Remember the story I told you about British Prime Minister Harold Mcmillan? He said politics was less a chess game than a series of “events, my dear boy, events.” Well, the last two weeks where I have been absent from The Wanderer, have been filled with highly determinative events to produce what will surely be regarded as one of the century’s most exciting contests in presidential history.
Two weeks ago to his dismay, David Axelrod of Chicago, Barack Obama’s top strategist and a man whom I have known for 30 years, discovered that while his client’s Iraq trip was a roaring success, his European speech was a failure-so much so that it was ridiculed as being eloquent but shallow despite all the media pazzaz. Why? Because his client seemed too simplistic, too innocent, too guileless, too idealistic. As one habitué of Manny’s Jewish deli here told Axelrod, “I get the idea that Putin would pat him on the head and say `there-there young man; go play with your ideals while we adults play politics the old fashioned way.”
Then came the first event which convinced Axelrod that his client needed a grown-up realist on the ticket with him-not first term Virginia Governor Tim Kaine or the youthful Indiana senator Evan Bayh, two nice young boys with no wrinkles in their cheeks so indecisive that between them they would have difficulty deciding where to have lunch. The event:
1. The Saddleback Back-to-Back TV Interview on Moral Issues. Axelrod’s client drew the first appearance before an evangelical audience with Rev. Rick Warren. The subjects included social issues and world problems cast in moral perspectives. Axelrod, a pro-abort, was appalled (a close associate told me) at how badly his client did on one central question: when does life begin? That was a question everyone could assume would be asked of a presidential candidate but Obama looked like a deer caught in the headlights. The answer Axelrod had given him was standard operating procedure for a pro-abort: viz through the centuries philosophers, even Augustine, disagreed, Augustine believing it came at “quickening” i.e. when the unborn child stirs in the womb. Augustine was hobbled by ancient biology but Axelrod had trained his pro-abort candidates to start with this absurd antiquity and move quickly to weave an aura of doubt to be resolved by support for greater federal expenditures in pre-natal and post natal care winding up with universal health care, a smooth formulation.
Instead, Axelrod was jarred out of his wits to see his client stumble around on the question as if he and Warren were engaged in casual Harvard faculty lounge banter and wind up by confessing that the solution as to when life begins “is beyond my pay grade.” Axelrod slammed his hand down on the TV table when he saw his client fumble it and decided that Obama needed someone by his side to give some old-fashioned moxie to issues like this. For example, someone who has been around the track a long time. Delaware’s Joe Biden, a pro-abort Catholic, had learned to finesse a question like this. And certainly on foreign policy and defense issues Biden could rattle off the lexicon with the best of the Republicans. At that point Axelrod made a phone call and immediately Joe Biden was sent overseas to Georgia to get a first-hand feel of the dispute between it and Russia. This led to
Event No.2, the picking of Joe Biden for vice president. The liberal media love the 65-year-old Delaware senator and has long forgiven him his almost terminal faults. Raconteur, first-rate wit and nice guy who has invested much in appearance improvement (heavy duty teeth whitening so when he flashes a smile it looks incandescent and painful hair plugs to take a nearly bald pate and make it cluster with grey locks), Biden has lived and laughed down his past but he is nevertheless a walking time-bomb of political gaffes and judgment blunders. It started when he copied someone else’s final paper in law school at the University of Delaware, put his own name on it and was discovered as a plagiarist. He was given an “F” in the course but was allowed to take it over the next year after he begged. Even then he passed with a gentlemanly “C”-graduating 76th out of 85.
Dogged with the idea that for all his charm he is dumb, Biden began a campaign of bragging about his intellect. It has continued throughout his career even after being found-out. He began telling audiences in Delaware and elsewhere that he graduated high in his law class. Then when discovered, he would say he graduated “in the top half.” Not so. He was regularly embarrassed through the years when the facts came out. Interrogating Robert Bork before Senate Judiciary, he tried to challenge the jurist on an item of natural law, a study Bork has made part of his life’s special work…but it was Biden who was humiliated. But his attempts to make himself an intellectual have never stopped. The fudging over his resume came to a dismal end one day in 1988 when Joe Biden was running for the presidency in the Iowa caucuses. He set himself up as a blue-collar working man who zoomed into the intellectual class. He began quoting Neil Kinnock who overcoming poverty became a brilliant expositor of the British Labour party. Kinnock rose from grinding poverty in Tredegar, Wales. His father was a miner who lost his job because of black lung and had to settle for common laborer. Kinnock was running against an ultra-leftist who insulted Kinnock’s working class accent. This spurred Kinnock to deliver a brilliant oration that won for him the election and which helped him become prime minister of England.
The speech Kinnock delivered to justify his lowly origins went like this-and it was video-taped: “Why is it that Neil Kinnock is the first in his family ever to go to a university? Why is it that my wife is the first in her family ever to go to college? Is it because our fathers and mothers were not bright? Is it because they didn’t work hard? My ancestors, who worked in the coal mines of Wales and would come home after 12 hours to play football for four hours?” For a few times, Biden used that speech with attribution but in one grand climatic speech he did not and appropriated Kinnock’s speech to himself. He even changed the locale. Where Kinnock referred to his ancestors who worked in the coal mines of Wales, Biden said “my ancestors who worked in the coal mines of northern Pennsylvania.”
Unlike Kinnock’s ancestors, Biden’s were well-to-do. His father was a polo playing dilettante and his parents went to comfortable colleges (his father squandered his money and turned to selling used cars for a time but that had no resemblance to Kinnock’s grinding poverty). Biden’s spectacular dishonesty came when he was in midlife. Still the almost psychological references to his attainments have continued. Early this year in the primaries, he was confronted by a man in an audience who questioned his facts. Biden wheeled about, cited his own intelligence and raged that his IQ was bound to be higher than his questioner’s. The crowd fell silent, embarrassed for Biden.
Yet on the stump Biden is both impressive and a superb attack dog. Axelrod has decided to take a chance that Biden’s old weaknesses will not surface. Also to take the chance to mar his client’s claim that his administration will be free of the old barnacles of party hackdom. Biden said (in this Spring’s primaries) that Obama is not ready for the presidency, that he-Biden-would be pleased to run with John McCain. Notwithstanding, Axelrod (in football terms) hurled a pass on spec a long way down the field. Whether it will pay off is unknown-but my feeling is Biden was a bad choice. The logical way to bind up the Democrats’ wounds would be to hold one’s nose and nominate Hillary Clinton. For two reasons: (1) The Clintons would thus be invested in seeing the Obama-Clinton ticket win and (2) to clean up an LBJ analogy, it is far better having a rival inside the tent spitting out than outside the tent spitting in. But Axelrod has been ill-treated by the Clintons and he could not abide another Democratic administration where he would be treated as an outsider.
Now however the Clintons are free to roam like two cancer cells in the Democratic body politick to subtly encourage the defeat of Barack Obama so that in four years Hillary can run unchallenged for the presidency at age 64. So I see the choice of Joe Biden as a grave error.
Event No. 3: the pick of Sarah Palin. All the while, John McCain who unlike Obama does his strategizing himself, was cognizant of his own weaknesses. The normal thing to do for one who is remarkably close in polling to a projected victor…when one’s party’s president is heavily unpopular and when one himself is 72 years old…is to play it exceedingly cautious: pick a running-mate who embodies what you don’t have (in McCain’s case a thorough knowledge of economics) and who stands to carry some battleground states. That would normally warrant Mitt Romney who is himself a wunderkind on the economy and who could easily help the ticket carry Michigan where his late father George is still revered. But McCain wasn’t buying.
He noticed the coolness of the Republican right to him. He decided the election would be lost by caution…so he chose-as we all know by now-an unknown governor, but a woman governor of 44, mother of five who is an indissoluble pro-lifer and social conservative, who not only talks the talk on abortion but when informed her unborn was a Down syndrome child, had the baby and welcomed him with great joy. Evangelical Sarah Palin is a perfect 10 where social conservatives are concerned…on all the grassroots movement issues, gun ownership, drilling in ANWR. But she still was unknown. But the Democrats helped McCain to get her known. They attacked her while Axelrod winced-attacked her implying she is a hypocrite because she promotes abstinence programs in the Alaska schools while her unmarried 17-year-old daughter was made pregnant by her boyfriend (whom she will marry and with whom she will have her baby).
The spectacle of Democrats attacking a young pro-life mother-governor and abstinence supporter whose daughter fell into sin is, without cynicism, the best thing that could happen to a Republican ticket that until recently was regarded as ho-hum. The spectacle of Democrats doubting that a woman governor has the ability of succeeding to the presidency when they themselves have ditched a veteran woman senator to nominate a man not yet through his first Senate term is rich irony. I see the nomination of Sarah Palin as brilliant, although with a very young candidate open to a vast liberal media assault there are very real dangers.
Event No.4, Hurricane Gustav. Michael Moore, the left-wing Catholic who made millions as a film documentarian, cheered with all his 320 lbs. quivering with happiness when weather forecasters announced that a massive hurricane was racing to decimate New Orleans at exactly the hour the Republican convention would open in St. Paul. I could see what Moore meant. It would (a) spotlight the alleged ineptitude of the Bush administration vis-à-vis Hurricane Katrina; it would (b) take the media focus off the Republicans and substitute human interest agonies instead of political speakers and© it would be a great device for the Democrats to criticize anything short of perfection in rescue operations.
Instead, Gustav was a decided plus because (a) it provided an excellent reason for the party to eschew its highly unpopular president and vice president (Bush and Cheney are popular with the GOP rank and file but their being on view in St. Paul would trump McCain and Palen); (b) it provided a showcase for five Republican governors to work smoothly with the Republican national administration, a difference from 2005; and© gave a decided thrust to the career of Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, 36, brightest of all the new governors to work his weal in behalf of his state.
What Can Go Wrong?
Lots. The mainstream media have redoubled their energies to elect Obama. Example: Andrea Mitchell, NBC-TV political correspondent, an agnostic as is her foxy husband Alan Greenspan but far-far more liberal and a Democrat-rooter, gasped when she saw Obama’s 6-minute-long rambling answers in contrast to McCain’s staccato ones on Rick Warren’s Saddleback program and immediately used a baseless filmy rumor to charge that somehow McCain had advance knowledge of the questions…as if “when do you believe life begins” was not to be deduced for a program for evangelicals. First, the media will zero in on Palin and try to transform her into a Dan Quayle, especially in the Oct. 1 debate with Joe Biden. Mitchell will be enlisted in that effort.
Second the media will reemphasize its campaign that at 72 McCain is a doddering old man who will turn the country over, either by death or senility, to a brash young woman who is likely to be intemperate and plunge us into war. Third will emphasize that neither McCain or Palin have a clue on how to resurrect the economy, having succeeded in driving Phil Gramm out of McCain’s camp by insisting Gramm’s statement that we have become a nation of economic whiners….correct in my view…was hideously insensitive.
Fourth, the hope that Palin’s nomination would automatically draw Hillary Clinton Democrats to the GOP is far less likely than McCain initially surmised. Hillary Clinton women…and there are a great many of them in my suburb where she was a neighbor a few blocks away…are definitely pro-abort…not gun rights enthusiasts or share any of the values of Sarah Palin. Morever these women sorely want the presidency to be Hillary’s, not anyone else’s and may feel the election of the first woman vice president being a Republican as a no-no. Yet Palin might just bring home one trophy. Geraldine Ferraro has said she has not yet decided whom she will vote for and cited McCain’s pick of Palin as one good reason.
Finally, the sleepy eye of the electorate has remained open longer than anyone expected…noticing favorably Obama’s acceptance speech before a pillared set that on close examination was designed to resemble the Lincoln Memorial before which Martin Luther King gave his smashing speech-an example of Axelrod’s subliminal genius at its best. It blinked in disbelief when Obama punted in inept cowardice on the issue of when life begins and contrasted this with McCain’s punchy responses. It initially liked the selection of Biden and can see him in the presidency which it still has difficulty with Obama. It doesn’t know what to make of Palin as yet…cannot visualize her as president (no matter how enthused the GOP base is about her) and can easily be convinced by the duplicitous media that she should be home with her kids and her daughter who will make her a young grandmother.
The answers to all these and issues I have not foreseen will come soon.
Mike says:
Great column... In retrospect, it's getting really hard to understand why a savvy guy like Axelrod would want Biden over Clinton.
Darth Marley says:
Default
I am not so much "pro-Republican" as I am convinced that the Dems should not ever be in power.
One thing that struck me about Obama's Iowa speech yesterday is there doesn't seem to be a damn thing he can say
he agrees with Republicans about.
With Hillary at least, she sees some common ground on foreign policy issues.
How is the "politics of change" defined? Rigid partisanism against the party of the sitting executive?
It strikes me as an amusing trend, that so many "liberals" will march lock-step against any policy favored by more
conservative minds.
Are the conservatives really wrong about everything?
And if not, is it wise to give power to Obama who speaks as if they are?
Is it wise to let the soulless minions of liberal orthodoxy be swept into power?
Jeff says:
Wrong. Sure it may have been a little easier to campaign against Palin, but if he had selected Hillary then McCain wouldn't have selected Palin in the first place. Secondly, campaign aside, have Bill and Hillary back in the White House as co-VPs would have been a disaster.
Walls says:
Neil Kinnock was never made Prime Minister of the UK though he did lead the Oppostion Labour for some time.
Mary says:
I am a Clinton democrat who will be voting McCain/Palin.I had decided long before McCain pandered to female Hillary voters,but I welcome his pandering all the same.You see,my party forgot about us,told us to stay home or vote for McCain.Now I generally do not do as I am told but this time,I am listening.The Democrat Party is now about as corrupt as you can get from the top down.I fear it can not be repaired anytime soon.The first step would be the ousting of Howard Dean,followed by Nancy Pelosi,Harry Reid and last but not least,Donna Brazile.The woman who said 3 years ago that if she had to tear the party apart to rebuild it she would.And also the smart woman who told Hillary Clintons voters to stay home.Thanks,Donna.I am taking your advice and voting McCain.Yep,it was good old Donna that made that brilliant remark.And please, do not kid yourself into thinking that it is myself and maybe 12 other Clinton voters that feel this way.There are many more than you can even imagine.Susan Estrich estimates that %35 of Clinton voters will cross party lines and vote Republican.I will tell you this...that estimate is very low.There are far more than that and we will not change our minds.Obama is the most corrupt politician to hit the streets of D.C. ever.He is steeped in classic Chicago style politics and has no regard for anyone but himself.He is a classic case of narcissism.God help us if he manages to cheat his way into this as he did in the primaries.
Ev says:
I believe Obama has been outmanuvered by McCain. I do not believe he picked Palen because of women but to bring in the evangelicals and the right wing of the party.
A brilliant move, though. I planned on leaving the corrupt DNC for the reasons Mary cited even before the VP selection, so that is a mute point.
The democrats have shot themselves in the foot, and no we did not want Hillary to be VP. That would not have gotten our vote. There are MANY of us, I believe who will be voting Republican for the first time this year.
Ryan says:
I, too, am a Clinton democrat who will be happily voting McCain/Palin. There are many more of us out there!
Jill says:
Excellent column. I thought McCain's VP pick absolutely brilliant. Sure, many things could go awry what with the media's zealous efforts to coronate Obama and defame any possible "pretenders" to the throne. Nonetheless, it will be an interesting election. As a former Clinton supporter, I will also be casting my vote for McCain/Palin. In fact, I will be voting a straight republican ticket thanks to the machinations of the likes of the afore mentioned Nancy Pelosi, Howard Dean and Donna Brazile.
Nzone71 says:
Obama didn't want to pick Hillary because he was afraid that he will forever stand in her shadow. He didn't want to share the limelight with Hillary.
It was a mistake that the DNC didn't back their strongest candidate that can lead them to win the election. Clinton/Obama will be the strongest ticket.
Obama can't stand Obama/Clinton ticket because it will remind him everyday that he doesn't deserve to win the nomination. So he picked someone that won't hurt his ego: the uninspiring Joe Biden.
Obama campaign and the DNC official like Donna Brazile have been saying that they don't need the old base to win the election. So go ahead, try to win without us. We already left the party.
PUMA for Hillary!
Allen Hoban says:
"But Axelrod has been ill-treated by the Clintons and he could not abide another Democratic administration where he would be treated as an outsider."
I believe the shoe is on the other foot!
See the last pages here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/mag...
"She couldn't stop talking about what she had seen," Susan Axelrod recalled. Later, at Hillary Clinton's behest, the National
Institutes of Health convened a conference on finding a cure for
epilepsy.
Susan Axelrod told me it was "one of the most important things anyone
has done for epilepsy." And this is how politics works: David Axelrod is now dedicated to derailing this woman's career."
"The spectacle of Democrats doubting that a woman governor has the ability of succeeding to the presidency when they themselves have ditched a veteran woman senator to nominate a man not yet through his first Senate term is rich irony."
Axelrod chose his client unwisely: an man of few real accomplishments, given to self-aggrandizement, who is believing the fiction that Axelrod has spun.
Obama and Axelrod deserve each other.
MShrub says:
Picking a VP was Obama's first big test-and he failed miserably. For all his talk of unity in America-he couldn't even work with the only branch of the Dems that has actually WON an election. Obama is just a proxy for the wealthy ultra-liberal branch of the Dems who view politics as intellectual sport and whose lives will remain unchanged no matter who is in office because of all their wealth-the same applies to Republicans. Give the peasants bread, sport (otherwise known as cultural wars and demographic divisions, as in AA vs female Dems) and religion and they will be happy.
Alyssa says:
A very interesting article, and amazingly, not laden with bias. I have bookmarked you.
To those of you "Hillary Democrats" who are voting for McCain, I want you to know that the next time Hillary runs for President against a man - any man - I'm crossing party lines to vote for her. The scales have fallen from my eyes, women are not in any remote way "equal."
Yet.
Robert says:
Mr Roeser clearly has not done his homework. The University of Delaware does not have a law school and at least while Biden has been alive never did. So the so-called plagiarized paper was not submitted during law school at the University of Delaware. So the author is guilty of not checking his facts. Makes you wonder what other facts have been botched!
bmc says:
I'm a Hillary Democrat, a woman and a military veteran who has decided to vote for McCain/Palin. Of course, it's purely an emotional decision. Of course, part of it is "identity" politics. But a huge part of my decision is character. John McCain has it in spades; so does Sarah Palin. I may not agree with either of them on issues all of the time, though I do agree with them some of the time. John McCain's speech last night reminded me of how much I do love my country; my military family background instilled a great pride in military service in me all of my life. My father was buried with full military honors at Arlinton. I have family friends on the Vietnam Wall. My husband served for 26 years as a fighter pilot. I was always the sort of patriotic american who cried when the national anthem was played. I felt like finally, I was ready to hang my American flag again. I love John McCain for that reminder, because I have loathed G.W.Bush so much I have refused to fly an American flag outside my home for the past 7 years. I love Sarah Palin for having the character and the courage to stand up for what she thinks is right, whether or not I agree with her on all issues. I think together, McCain/Palin would make a great American leadership team. I would never vote for Barack Obama. He's corrupt, a liar, a shallow narcissist, and a dilettante.
Brian says:
Wow Biden is a real Dirtbag.Who would want a cheat on the ticket? Right another Cheat Obama
Dan Kelley says:
Robert:
I hate to rain on your parade, but Joe Biden did attend Delaware as an undergraduate. While you are correct in stating he did not attend law school at Delaware, Biden did fail a law school class on account of plagiarism at the Syracuse University Law School.
So there is a typographical error in the article, but this does not change the fact that Biden is a serial plagiarist.
LS says:
People keep referring to the liberal wing of the Democratic Party, saying that they would not support McCain, and somehow assume that all of Hillary's supporters fit in that branch of the party. I consider myself a centrist, like many Clinton Democrats. Centrist Democrats will not have as much of a problem supporting John McCain and Governor Palin. I can envision the Republicans doing well in Clinton country this year. Governor Palin is a natural to attract our vote. Obama made a huge mistake by not putting Hillary on his ticket.
Mr. Unite Us says:
Republicans were already geared up for a Hillary Clinton choice.
Regarding when do human rights begin.
According to the Jewish religion 30 days after childbirth.
Mr. Unite Us says:
When does life begin?
It vary's average but on average,
I'd say about 1 hour into the 5th date.
kmb08 says:
One point is being missed. If BO had had the guts to pick Hillary, almost assuring him of the win in Nov., Palin would never have been placed on McCain's ticket to begin with, so we would be having a totally different analysis at work. Palin has her VP spot because of the path Hillary forged. BO was so arrogant, he didn't think he needed Hillary, nor Bill. For those of us who've followed Presidential elections for a long time, we knew he needed both of them to beat the Republicans in Nov. The Dems never fail to amaze me at their ability to realize defeat in a year made for a landslide victory.
Feae says:
Shame on all you Clinton’s supporters that will vote for McCain. That’s just shows that you guys were all in for everything else but substance. Didn’t BO and HC have almost the same agenda? If that’s the case, everyone who supported HC should do the same for BO. I thought this country had real issues that people should be focusing about not whether BO should have picked HC over Biden. You guys are talking of the DNC being corrupt as if the Republicans are not. At least the Dems do try to make the life of the average citizen better.
Enough with Palin; she just made a good rehearsed speech and people are talking about it as if 50millions other women couldn’t have given that speech. Shoot, my 5 yr old could have given that speech.
Talking about the bridge to nowhere; wasn’t she not 1st for that bridge and then when it became unpopular stood against it?
I guess she will also sell air force one to reduce spending.
Please, let’s be objective and follow the campaigns, watch the debates and use facts and reason to decide who to vote for. The stalks are just too high today.
p mcgurk says:
I totally concur on Barack's hubris in picking Biden. I am sorry if David Axelrod had hurt feelings about the Clintons. I am sorry that Michelle Obama feels the White House wouldn't be big enough for the both of them. But right now we Democrats will not win without Hillary. I will hold my nose and vote for Obama, but I will not campaign. And frankly we deserve to lose.
Dan Kelley says:
Absolutely, spot on analysis!
Welcome back!