Michael Gerson says that John McCain’s performance at Saddleback may be a turning point for the candidate, who showed that he just does better at unscripted, town-hall type events than Barack Obama:
What took place instead under Warren’s precise and revealing questioning was the most important event so far of the 2008 campaign — a performance every voter should seek out on the Internet and watch.
First, the forum previewed the stylistic battle lines of the contest ahead, and it should give Democrats pause. Obama was fluent, cool and cerebral — the qualities that made Adlai Stevenson interesting but did not make him president. Obama took care to point out that he had once been a professor at the University of Chicago, but that bit of biography was unnecessary. His whole manner smacks of chalkboards and campus ivy. Issues from stem cell research to the nature of evil are weighed, analyzed and explained instead of confronted.
This approach has a genuine appeal to some voters, especially of a more liberal bent, who believe there is a nuance shortage in American life. But on Saturday night it did not compare well with McCain, who was decisive, passionate and surprisingly personal. The candidate who once seemed incapable of the confessional style of politics talked at length of Vietnam experiences and his adopted daughter from Bangladesh. Asked by Warren about his greatest moral failure, McCain’s response — “the failure of my first marriage” — had an abrupt and disarming authenticity. The account of his hardest decision — refusing release from captivity during the Vietnam War ahead of others who had been imprisoned longer — remains shocking in its valor. And McCain’s habit of understatement — he described the excruciating rope torture he experienced in Vietnam as “very uncomfortable” — makes his stories even more effective. . . .
Obama’s response on abortion — the issue that remains his largest obstacle to evangelical support — bordered on a gaffe. Asked by Warren at what point in its development a baby gains “human rights,” Obama said that such determinations were “above my pay grade” — a silly answer to a sophisticated question. If Obama is genuinely unsure about this matter, he (and the law) should err in favor of protecting innocent life. If Obama believes that a baby in the womb lacks human rights, he should say so — pro-choice men and women must affirm (as many sincerely do) that developing life has a lesser status. Here the professor failed the test of logic.
For many evangelicals, the theoretical Obama — the Obama of hope and unity — is intriguing, even appealing. But this opinion is not likely to improve upon closer inspection of his policy views. Obama is one of those rare political figures who seems to grow smaller the closer we approach him.
6 comments ↓
“Hope for McCain”… which McCain could still dash with a pro-abortion VP selection.
But if McCain and Obama are selected as nominees by their parties, a head-to-head debate between the two should be a opportunity for the voters to see how the winner may fare in a head-to-head confrontation with Soviet… I mean Russion Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.
Perhaps his hubris will be his downfall and will cause him to lose the election. I, for one, certainly hope and pray that will be the outcome!
1) This smacks a bit of anti-intellectualism, a frequent media trope in comparing Democrats to Republicans: that Democrat thinks too much; I’d much rather have a beer with this regular ol’ guy!
2) I doubt that this column, much less my first point, will play into anyone’s analysis of liberal media bias. Such examples, as always, do not count. However, if the same praise was lavished on Obama …
3) I guess that McCain has now officially dropped the claim to being “reluctant” to talk about his service. That’s fine — it is to his advantage, after all.
Of course, there is the Republican double standard about military service — namely, that it doesn’t count if it’s done by a Democrat. Also, remember all those (completely justified) jokes at Kerry’s expense about, “Did I mention I served in Vietnam”? Yeah, Republicans aren’t making those jokes anymore.
I didn’t see the event but you make it sound almost like Obama’s Erasmus to McCain’s Luther.
tODD - “This smacks a bit of anti-intellectualism, a frequent media trope in comparing Democrats to Republicans: that Democrat thinks too much; I’d much rather have a beer with this regular ol’ guy!”
I don’t disagree that the media often portrays it as “he thinks too much,” but think it is a bit different in reality. I don’t know a ton of folks who are upset that a candidate thinks - its more of a frustration that the candidate is claiming to be ready to lead and therefore he people think he should have things (mostly) figured out or at least have a general guiding principle on the topic. Otherwise its hard to believe s/he is actually ready for prime time. Am I making the distinction clear?
The reason why Democrat presidential candidates tend to fade during the general election is because they become “nuanced” in the fall campaign. They know their true unvarnished positions are unpopular with the vast majority of American voters, so they attempt to tack to the center on the key issues. However, if they blatantly tack to the center, they catch it from their hard-left base (labor, teachers’ unions, environmentalists, gays). So they equivocate, as Obama did. Does anyone really think Obama does not have a firm opinion about abortion rights? Obviously, he does not think an unborn baby is a human life, or he would protect it in an unqualified way. But the vast majority of Americans disagree with that view at some level, so he cannot state his true belief. On the other hand, he cannot say that a fetus is a human life or his abortion rights supporters will disown him. Quite a quandary that leads one to say silly things like “that’s above my pay grade”, which makes him just look foolish and relativistic.
The democrats are proof that it is difficult to serve so many disparate self-interested, single issue masters.
Leave a Comment