, ballistic grade sunglasses with interchangeable lenses, and hi-tech shooting gloves off to our children who cannot get the supplies they need through regular channels.
We support them by going to the funerals of strangers' children.
We support them by believing that paying taxes to increase their miserable pay is a patriotic act.
And we support them by welcoming them home broken and battered.
What we do not support is an administration that uses our most precious tools recklessly and then refuses to give them proper support when they return damaged. Damn, my neighbor is more careful when he borrows my rototiller.
Would Palin pass a high security clearance examination? Is one being conducted?
Having been through some security clearances, and having discussed the procedures with some experts, I can say that it is highly improbable to the point of pragmatic certainty that Obama could not pass a high level security clearance. And that's just reality.
Who are you, James Bond?
George W. Bush couldn't pass either.
Just because someone has been through security clearances, how can you determine Obama wouldn't get one? Have you ever worked to get a security clearance for someone? I;m certain the people you talked to could not share EVERYTHING with you. Now that's reality. Can hyou get a security clearance on the bridge?
The reason you are asserting this is because of your political biases and not because of any genuine expertise in this area.
Oooo, are we ever impressed.
Palin would qualify, as there's nothig wrong with havig a husband who snowmobiles, with shooting moose, with having a Down's Syndrome child, etc. But Obama would not pass scrutiny, as the Bill Ayers connection, the missing 2 years at Columbia, etc., would now allow granting him a high level clearance.
Not...NOT.
Sorry, as I just said elsewhere, I'm getting sleepy. Night, all.
What? Is this sarcasm?
Would McCain pass? I read from more than one source he was being used by the enemy to make proganda films when he was a POW - although he milks his POW story like Guiliani milks 9/11. Giuilliani insisted on having the command center in the World Trade Center in spite of all the security experts pleas. Brash judgement. just like Bush, McCain and Cheney. McCain crashed several planes- I think. 5. Probably more brash judgement. He was at the bottom of his class. I'll take someone cool and calm over someone brash and arrogant any day. McCain does not have the judgement or temperment for president. This country is broke- how far in the future can we ever mortgage this country for
Palin's husband was a member of the traiterous Alaska Independence Party for 7 years, and Palin appeared at two of their conventions. There is no way she would qualify for a security clearance.
As Sarah is the current Governor of Alaska I assumed she had some intellectual prowness.
I was wrong, she would have trouble having a converasation with a 5 year old.
What a total air head! Trying to answer Katie Courics questions was a monumental challenge
for her, and Katie only asked basic stuff thet even Sarah should have been able to handle.
Truly pathetic, the worse political performance I have ever seen.
I would be surprised if the VP debate goes on, at this point I think McCains handlers are
desperately trying to prevent the interview from happening!
If the interview goes on its' all over for the Republicans!
One notes this strange tendency of the left to pretend their opponents are stupid. Is it because it gives them license to make disparaging remarks without even considering the facts and arguments?
It isn't Pretense.. Palin meanders from ignorance to outright stupidity every time she opens her mouth.
It is certainly a fact that Russia is near Alaska but it is a logical fallacy to assume that being factual concerning geographical proximity is relevant to having honest foreign policy experience. I would have been more impressed had she indicated that' No, she didn't but has made a study of world events and made efforts to understand how the foreign policies of nations had shaped the Geo-political landscape blah blah blah" and then proceeded to speak knowledgeably and in complete sentences concerning foreign policy...
They are truly out of good choices w/ Sara.h - She debates Joe and likely fails miserably. She cancels (due to some unforseen emergency) and she fails. Or, they pull the drama card again and she is replaced on the ticket. Another failure. All of which bring us to the sad but realistic conversation about JohnMc's poor judgment and erratic decision-m
Thank you, Mr. Berstein. McCain's pick of Palin definitely goes to the heart of his sanity and soundness to hold office. More important, picking someone who's such the antithesis of how women want (and have worked so hard for) to be perceived: beautiful women are stupid - vapid, only able to be led by men.... shows his disrespect for females in general and for the highest office in our nation (she's clearly a joke).
As I have said, this is entirely about John McCain and his handlers. It is outrageous to think he would make such a degrading choice as Sarah Palin. I am more concerned about the people running John McCain, than John or Sarah. This nightmare is about over, I hope!
Nothing says "Country First" than "picking" THE most unqualified, questionable elected official this country has to offer. When do we start requiring IQ tests and psychological profiles of our presidential and vice presidential candidates? Would make the decision a lot easier.
It is all about John McSame -- as McSame would insist. HE chose Palin, and HE is responsible for the coice -- stop the horseshit of blaming others than the person responsible: the exactly the irresponsible behavior that got us the Bushit criminal enterprise, and the destruction they have caused the country.
Stop being a Republican.
Seriously now, there are many worse than Palin. Jefferson, he of 90,000 bucks cold cash in his freezer in New Orleans, for example. I am going to bed, but were I not tired, I could list dozens for you. Such hyperbolic statements weaken your argument. What is your argument, anyway?
She is the Governor for crying out loud-all of these different inquiries almost on a daily basis makes Jefferson's plight look like peanuts. Jefferson is not running for a high office and can speak to boot. If she was able to hold a decent coversation,maybe she wouldn't be under this cloud-but she can't do anything
Don't forget Tom Delay, John McCain of the Keating 5, Randall Cunningham, Phil Gramm, Newt Gingrich of the "book advance" that he had to step down over. Yes, please tell us all about the liberal feet of clay. Just don't forget that the sainted conservatives have a few. THere's also the small matter of covering the losses for their WS buddies today due to their deregulation and of couse, Enron and Halliburton.
We liberals have memories too.
It is frightening that she could conceivably become President one day.
She should know herself that she does not have the qualifications to run the country and would
actually be doing herself a favor by backing out of the running now, while she can still 'save face' and
save herself further embarrassment from the glare of the spotlight.
I actually feel sorry for her now!!!!
It is becoming so pitiful that I think she may get the sympathy vote comparable to keeping the worst singer with sad eyes that gets picked on in the American Idol contest. Never should we underestimate the pathetic lack of critical thinking in half of our fellow citizens.
It is delusional to feel sorry for a person who is dangerous.
John McCain showed the worst possible judgement with his selection of VP. There is no way for him to say to the American People, that he put his country first with that choice. He had to declare war on the media in an attempt to keep them quite while he tried to sneek her into the White House.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
