[lit-ideas] Reckless John McCain

From: "John McCreery" <john.mccreery@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Lit-Ideas <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 15:28:53 +0900

While we rattle on about Sarah Palin, David Ignatius nails the implications
about John McCain of choosing her to run as VP.
-----

Palin Pick Shows a Reckless McCain*By* *David
Ignatius*<http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/author/david_ignatius/>

WASHINGTON -- In the military culture that shaped John McCain, there is no
more important responsibility than the promotion boards that select the
right officers for top positions of command. It's a sacred trust in McCain's
world, because people's lives are at stake.

McCain wrote in his memoir of the officer's responsibility for those who
serve under him: "He does not risk their lives and welfare for his sake, but
only to answer the shared duty they are called to answer."
<http://ads.forbes.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/realclearpolitics.com/story/820803264/Block/RCPHouse_FApromo_hpa_080909/RCPHouse_FTpromo_bb_080815.html/37613637393235353438636530303130?_RM_REDIR_=www.forbesautos.com/news/features/2008/cars-mccain-and-obama-drive-story.html?partner=rcp>

McCain made the most important command decision of his life when he chose
Sarah Palin as his vice presidential nominee. Two weeks later, it is still
puzzling that he selected a person who, for all her admirable qualities, is
not prepared by experience or interest to be commander in chief. No
promotion board in history would have made such a decision.

Because of Palin's dynamism and political appeal, she's being hailed as an
"inspired choice," to use President Bush's words. And she certainly has
energized the Republican ticket: The polls show it, as do the enthusiastic
crowds. And if a politician's primary responsibility is to get elected, this
may indeed have been a sublime choice. But was it the right one? And what
does it tell us about McCain?

McCain is 72, and he has had a serious bout with a virulent form of cancer.
Thus, he had a special responsibility to pick a running mate who could be,
in effect, a deputy commander -- someone who could take over for him if his
health should fail. The country is at war, as McCain so often reminds us,
and he was picking someone who might be responsible for the security of the
nation.

McCain's appeal is that he presents himself as a man of principle -- a
person who will do the right thing, even if it is politically costly. He did
that in championing the troop surge in Iraq, and he has taken courageous
stands in the Senate for years. He defied his party on issues he believed in
-- from ethics reform to climate change to torture.

But John McCain also likes to win. And he has an impulsive streak, sometimes
bordering on recklessness, which is described by many of his friends and by
McCain himself in his memoir, "Faith of My Fathers." The desire to win, and
the impulsiveness, converged in his decision to pick Palin -- a bold move
that has allowed McCain to regain his maverick identity.

Palin is an immensely engaging political personality. But that doesn't make
Palin a suitable commander in chief for a nation at war. She has almost no
knowledge or experience of foreign affairs; no military leader would entrust
command to someone so inexperienced or unprepared. Her performance in her
first major interview did little to allay concerns. In speaking about
Russia, for example, she was much sharper in tone than the Bush
administration has been.

Barack Obama faces a similar question, but he has been in the national
spotlight for four years and has traveled, studied, prepared -- and he
choose in Joe Biden a running mate who is one of the Senate's genuine
experts on foreign policy. The country will watch Palin's performance in
interviews and debates, but right now she seems a genuinely risky bet.

Thinking about the Palin choice, you begin to ponder other moves McCain has
made on the road to winning the Republican nomination. McCain was right a
few years ago to warn that Bush's tax cuts would have potentially ruinous
fiscal consequences; now he favors extending the cuts that have produced a
crisis of debt and deficit. Why did he switch his position, other than
political opportunism?

McCain even seems to have forgotten what saved his greatest legislative
achievement, which is campaign-finance reform. When he was asked during the
Saddleback Church debate which Supreme Court justices he would not have
nominated, he named Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, David Souter and
John Paul Stevens. It happens that those are four of the five justices who
voted in 2003 to uphold McCain-Feingold.

In May 2006, after McCain had courted Rev. Jerry Falwell in an effort to win
conservative support, I asked him if he was bending his principles for the
sake of winning. "I don't want it that badly," McCain answered. "I will
continue to do what is right. ... If that means I can't get the Republican
nomination, fine. I've had a happy life. The worst thing I can do is sell my
soul to the devil."

He was right.

--
John McCreery
The Word Works, Ltd., Yokohama, JAPAN
Tel. +81-45-314-9324
http://www.wordworks.jp/

[lit-ideas] Reckless John McCain

Other related posts: