suspension without suspense
by Mark Hunter Mulvey
Published: September 28, 2008
“History is past politics, and politics present history.” - John Robert Seeley, The Growth of British Policy
“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it, misdiagnosing it, and then misapplying the wrong remedies.” - Groucho Marx (1890-1977)
So reads the CNN.com headline announcing John McCain’s decision to put his presidential run on hiatus in an effort to unselfishly and heroically partake in what he considers to be a historical moment. The financial collapse in America seems to have offered John McCain an opportunity to shock and awe all but the most solvent citizens, and seemingly sacrifice his personal goals for the sake of the country.
The gasp of incredulity you hear isn’t the public’s reaction to this news, but rather the idea that McCain thought the world would see this gambit as anything other than a calculated, selfish, politically-motivated move designed to win simple-minded voters.
I’m throwing a check in Obama’s corner, who stated, “It’s my belief that this is exactly the time when the American people need to hear from the person who will be the next president… It is going to be part of the president’s job to deal with more than one thing at once.”
The whole notion of postponing the first debate of the 2008 presidential election in order to unspecifically “convene” with the current president to discuss the financial situation of American banks is patently ludicrous. It is a self-indulgent move by a candidate desperate to artificially stimulate a campaign whose most stirring move to date has been the introduction of a feisty Alaskan “hockey mom” as his running mate.
What McCain hopes to actually do has yet to be stated, described or even intimated. Senator Chuck Schumer, chairmain of the Senate Banking Committee, correctly stated, “We haven’t heard hide nor hair of Sen. McCain in these negotiations. He has not been involved except for an occasional, unhelpful statement, sort of thrown from far away, and the last thing we need in these delicate negotiations is an injection of presidential politics.”
The most troubling argument I have against McCain’s flashy attempt to “save” America from its inability to properly manage its own money is his declaration to jump into the fray because of its historic importance. He clearly states that somehow his presence is needed, though no one seems to be asking for it. I smell a desperate candidate willing to do whatever is necessary to take part in history, while less-historical events get relegated to the bottom of his to-do list. 75 percent of the homes in Galveston, Texas are unihabitable, but McCain has chosen to invite himself to the white collar bailout planning committee instead, pleading for brownie points in the thick of a presidential race like a pleasure-happy hamster tapping for food pellets of approval.
It’s simply dramatic posturing and a parlor trick of an announcement. Bush league. McCain’s attempt at misdirection is only delaying the day when he has to speak for himself without a committee of advisors plotting his next political publicity strike.
The skies over November are dimming. As scheduled, another presidential race has been reduced to a gritty game of partisan dramatics and political hegemony.
—
(email this article or post to social network)
—
September 29th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Unfortunately it’s hard to avoid partisanship when judging a politician’s motives. I think the judgment on McCain has been too harsh and patently unfair, and quite frankly, the only basis anyone has for their judgment of his motives is whether or not they believe that he sincerely cares about this crisis. Ultimately that probably has more to do with our own biases and perceptions than reality.
Given our political history a measure of cynicism is perhaps warranted, but I think it should be applied equally to both parties. Unfortunately politicians seem to often exist in a world where their “position” is simply the opposite of what “the other guy” did. That’s how Obama’s “more than one thing at once” line strikes me. If McCain had stayed on the campaign trail we probably would have heard something from the Dems about “playing presidential politics while the economy is in dire need.” Instead we heard from them about “injecting presidential politics into a delicate debate.” And you can bet that if Obama had been the one with the idea about going to Washington and suspending his campaign you would have heard the GOP say that McCain’s “vast experience has prepared him to handle both the campaign and the economic crisis.”
Strip away the politics and posturing and the fact is that no politician - least of all the presidential candidates who have so much to lose - want a piece of this bill, which everyone seems to think is necessary but, as we saw today, no one is willing to vote for. My impression has been that Obama has been just as guilty as McCain for “testing the wind” instead of taking the lead.
September 29th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
And just as an aside, from a Houston resident, I’m not sure what McCain could have accomplished in Galveston anyway unless he was willing to suspend his campaign and start carting off debris.
September 29th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Dave: Your point is duly noted, but let’s remember that Obama is simply following due campaign process and preparing for an already scheduled, and pivotal, presidential debate. If McCain did the same, there would be no grounding for partisan differences–each candidate would simply be seen as gearing up for their verbal sparring. Nothing to mention, really.
But McCain’s move strikes me as being unorthodox for the sake of continuing the present trend of blatantly defiant, rebellious politics that has served George W. Bush so well. It was a calculated move–more artifically jarring than it is genuine. Just like giving Sarah Palin’s the nod for VP.
Obama is a successful orator and McCain simply is not. This move came off as a distraction effort, nothing more.
As for your aside: agreed. But I argue that carting off debris and handing out bottled water would have been a more justified (if still uncalled for) reason for a campaign suspension than roundtable debates about bankers. My preference, or course, would be for neither candidate to suspend their campaign efforts just to voluntarily place themselves in the midst of a current event.