McCain as Agent for Change
- 01.04.2008 - 12:05 PMHere are some details from the conference call I just had with Senator John McCain. On last night’s results, the Senator was quick to point out that negative campaigning had worked against Mitt Romney, and that he hoped Romney would drop the tactic, as he’s not interested in going tit-for-tat from here on. Although, he never said he wouldn’t go tit-for-tat, and later in the call acknowledged that going negative can move campaigns along.
What’s most evident was the Senator’s embracing the “agent of change” mantra, of which every candidate has recently wanted to take partial ownership. In McCain’s case, the claim is particularly credible. He was pushing for a change in Iraq strategy while most Republicans were still blaming the bad news solely on the press. He pointed out that he proposed scrapping the Rumsfeld plan so early on that John Edwards took to labeling the troop surge “the McCain surge.” As a proponent of the most critical change in recent U.S. foreign affairs, the Senator should be able to point to the success of the troop surge and embarrass both Democrats and Republicans into dropping the whole change angle.
He was exhilarated about his townhall meeting with Joe Lieberman last night, calling it the highlight of his political career. The Senator emphasized that Lieberman is an independent Democrat, while pointing out that this bi-partisan townhall meeting was a first, as far as he knew. A bit later he stressed that he’s the only Republican talked about as being attractive to independent voters, and added that this bodes well in a general election. I pointed out that one could surmise that a McCain-Lieberman ticket is something he’s more than casually mulling around. Senator McCain said that vice presidential predictions are good fun and games, but, in any case, Lieberman would certainly play a large national security role in a McCain presidency. He pointed to Senator Lieberman’s assessment of the Iranian threat as particularly indicative of his keen sense on national security. “But right now, I just came in third,” he said. “After I win on February 5, we’ll revisit this conversation.” That conversation may come courtesy of Mitt Romney.
| »Back to Contentions | »Back to Commentary |
January 4th, 2008 at 1:28 PM
The McCain koolaid is flowing again, but why is a mystery. Those who’ve seen him up close have a well-founded fear of his utterly unsuitable temperament, and those who’ve followed his actions from afar rightly regard him as a narcissist with a few scattered instincts resembling what is called “conservative” - for whatever that matters to people who focus on labels as opposed to substance.
The “surge” is more about strategy than numbers - and even there, the strategy is a very faulty one, which happens to have benefitted from timing and other things beyond its control. But this flaw will probably become apparent when Iraq’s main unsettled issue (Sunni chauvinism, racism, and arrogance) comes back to haunt them/us, not having been beaten out of them by resolute action. “Counter-insurgency” is mostly a make-believe subject in general, but in Iraq’s case it’s particularly overblown. Assertion of will and establishing security require different tactics in different situations, but those are the keys - and in Iraq we continue to do the absolute minimum in this regard, while only partly fixing our disastrous body-English (we’re desperate to leave! really, we are, trust us!). It may turn out acceptably, but that’s out of our hands - the definition of a bad, risky strategy. If McCain - or anyone else - had argued for a serious war strategy, and had ID’d the key problem of perception of will to prevail, then they’d deserve some credit. As it is, McCain was among many who saw the blindingly obvious point that passivity in Iraq was no formula for success. Beyond that, he showed nothing.
And even his military instincts are far from above suspicion. Recall McCain’s hysteria about Afghanistan in the early going - hysteria is not too strong a word, look at his ludicrous WSJ op-ed of the time. His instincts on national security are vastly better than any Dem in the spotlight, and some GOPers, but that’s about the lowest bar in the history of low bars over which to leap.
His positions and behavior on rather fundamental issues - the Constitution, rule of law - are nearly bizarre for a major political figure. His enabling of the most irresponsible and outrageous political opposition as they departed from longstanding practice and in some ways suspended presidential power of judicial appointment was an act of narcissism unprecedented in recent political history (now THAT’s a high bar to jump).
McCain would probably be better than a goofball like Huckabee or a pleasant empty suit like Obama. Sadly, we’re right back in the world of low bars to clear …..
January 4th, 2008 at 5:35 PM
Amen, IceCold — the McCain koolaid is indeed flowing again, and there seems to be plenty of takers in media and among the spinners.
But McCain will wait a long time before he gets this conservative’s vote.
On illegal immigration, he’s a disaster waiting to happen. He now says, “I get it. I understand that the American people what the borders secure.” But McCain doesn’t say that 1) he necessarily agrees with the American people on that or 2) he has given up on his quest for amnesty for the illegals.
McCain can’t be trusted.
January 4th, 2008 at 6:33 PM
Some fear McCain is too much of a hawk, but of all the candidates, due to his own experience, McCain understands that America cannot have success in a war without the support of the American people. McCain knows the stakes of war as much as anyone, and will not involve our nation in any endeavor without communicating the true scope of the sacrifices that will be necessary. McCain continues to take a lot of flack from Republicans for his “Gang of 14″ that allowed most but not all of the conservative judicial nominees to go forward. This bipartisan accord was fundamentally conservative, as it stopped the traditional rules of the Senate from being thrown out the window. The filibuster makes activists moan, for it is one of the aspects of the Senate that keeps the majority party in check and characterizes the body as deliberative. By not exercising the “nuclear option,” it will be possible for extreme activitist judges of the Left to be blocked even in the event of Democratic control of both the Senate and the White House. This foresight that McCain showed by holding onto deliberative tradition against the wishes of the “movement” conservatives demonstrates that a McCain presidency will be a conservative one, for McCain recognizes the corrupting influence of power. The anti-Machiavellian crusade McCain has fought against the use of torture is another example of McCain’s understanding that what law broken for the sake of efficiency in the moment can have dire consequences for the liberty and security of the future.
January 4th, 2008 at 7:32 PM
McCains deference to international law is another problem. Joining the international criminal court and the Law of the Sea treaty would do violence to American sovereignty (I think he recently flipped on the latter issue but I wonder where his instincts are).
Also, cranky McCain will not look too fresh next to Obama. I wish it didn´t matter but it does.
January 4th, 2008 at 8:43 PM
He wasn’t third, he was fourth. If he was third, Hillary was second.
January 6th, 2008 at 2:44 PM
Very impressive collection of poor analysis, Shua. That you even make reference to irrelevancies like “conservative” and “movement conservatives” sort of renders your comment unsubstantive from the get-go. What’s a “movement conservative” and what does that have to do with anything. Talk specifics, talk substance, or talk about sports or the weather.
The rules of the Senate aren’t the Constitution - uh, they’re the rules of the Senate. They’re not changed often. Then again, SCOTUS nominations weren’t filibustered ….. ever? The ability of the Senate to block executive nominations, including judicial ones, lies in their ability to vote on same. Preventing such votes is not a Constitutionally kosher nor strategically wise practice to allow.
Support of the people for war? Where has there been a war without popular support for most of its duration, and ALL of its comparatively easy phases? Iraq was wildly popular at the outset, and especially at the close of major combat (i.e., regime change). It retained core support - even through the dark days of 2006, when polling questions distorted the issue. If McCain, somewhere, has been aggressive in outlining the difficulties and costs - all unavoidable - of confronting the enemies of civilization, then he’s jumped the appallingly low bar set by Bush, so that’s a (microscopic) plus.
Torture? Perhaps the perfect example of McCain’s narcissism parading as wisdom, and missing the point. His heroic war-time experiences have precisely zero relation to the issue of coercive interrogation. He was a legitimate combatant, for a power playing by the rules. Besides which, his position in the debate was pure McCain - wink wink, nudge nudge, we sort of understand that in extremis, down the road, some interrogators may have to break our rules to save hundreds of thousands of lives, in which case let’s hope that they’re protected by leadership of the day. Astonishingly arrogant and narcissistic - and a precise analog of “campaign finance reform,” about which McCain openly admitted it wouldn’t make a bit of difference in the outcome of votes and legislation, but wink wink, nudge nudge, it sure will make politicians more comfortable at cocktail parties when talking with NPR listeners.
No one has raised McCain’s endearing little flirtation with Al Sharpton tactics (used by his side-kick Graham) concerning illegal immigration. Baseless and slanderous implications of bigotry when one has nothing substantive or persuasive to argue is about as despicable as it gets - however typical it is in the US today. But for McCain to borrow this contemptible tactic when his indefensible policy stance is about to be rightly brushed aside is …. is …. well, sadly, completely predictable for him.