Putting Country Last

I don't know John McCain as well as David
Brooks<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/26/opinion/26brooks.html?hp>does.
In fact, I don't know him personally at all. But I covered his 2000
and 2008 primary campaigns, and I spent considerable time interviewing him,
including several long interviews I did for a
profile<http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=23c3a0ff-9d55-4d28-a94e-0b0e09e26505>in
2006. As I wrote in that profile, I liked and respected McCain, and in
2000, I urged the magazine to endorse jointly McCain and Al Gore during the
primaries. He was, I thought, basically a moderate Republican (I never took
his or Chuck Hagel's positions on social issues seriously). But above all,
he was, as he claimed during this campaign, a politician who would put
"country first."

By this year, of course, I was far less enthusiastic about a McCain
presidency. McCain boasts of his prescience on the surge, but the surge took
place four years after a needless war that McCain helped start--a war that
devastated a country, destabilized a region, undermined America's standing
in the world (and I am not merely speaking of our moral standing), and
killed and maimed thousands and thousands of people. It is the kind of an
action for which your average politician or general (I am thinking of the
Argentinean generals who masterminded the Falklands war) would be banished
from public life. It should have been the end of McCain and Bush and all
those people.

I never doubted, however, that McCain's motives in pushing America into war
were honorable. Nor do I question his motives in championing Georgia against
Russia or in rattling the sabers against Iran. I question his judgment and
wouldn't want him as president. But I do question his motives in inserting
himself into the attempt by the Treasury Department, Federal Reserve, and
the Congressional leadership (excluding the usual suspects from the
Republican House delegation) to fashion a plan for preventing a Wall Street
crash. He has shown a willingness to put the success of his campaign ahead
of the country's welfare. And it's not over a relatively minor matter--like
offshore drilling or creationism in schools.

I know there are economists, some of whom I respect, that think this
financial crisis will blow over, that it's a crisis in the financial
superstructure that won't ultimately affect the country's industrial base. I
have never understood the post-1980 stock market very well, but I know
something about economic history, and I know that at a certain point, a
financial crisis can get out of hand and lead to a credit crunch that will
depress the industrial base and set off a vicious cycle of unemployment. I
also know a little bit about international economic history--enough at least
to appreciate what would happen if nations began to abandon the dollar the
way they abandoned the British pound eighty years ago. As Paul
Krugman<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/26/opinion/26krugman.html?hp>--who
has been writing about the mortgage mess for years--has argued, it is not
worth taking the chance that this crisis will blow over.
That's a long way of saying that it is simply unpatriotic--it's an insult to
flag, country, and all the things that McCain claims to hold dear--for
McCain to hold this financial crisis hostage to his political ambitions.
McCain doesn't know a thing about finance and is no position to help work
out an agreement. If we do suffer a serious bank run, or a run on the
dollar, it can be laid directly at his feet. As I said to friends last
night, if McCain had been president at this point, I would have wanted to
impeach him.

That brings me back to David Brooks' column. David thinks that beneath the
surface of McCain the craven campaigner, that the man who nominated an
ill-prepared  Sarah Palin as his possible successor and has lent his
energies to blocking a financial bailout, there still sits a "real McCain"
who could govern fairly and effectively as president. I doubt it. I really
doubt it. Whether because of age or overreaching ambition, McCain has become
the kind of man he earlier railed against. He has become the Bush of 2000
against whom he campaigned or the Senate and House Republicans whom he
despised. His defeat is now imperative.

--*John B. Judis
*

-- 
"Usually when people are sad, they don't do anything. They just cry over
their condition. But when they get angry, they bring about a change."
- Malcolm X, Malcolm X Speaks, 1965

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Black Focus Inc." group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Black-Focus-Inc?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to