Palin and the cringe reflex
Palin and the cringe reflex
Dick Polman, Inquirer National Political Columnist
Over Labor Day weekend, during the first burst of Palin-mania (remember that?), I played the contrarian and suggested in this space that her presence on the Republican ticket was actually "a cosmic joke on the electorate." Little did I know.
The latest misadventure of America's not ready for prime time player transpired at a cheesesteak store in Philadelphia the other night. As she awaited her order (with fried onions), a Temple University grad student asked her whether she thought it would be appropriate for American troops to cross the border from Afghanistan into Pakistan, in pursuit of terrorists. She quickly declared, in a response captured on video and circulated by CBS News, "If that's what we have to do to stop terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should."
Bingo. She had just endorsed Barack Obama's position - the same position that John McCain had sought to ridicule in the first presidential debate one night earlier. But this incident was hardly shocking, given her recent string of performance pratfalls - such as her inability to talk coherently about the Wall Street bailout or her alleged foreign policy credentials, or to cite a single instance when McCain ever fought hard for Wall Street oversight ("I'll try to find you some, and I'll bring them to ya").
Her Saturday night statement about invading Pakistan, an impromptu Palin doctrine, put McCain in a very awkward position. There he was on Friday night, sneeringly lecturing Obama about how naive it is to publicly discuss America's security options ("You don't say that out loud")....yet here was his running mate saying it out loud. Clearly, he had to clean up after her somehow. So when the subject came up yesterday, during an interview on ABC News, he did the usual. He blamed the media for the whole thing.
"She was in a conversation with some young man," he said. "...In all due respect, people going around and...sticking a microphone while conversations are being held, and then all of a sudden that's - that's a person's position...This is a free country, and I don't think most Americans think that that's a definitive policy statement made by Gov. Palin. And I hope you wouldn't either."
Sticking a microphone while conversations are being held...Imagine such a thing! Last I heard, Palin was running for vice president, and when a candidate for high office ventures out in public and makes remarks about national and foreign issues, those remarks do tend to get covered, 24/7. This is merely the latest iteration of the venerable American tradition of trying to hold candidates accountable. And since, in Palin's case, the McCain people barely seem to have vetted her...well, somebody's got to do it.
Given the fact that Palin reveals her ill-preparedness every time she speaks, it's understandable that McCain would seek to exempt her from the requirements of public exposure. Witness this response to Katie Couric, who had asked her to explain why Alaska's proximity to Russia qualifies her for the vice presidency: "Our next door neighbors are foreign counties. They're in the state that I am the executive of...It's very important when you consider even national-security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the airspace of the United States of America. Where—where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just - right over the border. It is from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there. They are right next to—to our state."
Less widely circulated was her response to another Couric question. Couric suggested that perhaps it would be wiser for Congress to simply give $700 billion directly to economically-struggling citizens, rather than to Wall Street. Before you read Palin's non-response (she never answered the question), please buckle your seatbelts, because this will be a bumpy ride:
"That's why I say I, like every American I'm speaking with, were ill about this position that we have been put in where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health-care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy, helping the—it's got to be all about job creation, too, shoring up our economy and putting it back on the right track. So health-care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans. And trade, we've got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive, scary thing. But one in five jobs being created in the trade sector today, we've got to look at that as more opportunity. All those things under the umbrella of job creation. This bailout is a part of that."
It's not easy to make George W. Bush sound eloquent by comparison, but Palin does the job. It's no wonder that even the conservative opiners are starting to recoil. Rich Lowry calls her performances "dreadful." Mona Charen calls them "atrocious." And Kathleen Parker, columnist and early Palin fan, grudgingly concluded the other day on the National Review website that Palin is "clearly out of her league...I watch her interviews with the held breath of an anxious parent, my finger poised over the mute button in case it gets too painful. Unfortunately, it often does. My cringe reflex is exhausted."
So the big question is, what are the McCain people going to do with her on Thursday night, when she's scheduled for 90 minutes with Joe Biden? Short of contriving a crisis in Alaska that cancels the debate and sends her home, she'll have to duel with a guy who (notwithstanding his verbal loquaciousness and propensity for talking himself into a gaffe) is already viewed by most Americans as far more qualified than she to assume the presidency in an emergency. Every poll documents this fundamental perception. He knows a lot about national and foreign policy, and he arguably talks too much; she knows virtually nothing beyond the talking points that are drilled into her head, and she delivers them in disconnected fragments.
Biden, of course, will have to sufficiently rein himself in, lest he look like an overbearing bully. Palin will have the advantage of low expectations, which means that if she can merely show up, get her nouns and verbs and predicates in order, focus heavily on extolling McCain and maligning Obama, and forge some kind of emotional connection with the audience (I'm just like you, my family has the same worries as you), then the GOP message crafters will be able to argue that she did surprisingly fine.
The problem she has right now, however, is that her lack of qualifications arguably undercut her credibility as a salesperson for McCain and critic of Obama. Her mission, these last few weeks, was to polish her own creds so that she would be viewed as credible during the veep debate. That mission has not succeeded. It raises the stakes for her on Thursday night - and, more importantly, it raises the stakes for McCain.
As conservative commentator William Kristol, a McCain booster, acknowledged in his New York Times column this morning, "If she does poorly, it will reflect on his judgment." And if McCain, who is trying to sell himself as the seasoned, experienced candidate, is ultimately faulted by the voters for his judgment, the Republican ticket is doomed. And Sarah Palin will have likely eaten her last Philadelphia cheesesteak...at least for the forseeable future.
Click here for Philly.com's politics page.
Sweetie, it was Tony Like's.— SteveMG- Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the market tanks.— Djoko Pritza
Comment removed.- Republican Joe Scarbrough says the two losers in the bailout failure are McCain and Pelosi.— Djoko Pritza
- I think McCain can be a big loser in this affair depending on what happens in the next couple of days. They are suppposedly reconsidering the bill later this week, and Republicans may try to get it tweaked to satisfy their members. Pelosi is a big loser only because she could only bring 2/3 of her caucus and, without knowing she had the votes, should never have brought the bill to the floor. Roy Blount (R- Missouri) said they believed they had 12 votes more than they got. The R's delivered 65 votes that they probably didn't get before last week....why couldn't the D's bring 11 more votes? Pelosi's comments were not a good idea. What was she trying to prove?— tom - wilmington, de
- I honestly feel bad for the woman. She's clearly very confident in herself but doesn't have the kind of support she needs to make this work. GWB, for all his faults, surrounded himself with talent and had a strict message. McCain doesn't have that kind of rigidity nor has he surrounded himself with the talent he needs, and Palin has been left in a lurch. That being said, I think Biden is going to flub this debate badly by making Palin look like a sympathetic character. She's kept a brave face throughout the constant media blitz (CNN has been outright laughing at her since the latest Tina Fey sketch), and if she does that here it won't matter what Obama/Biden do here on out.— psv
- I love the media. David Shuster is spinning like a top in a tornado. First, McCain was AWOL on Saturday night....after Democrats asked for him to leave since he was impeding the process. Then, since it failed, he did not deliver the votes. He got many in the House to go against their principles today, but not enough. So let me see....while he was there, he was impeding the process and Dems wanted him to get no credit. When he wasn't there, he was showing a lack of leadership. But Obama not being there was multitasking. I love the media.— tom - wilmington, de
- Comment removed.
- Wasn't Obama's "clinging to guns and religion" statement made out of bounds of an official interview? When you're running for the highest offices of the land, you are always on the record. Obama should never have said that and he has and continues to pay royally for it. McCain ought to be ashamed of himself for thinking the media should treat his running mate under a double standard -- especially since her public appearances are so few and far between.— mskelly
- psv, when you start feeling sorry for the candidate a step from the presidency, that ain't a good sign. and as to surrounding her, she's surrounded by all bush people that mccain brought in. you seem not to know of what you speak. poor sarah.— Djoko Pritza
- Tom who's spinning more, Shuster or McCain?— Djoko Pritza
- I for one applaud the Representatives who voted this bail-out bill down. Special kudos to Representative Gerlach..you sealed my vote. Luckily for him, the FISA bill was smaller potatoes.— JeffA
- As for Palin - if she has a shred of decency and self-image, she'll step down like Harrier Miers did. I actually respect her for taking on the corrupt Republican machine in Alaska. But as a single issue (Reform) winner, her river of experience runs too shallow for the national stage. The best and the brightest don't start their careers going to 5 different colleges and working as a tv journalist.— JeffA
- Regardles what happens here there are going to be people who are unhappy. I don'tr know the answers, not sure anyone has a sure bet fix for thias problem. What I know, is that I realized why they call McCain a Maverick, it's because of his unpredictability. But the problem is thaty is not necesarily a good thing. I'm not sure he hasn't gotten too caught up in this maverick image and has begun making decisions for the sole purpose of being unpredictable. His speech in Ohio today is another in a string of broderline irrational decisions and was embarrassing. Trying to be the first to take credit for the bailout only to see it fail. And his news conference tonight was downright sad. He is a gmabler and he has been on a losing streak for a few weeks. Not good for America.— gee1971
- McCain continues to show he lacks the mental agility to lead. He said today, "Obama and his allies in Congress injected partisanship into this process!" The VERY NEXT sentence: "Now is not the time to place blame." Does he even know what he's saying?— Djoko Pritza
Cited by the Columbia Journalism Review as one of the nation's top political reporters, and lauded by the ABC News political website as "one of the finest political journalists of his generation," Dick Polman is a national political columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer. He is on the full-time faculty at the University of Pennsylvania, as "writer in residence." Dick has been a frequent guest on C-Span, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and the BBC. He covered the 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004 presidential campaigns.
ARCHIVES
All commentaries posted before April 18, 2008, can be accessed at www.dickpolman.blogspot.com.
- American Spectator
- David Limbaugh
- Free Republic
- Glenn Reynolds
- Hugh Hewitt
- Human Events
- John Hawkins
- Matt Lewis
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Opinion Journal
- Power Line
- Red State
- The Brody File
- The Daily Caller
- Town Hall
- Weekly Standard
- Center for American Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- Daily Kos
- David Corn
- Huffington Post
- Media Matters
- Mojoblog (Mother Jones)
- Open Left
- Political Animal
- Salon's War Room
- Talking Points Memo
- Tapped
- The Democratic Strategist
- The Grey Matter
- Unclaimed Territory
- Andrew Sullivan
- Attytood
- Chi Tribune's The Swamp
- CJR's Campaign Desk
- CNN's Political Ticker
- CQ Politics
- FactCheck.org
- Gail Collins
- Howard Kurtz
- Mickey Kaus
- NBC's First Read
- Obit
- Political Wire
- Politico
- Politics Daily
- Pollster.com
- Real Clear Politics
- The Atlantic Wire
- The Fix
- The Moderate Voice
- The Plank
- USA Today On Politics
- Wonkette
