McCain Agonistes

Am I the only one who notices how radio news reports -- even on NPR -- on everything from health care to the budget always seem to lead with sound cuts from Republican opponents. They get the time to spout a talking point, then the announcer moves on to the next story. We're left to wonder why these bills that have passed garnered any support. Considering how bought-and-paid-for the Democratic Party is by corporate interests, I find this odd. What are the corporate media afraid of? In any event, when the roles are reversed, and the Democrats are reduced to theoretical powerlessness in the Congress, we will not hear their voices. We will still hear Mitch McConnell, John Boehner and, of course, the wealthy Republican presidential standard bearer John Sidney McCain III.

Even Tiger Woods' numerous paramours had more sense than the media do over their darling, the senior senator "from Arizona." Lately many stories have swooned over McCain "finding his voice again," "leading the opposition to health care legislation," etc. An only slightly more balanced report came today from the New York Times. I hear McCain on CSPAN and he sounds like a bitter old man. The media hear him and angels sing. Old fighter pilots never die, they still get the girls (and guys). That's the best explanation I can muster.

McCain is against everything. Like his party, he sees nothing wrong with the health care system. The GOP platform on the uninsured and underinsured seems to be: tough luck. He rails against deficit spending, even though the wars and private contractor deals approved by his party and its president are by far the largest component of the deficit. He opposes any stimulus beyond further tax cuts. The media let the Republicans get away with all this without ever scrutinizing their positions, lack of ideas and dire consequences from their obstructionism. He's mad at his slavish little buddy Lindsey Graham for having the temerity to try to do anything about climate change.

"There are few glimpses of the winks, wry smiles and one-liners that were once an integral part of his character," the Times laments. Why, McCain was once in favor of climate-change legislation, immigration reform, etc., before changing his position. They note that he faces a primary challenge from J.D. Hayworth, which is forcing their hero to tack hard to the right. Maybe. McCain has always been erratic, impulsive, driven by rage and most of all, an opportunist. His backtrack on opposing Bush administration torture was a classic McCain move. If the one member of the Senate who was actually tortured in wartime can't stick to his principles on this issue -- well, you have John McCain.

You had the real John McCain in his decision to place the callow, aggressively ignorant rookie governor of Alaska on his ticket, a heartbeat away from a 73-year-old man with a battered body. She may yet go further than her "mentor." If this man were president, things might go so far south we would finally get the reform necessary to save the country. Instead, he gets to rail safely from his seat in the Senate.

In truth, well-placed members of the media got the "winks, wry smiles and one-liners." Most others got the angry man, now turning into an angry old man -- especially his constituents in Arizona. The Grand Canyon State was merely where McCain landed through his fortunate second marriage, a platform for his ambition to return to D.C. He has done little-to-nothing for a state that remains heavily dependent on federal spending (and at a time when other conservative senators happily helped steer advanced federal research dollars to, say, Texas). He has no record of legislative accomplishment beyond an unworkable campaign-finance bill. So toxic is his relationship to other senators, that his opposition to the Phoenix light-rail system was actually a plus. He seems oblivious to Arizona's monumental challenges or issues, unlike Jon Kyle, who speaks Kook to keep his seat, but actually has a clue.

I continue to believe that Arizonans won't get a clue until they get what I call The Full Kook -- where the extreme right Kookocracy is able to implement all its cherished policies. No governor to play the adult and be blamed for preventing "conservatism." Never mind that even to the degree that this ideology has been followed it has placed the state in its dire mess. Never mind that it's detached from reality in the needs of governing a complex urbanized society -- it's even even detached from Goldwater or Reagan. (Any solutions are "leftist" or "SOCIALISM"). Never mind all that. I want the Full Kook. All the way. And then maybe, maybe, enough Arizonans would wake up and vote the rascals out, especially of the powerful Legislature.

As for the senate election, I understand St. Janet has said she won't run. That's probably wise. Her moment in Arizona has passed. For my part, I'll support Hayworth, even though I'm not sure he can get enough of McCain's base of bitter, frightened, bigoted, old white people. In inimitable J.D.-style, he told the Times, “Do we want to send John McCain back to the United States Senate again, or is it time to change to a clear, consistent, common-sense Republican?” Well, Hayworth will be clear and consistent (the Full Kook). And he won't get the undying love of the media from which, ironically, he sprang.

On the other hand, the Democrats have made such a hash of things, been such cowards and even inept tacticians. The unemployment situation in the country and pockets of outright depression are causing a volatile and highly unpredictable environment. The president's seeming sell-out to the lords of finance and big health care has taken away his magic and will cause a backlash from both liberals and moderates. In 2010 we could see Sen. Hayworth as part of a Republican takeover of Congress -- good lord, if the GOP can be so powerful having been relegated to 40 seats, imagine if the party just gained a few more? Then in 2012, President-elect Huckabee, Romney or...Sarah Palin. John McCain just keeps on giving.

Comments

[Emil Pulsifer]

I think that there are two factors behind McCain's conservative shift (e.g., on climate change).

The first involves recent staff changes. Most people have no concept of the extent to which the positions of professional politicians are influence by their staffs; yet another point of leverage for corporate lobbyists seeking to get the most bang for their buck, especially since many of those staff later graduate to private positions within the very companies they formerly worked with as congressional staff:

"The staff that remains, say former aides, lacks the institutional history on the issue and the ability to steer McCain toward productive solutions."

http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2009/11/20/20091120politico-climate-CR.html

The second factor involves, probably not actual political competition from Hayworth, but the latter's use of his radio show in recent months to hammer McCain for a supposed lack of fidelity to conservative principles. This may have affected McCain's poll results, and in turn his political strategy.

[soleri]

I worried last year that 2008 might be like 1976, an election you would be very lucky to lose. Jimmy Carter got blamed for the economic ravages of inflation even though it preceded his presidency. Likewise, Obama will get the blame for the disastrous economic collapse that occurred prior to his election. As the pundits like to say, it's his economy now.

McCain is one of the nastiest pieces of work ever to get to the US Senate but he can work a room like few others. His legend is mostly a work of fiction but it's seductive in its own way. Particularly for its author.

There were some who thought the Country-First patriot would join Obama in a grand coalition to rescue this nation. Obama reached out but McCain's vanity works only in certain directions. Once he realized the Republicans (and their smarmy Gollum, Joe Lieberman) would successfully obstruct Obama's agenda, the upside vanished. McCain's default reality took over, which is pettiness mixed with incoherence.

He's an empty windbag now but a senator's gig still beats hanging out in a condo in Phoenix staring at Cindy. He'll always be our "straight talker", at least in the media. When he finally dies, they'll cover the funeral like he was a giant of our era. It's painful to think about but this era might really be that bad.

[koreyel]

Brilliant stuff Jon, Emil, and Soleri...

I think this Talton point is worth ruminating:

"McCain is against everything. Like his party, he sees nothing wrong with the health care system. The GOP platform on the uninsured and underinsured seems to be: tough luck."

Maybe that's right in a deeper way. Maybe "tough luck" isn't a hard sell anymore. Maybe it is what the American character wants to hear right now: "Tough luck Jack. You are on your own. Work three jobs. Whatever. Bugger off bum." Maybe "tough luck" IS our new operating system. How else can you explain this scenario:

HCR is severely gutted and still 60 teabaggers, with attendant media, show up for a so-called "Die-In" in the halls of Congress. All to protest a lie about lie that doesn't even exist in the bill anymore. And never did.

Now flash backwards a day: Joe Lieberman kills the Medicare buy-in that effectively slices millions of middle-class, aging baby boomers out of some health care security and not ONE PROTESTER SHOWS UP AT HIS OFFICE.

I am totally nonplussed on how to explain these observations. Except to suppose that America's new group think is: "Tough luck. Suck it up sucker."