2008 September 26 | Hanlon's Razor

Debate countdown

By Hanlon, on September 26th, 2008 at 08:04 PM

I hate to repeat myself, but I’m really enjoying how poorly this all went down for McRage.

His whole “delay the debate until we get this thing solved” hit two roadblocks when his involvement screwed up the solution and then he decided to go and debate anyway.

Now I’m getting word that the VP debate prep with Palin is going so badly that halfway through a rehearsal they just quit, and the campaign’s in full-blown panic mode.

I’ve got a new prediction. He wanted to delay the debate for one reason: he knew that with the crisis, there’s no way they’d be able to eliminate economic questions in the first debate despite his fight to move that to the end (giving him valuable study time). So he wanted it moved entirely.

Palin’s losing the National Review

By Hanlon, on September 26th, 2008 at 02:59 PM

When you’re the Republican candidate, and the National Review isn’t on your side, then you’re in some SERIOUS trouble. Big quote coming.

Palin’s recent interviews with Charles Gibson, Sean Hannity, and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League.

No one hates saying that more than I do. Like so many women, I’ve been pulling for Palin, wishing her the best, hoping she will perform brilliantly. I’ve also noticed that 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.

Palin filibusters. She repeats words, filling space with deadwood. Cut the verbiage and there’s not much content there. Here’s but one example of many from her interview with Hannity: “Well, there is a danger in allowing some obsessive partisanship to get into the issue that we’re talking about today. And that’s something that John McCain, too, his track record, proving that he can work both sides of the aisle, he can surpass the partisanship that must be surpassed to deal with an issue like this.”

When Couric pointed to polls showing that the financial crisis had boosted Obama’s numbers, Palin blustered wordily: “I’m not looking at poll numbers. What I think Americans at the end of the day are going to be able to go back and look at track records and see who’s more apt to be talking about solutions and wishing for and hoping for solutions for some opportunity to change, and who’s actually done it?”

If BS were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself.

If this came from a liberal columnist it would immediately be met with massive derision from the McCain campaign, but we’re talking the NRO here.

On some level, you have to sympathize. When you break a glass ceiling, the pressure is immense. Not only are you expected to excel simply by virtue of your station, but you have to do incredibly well in order to prove that you deserve to be there, as do those who will follow behind.

A stupid white guy running for president just comes across like a dumb politician, nothing more. But when the first woman running for the VP slot in the Republican party sounds like she’s horrendously out of her league, there’s the implied message of “women finally got someone that far, and she’s the best they had?” She’s not, not by a long shot, but that’s how it can seem. Imagine if in Jackie Robinson’s first year in the MLB he had a batting average of .100 and raped a white woman.

To an extent, Palin was undoubtedly buoyed by people who supported her because she was a woman despite knowing full well she was flawed, hoping that if they stuck it out, she’d do them proud. She hasn’t, though, and is instead coming across like the worst stereotype the gender has to offer. She’s snippy, she talks with a “mother knows best” attitude, she seems to think that “because I said so” is a good enough reason, she defers to McCain in all matters (his people are even working for her in the governor’s office now), she hides behind her femininity when it suits her.

It’s times like these I think the reason the right hated Clinton was because she wasn’t a “woman” the way they expect women to be. She was truly tough, uncompromising, just as smart as the men and when she thought you were being sexist she seemed more likely to tell you off instead of crying and hiding behind her husband. The Republicans picked a beauty pageant queen.

To the women of the country, I apologize on behalf of the ignorant men who will no doubt be even less likely to support a female candidate after the disastrous run Palin has had. I won’t do so myself (I’m able to realize that Palin’s just an airhead), but I’ve a feeling it’ll happen and so I’m apologizing because I know they won’t.

Was it all an act?

By Hanlon, on September 26th, 2008 at 12:25 PM

Rumors are flying now about McCain’s actual role in the whole bailout negotiations thing. Going by an NY Times article, here’s what I’ve managed to piece together, starting from the beginning.

Last week, firms start to go ass-up. Banktruptcies are declared, talk of bailouts emerges. Paulson drafts a plan that gets published in the New York Times on Saturday, discussions over the $700bil bailout to be shouldered by the taxpayers start. Outrage from all corners either at the proposal in general, its shortcomings, or the fact that it’s come to this.

McCain, despite not having taken the time to read the three page proposal that I whacked through in 20 minutes, announces that he’s going to suspend his campaign and run to Washington, breathlessly burst through the doors of Congress and (I assume) rally the legislative branch together and Get Things Done. He went so far as to suggest the debates should be put on hold until a deal passes.

Having delayed for somewhere in the area of 22 hours, he finally headed to DC. By the time he got there, a deal was already on the verge of being made. Forcing a giant meeting of himself, party leaders, Bush, and Obama, he sat by and said nearly nothing for the duration of the meeting. At the very end, he finally piped up, seemingly just to say he didn’t like the plans and offer an incoherent pseudo-statement about his personal position. Somewhere in there he suggests an absolutely awful plan that involves less regulation and cutting corporate taxes.

Now we’re in a gridlock, the parties are at each others’ throats, Chuck Goddamn Schumer is begging Bush for help to get the GOP united, and McCain’s the X-factor.

It’s easy to just accuse McCain of political grandstanding, but it doesn’t seem that simple. That doesn’t explain McCain’s silence during the meeting, the fact that he’s effectively put a lock on negotiations on this bill. The talking heads are, either to decry or praise him, saying McCain’s purpose in this was to make a big show of putting country before politics. Uh-uh.

Somewhere in the back of his mind, McCain really did think he could save the day. Some part of him wanted not to look presidential, but to show that he’s a true leader and a man of action, not words. So he announces to the world his campaign suspension, making sure to tell as many people as possible, and then leads the charge to Washington, where he orchestrates a big meeting and sits down at the table, ready to take the bull by the horns and show American just what he can do, dammit.

Something goes wrong.

McCain remembers that economics are his weak point. If this were a terrorist attack or a catastrophe in Iraq, then he’d know what was going on. Right now they’re talking over his head on a topic he struggles with. He asked that the first debate not be on economics so he’d start off on his good foot, and here he is in a make-or-break meeting on economics.

That’s not all. Between Saturday and Tuesday, he hadn’t read Paulson’s three-page proposal. Now over a day has passed and Congress has trudged through long negotiations. They’re discussing details and logistics of plans and ideas he wasn’t there to hear about. While he was talking on TV, flying, and sleeping, they were pushing on. Not only is it a bad subject for him, but he’s out of the loop. Even the proposal he didn’t read is behind the times.

Maybe he finally read Paulson’s proposal on the flight over, and was ready to kick the door in and tell them what’s wrong with that sumbitch, only no one’s talking about that any more. They’ve moved on and McCain’s out of his league. He has nothing to contribute, they’re talking over his head and referencing things he hadn’t heard of. The end comes and all he can do now is feebly throw in the objection he was hoping to make at the beginning. Far from solving it, thanks to his big production combined with his ignorance of the subject matter he’s made the problem worse.

John McCain really did think he was going to take charge, he’s not the type to fake bravado. He practically staked his campaign on this moment, undoubtedly hoping to prove to America that he’s the true leader while Obama’s just a mouthpiece. And now it’s gone about as badly for him as you can possibly imagine.

In many ways, this is more telling than anything else. Simply soapboxing and putting on a charade (he didn’t really suspend his campaign, this whole thing was a form of campaigning) is standard fare for politicians. If he was just making a big show out of it, we’d know he was a standard politician. Maybe an especially shameless one, but a politician.

McCain wanted to show the country what he’d do as president, and now we know: he’d overreact, hold press conferences, not do his homework, and make things worse in the process.

Okay, does McCain actually want to fix this damn thing?

By Hanlon, on September 26th, 2008 at 12:41 AM

He claims he does, but now he’s really going to be confusing the hell out of people. Look one post down, and realize that Palin was desperately trying to claim that McCain is pro-regulation. Now square that with this:

BOB ORR: We’re told at the White House Senator McCain offered an alternative plan that would include fewer regulations and more corporate tax breaks for businesses, kind of a private solution. But we’re also told those ideas angered and surprised Democrats like banking chairman Chris Dodd who now says he thinks the White House summit was more of a political stunt for McCain.

If I were Sarah Palin or, well, anyone who just spent the past few days presenting John McCain as the populist who supports a government bailout (which would include McCain) I’d be pretty miffed right now. Now everyone’s going to have to put on the brakes and turn around to say that, no, actually, McCain’s brilliant plan is for LESS regulation.

That’s right. The solution to a crisis brought about by deregulation is… less regulation and more corporate tax breaks. Apparently McCain takes the “fight fire with fire” idiom to its most extreme and idiotic conclusion.

Or, alternately, McCain is just working to torpedo the whole thing so it doesn’t pass and he can still argue that the debates need to be delayed (particularly those pesky VP debates). Most importantly, he probably needs to keep things held up until the people start to see him as Mr Presidential, so he can finally stop blockading the legislation and then claim he’s the reason a consensus was found.

A pattern is emerging, I think.

By Hanlon, on September 26th, 2008 at 12:28 AM

I’m starting to notice that McCain and his guys are really, really working the “I don’t know and you can’t prove me wrong” angle.

Palin on Kissinger, after calling his belief in negotiations with Iran and Syria “naive”:

I’ve never heard Henry Kissinger say, “Yeah, I’ll meet with these leaders without preconditions being met.”

McCain, trying to jive his criticism of “golden parachutes” with the fact that staffer Carly Fiorina got a huge one:

I think she did a good job as CEO in many respects. I don’t know the details of her compensation package but she’s one of many advisers that I have.

Palin on not being able to come up with an example of McCain ever supporting regulation:

I’ll try to find you some and I’ll bring them to you.

Keep in mind that in all three instances we’re talking about times where one of them asserted something and was immediately questioned on it. They seem to have this flippant attitude toward “defending things they say”, as if having any basis for saying stuff is outdated.