McCain's America
Commentators are still picking over the bones of John McCain's acceptance speech last night. Watch it again . There were a number of interruptions from protestors in the hall, carrying banners challenging Senator McCain's support for President Bush's foreign policies, some of whom were escorted from the building. Supporters repeatedly shouted "U-S-A" to drown out the protestors. Even setting aside the resulting 'ground noise and static' (as Senator McCain put it), many commentators were less than impressed with . John McCain is not one of America's great orators, and this speech was in keeping with that reputation. Logically, there was a curious tension throughout: praising the Bush White House while promising to bring change to Washington. The president he has just praised has been in power in Washington for eight years.
He did have a few good sound bites, which rallied the convention ("I'd rather lose an election than see my country lose the war."), though the television audience outside the convention hall may be troubled by all the fighting-talk. God was name-checked a few times -- never substantially, but it was a necessary inclusion in a speech of this kind. McCain's domestic vision is of American hard workers fighting to keep the fruits of their labour; beyond that, he sees American soldiers fighting for freedom overseas. God-given freedoms, commitment to family, service to country, giving parents greater choice in education ('the civil rights issue of this century'), a culture of life (meaning a post-Roe v Wade America), lower taxes and drilling for more oil.
It was a confident -- if, at times, awkward -- sales pitch. About 29 minutes into of the speech, a convention delegate yawns widely. It was not great theatre -- John McCain is not likely to be seen in front of faux Grecian columns anytime soon. That modesty may still work to his advantage with the electorate. In American politics, what often seems like a weakness in a candidate to those outside America can seem like a virtue in the eyes of voting Americans. McCain is folksy and solid; his life-story is a character study in personal heroism; and he speaks, sometimes whispers, with a kind of quiet authority: "My fellow Americans, I have that record, and the scars to prove it. Senator Obama does not."
In the final section of the speech, Senator McCain tells the story of those scars. His service in Vietnam, being captured and imprisoned and tortured. He describes how his strutting hyper-independence was challenged when his life was saved by the two American soldiers with whom he shared a prison cell in Hanoi. He talks about discovering America in those moments, being saved by America; how his selfishness gave way to a new idea -- America. And how he surrendered his life and his ambitions from that day forward to this new cause -- America. It is a conversion story. I knew there would be some theology in here somewhere. McCain's motto in this campaign is 'Country First'. Not 'For God and Country'; just 'Country First'. Some evangelicals were nervous about a McCain presidency (hence the selection of Sarah Palin), and many have wondered what kind of religious faith John McCain actually has. Does this last section of the speech give us some clues?
Comment number 1.
At 5th Sep 2008, BillKeller wrote:There is a curious silence within the McCain campaign about Palin's disclosure of troop movements (her son's BCT date and type) and his personal picture on television worldwide. Irresponsible? Look how the UK handled Harry's disclosure and recognized the potential hazard that his presence added to the safety of his companions. Surprisingly no one has asked if political influence was not applied to the Army over the timing of his deployment. Wonder if Palin did not direct her son to 'come home with your shield on on it!'.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 5th Sep 2008, John Wright wrote:See, this is what makes me nervous about McCain. He's definitely not as good an orator as his VP, but a good speech does not a good president make. I don't think Republicans are too excited about McCain, which is why Palin is of particularly extra importance to his ticket.
Will mentions that "In American politics, what often seems like a weakness in a candidate to those outside America can seem like a virtue in the eyes of voting Americans." I've noticed that too. And I think I now understand it. It's derived from the sense of unpretentiousness that Americans appreciate - any hint of elitism goes down badly - McCain gains points in the way Bush did in this regard, though nobody's interested in another Bush. You'll notice, however, that Palin has even more of a claim to being part of 'normal everyday' America than McCain: she's a hockey mom, a PTA member, she has a natural style and doesn't want the trappings of office, not a part of the "permanent political" machine in Washington. After this speech, she just became more important than McCain himself to his candidacy.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 7th Sep 2008, MarcusAureliusII wrote:When the time comes to pull the lever, will all those disaffected Democrats who supported Hillary Clinton and felt she got a bad deal because she is a woman say screw the Democrats, this woman could become President? That seems to be what McCain is counting on. BTW, you cannot vote for one party for president and another for vice-President which I think was once the case. If Obama loses, will the Democrats rethink their infatuation with what by American standards is the far left wing of their party? Will they learn their lesson and move back to the center? But if they win and control both houses of Congress, how long will they be able to blame "the party opposite" for the nation's problems they say they are going to fix? Tony Blair sang that song for all ten years he was Prime Minister. It wears thin pretty quickly, I don't think it will stay at the top of the charts in America for very long.
Given the attack on America on 9-11-01 which I blame on President Clinton and the Republican Congress which was more interested in impeaching him than in doing its job protecting the nation, I'm relatively pleased with the last 8 years. America's current economic problems are only in part to to government fiscal mismanagement, it is largely due to the sub prime mortgage fisasco which had nothing to do with politics. That will be resolved probably by a big round of inflation no matter who wins. I could live with 4 more years of McBush. America's problem is that because there wasn't another attack, it went back to business as usual. Much of it has forgotten it's still in a war for its survival. Either candidate winning, it may be in for another lesson. Al Qaeda is not beaten by a long shot.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 8th Sep 2008, Orville Eastland wrote:I was unimpressed with McCain's speech, like Obama's, but, then again, I didn't watch either of them.
I am mostly unsurprised by the biggest lie of the speech- that Russia started the crisis in the Caucasus by invading Georgia. However, given that Georgia has the support of the US media, the Bush administration and Joe Biden, it's likely that this lie is considered true by all but those who remember the Georgian invasion.
MarcusAureliusII:
You're incorrect about voting for separate VP's, but until 1804, the losing presidential candidate got the VP spot.
I differ with you on Obama being the candidate of the "far left". Given his recent support of the "surge"*, and his selection of Joe Biden, who supported attacking Iraq in 1998 and 2002, despite all evidence to the contrary (and now opposes the current Iraq situation due to "mismanagement"), I'd say Obama has moved away from the "far left", in regards to Iraq.
I also differ with you on the subprime situation, though I would blame that on the aforementioned Clinton Administration and the Republican Congress, for deregulating the banking industry.
* I put the term in quotes because the amount of US troops in Iraq is STILL higher than pre-"surge" levels, and there are no plans to reduce the number of troops to the aforementioned levels, even after Bush leaves office.
As for its "success" I attribute the drop in violence to:
1. The Secular Sunnis, Secular Shi'ites, and Religious Shi'ites turning against Al-Quaeda. (Hey, Al-Quaeda hated all three of them, so why would they want to work with them?)
2. Muqtada Al-Sadr deciding to cooperate with the government rather than fight it. (It helps that, given his wide support and political connections, he could topple the government with a few well-chosen words...)
3. The US deciding to work with the Sunnis and ex-Ba'athists instead of fighting them.
4. Chance, Fortune or Divine Intervention. (Take your pick of the terms.)
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)