Back to Clive Crook's blog homepage
Thompson, Lieberman and day one in St Paul
September 3, 2008
The first full day of the Republican convention—the schedule was put back from Monday because of Hurricane Gustav—went off smoothly. President Bush was beamed in from the White House, and Fred Thompson and Joe Lieberman were the other headliners. No sign yet of Sarah Palin, due to speak on Wednesday, and the subject of almost every conversation in the margins of the event. Whatever the rest of the country may think of her, whether she proves to be an asset or a liability to the McCain campaign, her selection has generated extraordinary excitement and enthusiasm here.
At the same time, though, her arrival on the ticket threw the first day’s pace off a little. With Palin nowhere to be seen, day one, as they say, buried the lede. The idea was to devote it to introducing John McCain, but is any American politician less in need of an introduction?
The tributes were well enough done. True, Bush’s reference to McCain’s spirit being more than a match for the “angry left” was a bit puzzling. (Does anybody even in this hall think that Obama represents the angry left?) But Thompson’s funny, punchy speech had everybody asking, why wasn’t he like that during the primaries? Aside from the sustained ovation for a fallen soldier, Thompson got the biggest cheer of the night. (“And we need a president who doesn’t think that the protection of the unborn or a newly born baby is above his pay grade.”) His speech even had a morsel of policy content (taxes are a bad thing), which otherwise would have been entirely absent from the day. But there was nothing very surprising and, thanks to Palin, it all seemed a little beside the point.
Lieberman’s speech certainly ought to have seemed surprising, but his apostasy is old news. Eight years ago, this man was Al Gore’s running-mate; now here he was speaking up for the Republican nominee. He rested his case on the fact that McCain is an extraordinary man and these are extraordinarily dangerous times. But he said little to elaborate. He got a round of applause for Bill Clinton—no mean feat with this crowd—when he contrasted Clinton’s occasional willingness to work with Republicans with Obama’s record. And he got one big laugh: “If John McCain is just another partisan Republican, I am Michael Moore’s favourite Democrat.” If I had been just another of the partisan Republicans packing the hall, I might have been a little insulted by that, but the audience either failed to make the connection or was in a generous frame of mind.
Most Democrats by now detest Lieberman, of course, but one other thing he said might persuade those who don’t to get with the program. He not only praised McCain’s support for the surge of forces into Iraq (fair enough), but contrasted this with Obama’s “voting to cut off funding for our American troops on the battlefield”. That was tendentious at best, and the most aggressive attack on Obama of the day. Obama has never argued for funding to be cut off; he wanted a timeline for withdrawal attached to the funding. He did vote against a funding bill that failed to include such a provision; but then Lieberman himself, and most Republicans, also voted against a funding measure that did include such a provision. One way or another, almost everybody has voted against funding for the troops. Lieberman’s charge was unfair, and did not sit well with his appeal for one-nation bipartisanship.
And then again, there is Palin. Lieberman, widely thought to have been McCain’s first choice for VP (McCain is said to have switched because the base would not wear it), applauded the selection. “Governor Palin, like John McCain, is a reformer. She’s taken on the special interests and the political power-brokers in Alaska and reached across party lines to get things done. The truth is, she is a leader we can count on to help John shake up Washington. That’s why—that’s why I sincerely believe that the real ticket for change this year is the McCain-Palin ticket.” Lieberman and McCain see eye to eye on national security. But Lieberman is pro-choice on abortion, and a social liberal in other respects as well, whereas Palin is a social conservative. Genuine though his admiration for McCain may be, stretching his endorsement to the whole ticket seemed a stretch too far.
One last observation. Barring breakdowns later in the week, the Republicans have won the platform war hands down. The Democrats had their cheesy game-show set followed by the much-derided Greek column thing. The Republicans have a clean, reflective stage in front of an enormous high-definition screen, used so far to excellent effect. If I were with the DNC, I’d find out who was responsible and book them for 2012.
Clive, I am glad to see that you went to the Republican convention. Even though I am a hard core Democrat, i was shocked to see how many British and other foreign journalists seem to have packed up and left right after the democratic convention was over.
While Republican conventions may not be the best places to find eloquence, intelligence or reality, it is an unfortunate, not merely inconvenient, truth that they are much more consistent at producing White House occupants than the ones on the Democratic side.
The only point where i take issue with you is in your dismissive reference to the Democrats’ Greek columns. Isn’t there perhaps some deep symbolism here? Cannot the Democrats’ fatal flaw in finding so many different ways to lose presidential elections be compared to a Greek tragedy?
Posted by: algasema | September 3rd, 2008 at 11:48 am | Report this commentalgasema. Wrt your remark about a Greek tragedy. As yet Hubris and “the gods” have not taken centre stage in this tragedy, but probably they will. Maybe Cassandra is reading this blog and will give us his opinion?
Posted by: J.J. | September 3rd, 2008 at 12:00 pm | Report this commentJ.J., the mass exodus of foreign journalists before the Republican convention also reminds me of the beginning of the Lotus Sutra, one of the most famous of all of the ancient Indian Buddhist writings, where some 5,000 of Shakyamuni Buddha’s leading followers get up and walk out before he even starts to speak, because they think that they have already heard everything that he had to say.
I do not for an instant, of course, mean to compare the likes of Joe Lieberman, Sarah Palin, or even Gerge W. Bush and John McCain with the Buddha. On second thought, maybe the journalists, unlike Shakyamuni’s disciples, were right after all.
Posted by: algasema | September 3rd, 2008 at 1:37 pm | Report this commentAt the time I was eager to get to know more of the republican cause; I could not help but have my interest take a nose-dive.
In my opinion; Anyone who serves this great land and sacrifices their life for the nation has to be honored. (Hats off). And in these modern days become the perfect one, only one, God forbid superman to take on the country’s baton as head of state.
From the speeches yesterday, much as we have to respect John S McCain for the great service he gave to this nation. We have to look way beyond than drawing mere sympathy.
We are about to set a precedent that everyone who serves his country in the military is the only person who can stand out in the crowd. So many families including mine have lost family in endless and needless wars. Why these wars are started in the first place? Just take a look-out in the naked sun. We are determined and armed to teeth to stay in this perpetual cycle.
Fathers, mothers, sons, daughters, children, friends; all have fallen. But for what? Lucky ones have come back home dis-figured and most will never be the same. why?
John S McCain, has been around for some good years now; If he is this good, if he is that saviour the country needs, where has he been? Yesterday he was applauded for the surge in Iraq. But I am wondering and asking myself questions if there is indeed executive power in this country that goes about its business; as it seems to be the case of McCain has done this and is doing this. Yes! he was in down south when Gustav hit; But where was he when Katrina was looming?
And in a slogan “Country First” what is McCain playing at? Maybe I need to be educated; someone please!
Posted by: Steven | September 3rd, 2008 at 4:48 pm | Report this commentJoe Lieberman’s (aka the senator from Tel Aviv) talk of “putting the country first” is very confusing stuff. Where to begin?
We can sleep easier now knowing thanks to Jim Lobe that Gov. Palin met with the board of directors of AIPAC on Sept. 2 where she was “extremely well received” according to John McCain’s spokesman Michael Goldfarb. Under a McCain/Palin administration it will be business as usual: ie 40 more years of Occupation and zero US foreign policy credibility in the ME.
Yes, Virginia, there is no lobby.
Posted by: fm | September 3rd, 2008 at 6:45 pm | Report this comment“And in a slogan “Country First” what is McCain playing at? Maybe I need to be educated; someone please!”
I second that. When flicking through the television channels yesterday evening I briefly listened to Ron Paul speak on C-SPAN. The image then changed to show the conventioneers who were holding signs with that slogan. Mr. Crook, please interpret for us.
Good comment from someone, perhaps on Mr. Rachman’s weblog, who has fundamentalist Christian relatives, in regard to the fundamentalists’ worldview - something that I cannot understand at all. I assume the slogan makes eminent sense to them however.
More correctly, Senator Lieberman is the Senator from Likud, not from Israel or from Tel Aviv. And he is that in fact. How Connecticut voters accept that is beyond me.
Posted by: Wendell Murray | September 3rd, 2008 at 8:17 pm | Report this commentWhy did the foreign journalists pack up and leave after the democratic convention? Was it because they assumed that the Republication one would be boring and not newsworthy? Let’s face it. Outside the US, Barack Obama is news. People are still curious about him. But of course, curious outsiders can’t get him elected. www.winnowed.blogspot.com
Posted by: Vinod Joseph | September 4th, 2008 at 4:43 am | Report this commentGood comments on the speeches, though I think you’re very kind to Lieberman. His delivery except for a few good lines was flat and didn’t get a response in the hall. You may want to update this post to note the green and blue backgrounds for McCain’s speech. The Republican set may have looked impressive in the hall, but they forgot to check out how it looked on television. I’ll take the Greek columns from Invesco Field any day over another green background for McCain. Maybe the Republicans need to hire the Dems’ “set designer” for 2012.
Posted by: John | September 7th, 2008 at 11:29 am | Report this comment