TNR BLOGS

November 20, 2008 | 3:55 PM
November 20, 2008 | 1:45 PM
November 20, 2008 | 1:06 PM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM

November 20, 2008 | 2:15 PM
November 20, 2008 | 1:52 PM
November 20, 2008 | 11:06 AM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
03.09.2008
Kusnet: A Schizophrenic Night In St. Paul

David Kusnet was chief speechwriter for former President Bill Clinton from 1992 through 1994. He is the author of Love the Work, Hate the Job: Why America's Best Workers Are Unhappier than Ever.

 

John McCain canceled most events on the first night of the Republican National Convention and promised no partisan political rhetoric.

He didn’t say anything about the second night.

For a disliked party with a despised president but a widely admired nominee, the Republicans took the only realistic rhetorical avenue: Reduce the entire presidential campaign to biography (see Jonathan Cohn for more on this), run away from partisan labels, and bludgeon the opposing candidate with ... patriotism and nonpartisanship.

So it was that President Bush, speaking in the slot that the Democrats usually reserve for Dennis Kucinich, praised McCain not only for his heroism but also for having disagreed with him. Speaking by satellite for eight minutes, the President mostly sounded presidential, with the glaring exception of one of the most demagogically divisive lines ever spoken by a chief executive from a White House podium: “If the Hanoi Hilton could not break John McCain's resolve to do what is best for his country, you can be sure the angry left never will.” Somewhere in the executive mansion, a portrait of Richard Nixon was smiling.

Then came Fred Thompson delivering something closer to an old-fashioned nominating speech than the traditional sportsmanlike oration by a defeated candidate for the presidential nomination.

Thompson’s speech reminded Americans what even those of us who intend to vote against McCain must never forget: He is a hero who willingly accepted suffering on a scale that we could never imagine, much less endure.

But, as Thompson acknowledged, “Being a POW doesn’t qualify anyone to be president.” So what, then, is the case for electing McCain, eight years after his own party rejected him in favor of a man they would rather not host in person and in prime time?

From the start of his speech, Thompson described McCain as displaying a consistency of character in every season of his life, from his rowdy youth to his heroic military service and his lengthy political career. At the Naval Academy, McCain, “although loaded with demerits ... was principled even in rebellion,” Thompson said.
“He never violated the honor code.”

In the midst of describing his youthful indiscretions, including dating an “exotic dancer .... named Marie, the Flame of Florida,” Thompson shrewdly defined McCain’s character--“this mixture of rebellion and honor”--in a way that made the case that he really is a “maverick,” that he will not continue Bush’s policies, and that he has a kinship with Sarah Palin beyond the expedience of having a conservative woman as his running mate.

With this entertainingly irreverent introduction, Thompson then sounded predictable themes. McCain’s ordeal tested, strengthened, and revealed his character. He has upheld his slogan--“Country first”--not only through service and sacrifice but also by reaching out across party lines in the U.S. Senate. And Barack Obama is not his equal either in patriotism or bipartisanship.

As for Thompson, however, when he extended his hand across the aisle, it was only to sucker punch Obama. After praising McCain’s character yet again, Thompson declared: “It's pretty clear there are two questions we will never have to ask ourselves, ‘Who is this man?’ and "Can we trust this man with the Presidency?’" Without missing a beat, he went from extolling his own candidate to summoning up every subliminal doubt about Obama.

Then came the Republicans’ favorite former Democrat, Joe Lieberman. If ever again, any orator anywhere other than Lieberman himself sings Lieberman’s praises, it will not be in the endearingly entertaining manner that Thompson saluted McCain. “Honor” Lieberman may have--although one wonders whether he really believes that Sarah Palin is better suited for the vice presidency than Joe Biden. But “rebellion” appears utterly alien to Lieberman--he seems capable of rage only against rebels such as those who denied him re-nomination in 2006.

So, while Thompson, who still has some bad-boy swagger himself, portrayed McCain and Palin as mavericks who would shake up Washington, Lieberman presented them less plausibly as post-partisan healers whom centrist Democrats like himself could support. Instead of smearing Obama, he patronized him as “a gifted and eloquent young man who can do great things for our country in the years ahead.” But, unlike McCain, and, for good measure, Bill Clinton, Obama “has not reached across party lines to get anything significant done, nor has he been willing to take on powerful interest groups in the Democratic Party,” Lieberman warned.

Thus, an evening that began with speakers reassuring the Republican loyalists within the convention hall that McCain really is one of their own concluded with an apostate Democrat reassuring the television audience that McCain really isn’t a partisan or an ideologue at all. Most likely, the party faithful found the evening’s oratory more persuasive than those who have lost faith in the party.

--David Kusnet 

Posted: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 1:05 AM with 11 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

roidubouloi said:

All this schizophrenia merely reflects the fact that McCain's entire candidacy is based on one note and one-counterpoint:  "When I was a POW  .  .  .  "  and "Nigger, nigger, nigger."

That's all there is to McCain other than his hair-trigger temper, highly risky behavior, and incipient senile dementia.  The melt-down begins.

September 3, 2008 7:55 AM

Rhubarbs said:

"He is a hero who willingly accepted suffering on a scale that we could never imagine, much less endure."

Fundamental philosophical error here. Unfortunately, also an error with authoritarian overtones. Can I imagine the suffering of six years of imprisonment and torture? Possibly not -- but then again, we humans are by and large imaginative people, and such suffering cannot be inflicted unless it is first imagined by the perpetrators. And history shows that there is no shortage of willing perpetrators of suffering.

But the real error is in imagining that McCain's endurance of his suffering is in any way special. Deeply unfortunate, yes, and we rightly call the quality of endurance "heroism" when we see it. But plenty of McCain's comrades suffered just as he did, some worse, and almost all endured it. Millions of Americans right now are enduring lengthy imprisonment -- most of them quite deservingly serving time for crimes of their own commission, but suffering does not depend on innocence. Many millions more Americans suffer chronic, painful illnesses that cause just as much agony as any man-made torture. Almost all people faced with such suffering can and do endure and, if the cause of the suffering does not kill them, recover.

There is really nothing particularly special about McCain's suffering and endurance -- as a matter of empirically observable fact, almost all of us could endure the suffering he accepted just as well as he did. That quality of heroism is a nearly universal human trait, one that most of us, if we live long enough, will be called upon to display, even if only for the few months it takes for the painful illness most of us will die from to finish us off.

September 3, 2008 9:24 AM

DDovenbarger said:

How can a party that has so recently promoted torture of prisoners find succor in claiming nobility for those who endure torture by foreign enemies?  Or do tortured white men have heroic nobility, while tortured prisoners from other backgrounds merely display characteristics of deranged terrorists?  

September 3, 2008 9:41 AM

scire said:

I loved the line "angry left." Yes, we're angry! This man has screwed my country. And I'm pissed.

Watching the convention last night, it seemed so -- to quote Obama -- "out of touch."

Still blabbling the same old stuff they've been blabbing for years and acting like everything is hunkydory.

Let them continue the willful blindness.

September 3, 2008 10:08 AM

scire said:

To tag onto Rhubarbs comment: it's called survival.

But that's why I'm supposed to vote for the guy -- he survived hardship, which I guess negates the fact that he has few coherent well-thought out policy proposoals, is running on a combination of biography and let's find bogeymen and excuses for war everywhere, who selects a running mate based on what was apparently a one-day vetting process and on one meeting (she could be the most qualified candidate in the world and I'd still think that was a scary way of making a decision), and who has repeatedly demonstrated impulsivity and a temper throughout his long career. He has added appalling irresponsibility to the list of reasons why I will not vote for him. He has made himself not only an unpalatable choice, but now a frightening one.

I could rant at length, so I'd better end there.

September 3, 2008 10:15 AM

dave_nedde said:

It is just me, or does "Country First" sound like the name of a bank?

September 3, 2008 10:16 AM

The Plank said:

Look Who's Running On Biography Now by Jonathan Cohn No Manufacturing. No New Ideas. What's Our

September 3, 2008 11:00 AM

MichLib said:

Bush's lines about Americans being optimists and looking to the future will likely resonate with the uneducated masses who know no better than to follow their equally uneducated leader with a southern drawl.

September 3, 2008 11:22 AM

satyendra said:

Dave_Neddle, LOL. Countrywide Financial was the name of a bank that is now insolvent due to the mortgage crisis. I think Bank of America is now buying it.

September 3, 2008 11:52 AM

lesserliz said:

Finally somebody is swiftboating McCain!

bravenewfilms.org/.../51429

September 3, 2008 1:38 PM

ericad said:

If Liberals really were "America 2nd", wouldn't we have been taken over by somebody by now? Or least assisted some jihadis in setting up another specatular?  How mentally limited do you have to be to believe that things that are repeated 70 times in 3 days are true?  "empty suit", "America 2nd or last, or just Blame America or America haters", "tax increases", "community organizer" (said sneeringly".  I could go on.  But the real dissonance comes during the applause line of lmiting government vs. growing government.  Because what they really mean is limiting government when that doesn't mean: growing it for corporate bailouts, domestic intrusions in the name of security, subsidies for sugar, oil exploration (and soon, "green energy", but only to companies that have connections--not just based on merit/innovation).

September 5, 2008 9:58 AM