A CAMPAIGN ABOUT CHANGE VERSUS A CAMPAIGN ABOUT MCCAIN?
Reading Michael Crowley's Mark Salter profile in TNR, you wonder how real McCainiacs can really keep a straight face while arguing that the Obama campaign is the one driven by a cult of personality built around a narcissist who feels he's owed the presidency. Salter is apparently livid that Obama has stolen McCain's themes of having matured out of a colorful childhood and been bettered by patriotism and commitment to public service. Did Mark Salter make it through his top perch in John McCain's 2000 campaign without ever listening to a George W. Bush speech? Salter even jokes
"I often regret that we didn't copyright 'serving a cause greater than your self-interest,'" he cracks.And Barack Obama is supposed to have an arrogance problem? Crowley also resurrects Mark Salter's tirade against a college graduating class whose student speaker had the temerity to criticize McCain before he spoke:
Should you grow up and ever get down to the hard business of making a living and finding a purpose for your lives beyond self-indulgence some of you might then know a happiness far more sublime than the fleeting pleasure of living in an echo chamber. And if you are that fortunate, you might look back on the day of your graduation and your discourtesy to a good and honest man with a little shame and the certain knowledge that it is very unlikely any of you will ever posses one small fraction of the character of John McCain.This isn't some out of control staffer - this is the guy who survives every McCainland shake-up, ghost-writes everything, conceived, crafts, and protects the McCain mythology, etc. But his comments are striking in part because they echo the ethos that emanates from so much of McCain's campaign: this sense that John McCain deserves the presidency, even if America isn't good enough to deserve John McCain. Who else would put up an internet ad about how the candidate as an elite boarding school student learned the honor code and committed to turn in other boys if they were cheating - and he's applied those values ever since? Or one that just consists of speechifying by their guy and quotes from Teddy Roosevelt? Can you imagine if Barack Obama tried to pull that? Meanwhile McCain's campaign brings up his POW experience at every conceivable opportunity while demanding he be recognized as too modest to talk about it - and how dare Wes Clark question whether it qualifies him to be president? (Remember the attacks on John Kerry for talking too much about his purple hearts) Today Obama is predictably under attack from conservatives for the ostensible arrogance of giving a speech to a big crowd outside the United States. In that speech, Obama talks about his personal story and what he loves about America - echoing, though understandably not repeating his statement in his convention speech that "in no other country on Earth is my story even possible." This is the most common intersection of autobiography and patriotism in an Obama speech: America is a great country which has made so much possible for me. With McCain, the formulation is more often: I love America, and I've sacrificed for America my whole life. McCain is of course entitled to tout his military service, which is certainly more admirable than what he's done in the United States Senate. And his campaign's steady emphasis on McCain's story and character I'm sure is driven in part by recognition that more people cast their votes on such things - ethos rather than logos in Paul Waldman's formulation. But - aside from Crowley's observation that McCain's character appeal seems more attuned to what voters wanted in 2000 than in 2008 - I have to hope that it's not just we "base voters" who find his campaign's sense of entitlement grating. Everyone seems now to agree that McCain's wasn't helped by the speech he gave the night Obama clinched his delegate majority. But it wasn't just the green background - McCain came off like John Lithgow's disapproving father figure in Footloose warning America away from the dangers of Barack Obama's dancing. Or like Gore Vidal's character (the Democrat) lecturing the debate audience not to fall for the titular Republican in Bob Roberts. It seemed like the best case scenario is you walk away convinced that however exciting it would be to vote Obama, you'd really better vote for McCain (and eat your vegetables). That speech brought home a sense of McCain as the candidate of obligation. Salter's screeds bring home the sense that we're doubly obligated to vote for McCain: First, because voting Obama is a risky indulgence. Second, because after all McCain's done for us, we owe it to him. Which came first: the mandate that we have to vote for John McCain, or the low level of enthusiasm (14% in a recent survey) among his supporters? Which is more arrogant and presumptuous: "We are the ones we have been waiting for" or "The American president America has been waiting for"?