South Dakota Politics

Dear Mr. Obama

Krauthammer, Palin, Gibson, and the Bush Doctrine

Charles Krauthammer:  "The New York Times got it wrong. And Charlie Gibson got it wrong. . . . In doing so, he captured perfectly the establishment snobbery and intellectual condescension that has characterized the chattering classes' reaction to the mother of five who presumes to play on their stage."

The Blob Turns 50

Right about the time I was born, a group of film makers were putting together one of the most novel and effective monster movies ever made.  Most movie monsters are, at best, modified versions of earlier nightmares.  Boris Karloff's Mummy, the first in a long line of bandaged, lurching creatures, was so faithful a copy of Lugosi's Dracula that the movie had the same theme music: Swan Lake.  The very influential Alien was a supped up version of another 1958 film, It! The Creature from Beyond Space.

The Blob was a monster without pedigree.  There was nothing quite like it, so far as I know, in the history of spooky tales.  It hatches from a meteor, and so puts itself squarely in the genre of science fiction.  It looks like a gob of red jam, but has two terrible powers.  It can roll where it wants to go (implying I suppose some powers of perception), it can squeeze under any door, and it can consume and digest human flesh, becoming bigger with each victim. 

The Blob comes along at the same time as a lot of classic post-war, Cold War science fiction movies, and it has the same kind of paranoia.  But it has nothing to do with politics.  It reflected the new awareness of the larger universe that science exposes to popular culture.  The blog was a more or less plausible of what biologists were learning about simple life forms: they consume everything they can get their molecular teeth in, and grow until something limits their growth.  Every living organism, including us, is always vulnerable to some new organism that figures out how to get under the doorjamb. 

The story line is set into the standard teenage rebel motif.  Steve McQueen plays the starring role.  Not, perhaps, his best work, but probably the one he will be longest remembered for.  He and his girlfriend encounter the monster first because, well, they are out at night while all the adults are home in bed.  None of the adults believe them, of course, until it is almost too late.  It is altogether well done. 

There is a scene in a movie theater where it pours out of the projector openings and the audience runs screaming out the doors.  Every July at the theater where it was filmed, there is a reenactment of the scene.  That is a movie that has made an impression.  Happy fiftieth birthday, blob!

Palin Governed from the Center

So long as Governor Palin remains the center of attention, and just right now there is no end in sight, it is going to be hard for the Obama campaign to regain traction.  I have been arguing that many of the attacks on Palin invite comparison with Barack Obama, whom the Left fell in love with before ever they knew much about him.  Palin as well won the hearts of many a Republican-minded voter before they had any good idea what she believed or what she had done. 

Charles Krauthammer has a theory about this, which supports my own.  So he must be right. 

Obama's meteoric rise was based not on issues -- there was not a dime's worth of difference between him and Hillary on issues -- but on narrative, on eloquence, on charisma.

The unease at the Denver convention, the feeling of buyer's remorse, was the Democrats' realization that the arc of Obama's celebrity had peaked -- and had now entered a period of its steepest decline. That Palin could so instantly steal the celebrity spotlight is a reflection of that decline.

Krauthammer argues, plausibly, that both Obama and Palin are "celebrity candidates," whose appeal is largely image more than substance.  The problem for the Democrats is that Obama is well into the second season of his show.  As in the case of Lost or the X-Files, viewers keep waiting to find out what the mystery is, and after enough time has passed, they begin to wonder if there is anything there to be revealed.  Krauthammer thinks that Obama has already jumped the shark. 

Palin has the advantage that she has just now started her run.  Even if she is a sphinx without a secret, she should be able to keep up the show past November. 

There is something to that analysis, but in fact Palin has more substance to her show than Obama has.  Unlike Obama or Biden, or McCain for that matter, she has served as a chief executive.  USA Today has a remarkably fair-minded article on her governorship, and it looks pretty sound. 

Weeks after taking office as Alaska's governor in December 2006, Sarah Palin vetoed a bill that sought to ban benefits for the same-sex partners of state workers. It was unconstitutional, she said.

This year, she rebuffed religious conservatives who wanted her to add two abortion restriction measures to a special legislative session on oil and gas policy, even though she supported the bills. Former aide Larry Persily said she didn't want to risk offending Democrats, whose votes she needed on energy legislation.

Since Republican presidential candidate John McCain picked Palin as his running mate, much attention has been focused on her deeply conservative social views — including her opposition to abortion even in cases of rape and incest and her attendance at a church that promotes the "transformation" of homosexuals through prayer.

But in her 21 months as governor, Palin has taken few steps to advance culturally conservative causes. Instead, after she knocked off an incumbent amid an influence-peddling scandal linked to the oil industry, Palin pursued a populist agenda that toughened ethics rules and raised taxes on oil and gas companies.

This is hardly the record of a religious extremist.  It is the record of someone who knows that she must build coalitions to get things past.  It is the record of someone who knows that the constitutional foundations of her power are not subject to her personal or religious whims. 

Governor Palin has really taken on the oil companies and corruption in her own party, according to USA Today.  If Barack Obama has ever stood up to his own party on any issue, it has been kept a secret.  This is someone with substance.  No wonder she scares the left out of its clogs. 

Barack Obama: Disabled War Vets Are Aren't Cool Enough To Be President

I guess this is the new politics.  Here is Barack Obama's new ad:

And why doesn't John McCain use computers or email? From the Boston Globe, March 4, 2000 (HT, Jonah Goldberg).

McCain gets emotional at the mention of military families needing food stamps or veterans lacking health care. The outrage comes from inside: McCain's severe war injuries prevent him from combing his hair, typing on a keyboard, or tying his shoes. Friends marvel at McCain's encyclopedic knowledge of sports. He's an avid fan - Ted Williams is his hero - but he can't raise his arm above his shoulder to throw a baseball.

Why doesn't John McCain use computers?  Because he physically can't due to war injuries.  Way to go, Obama camp.  As Jonah puts it:

In a similar vein I guess it's an outrage that the blind governor of New York David Patterson doesn't know how to drive car. After all, transportation issues are pretty important. How dare he serve as governor while being ignorant of what it's like to drive a car.

Update: Forbes magazine, via Jonah:

In certain ways, McCain was a natural Web candidate. Chairman of the Senate Telecommunications Subcommittee and regarded as the U.S. Senate's savviest technologist, McCain is an inveterate devotee of email. His nightly ritual is to read his email together with his wife, Cindy. The injuries he incurred as a Vietnam POW make it painful for McCain to type. Instead, he dictates responses that his wife types on a laptop. "She's a whiz on the keyboard, and I'm so laborious," McCain admits.

September 11, 2001

Never forget. 

By This Standard, Obama is Qualified Too

From the Politico:

South Carolina Democratic chairwoman Carol Fowler sharply attacked Sarah Palin today, saying John McCain had chosen a running mate "whose primary qualification seems to be that she hasn’t had an abortion.”

Lipstick and Pig Skins

There are Viking's fans across the upper Midwest?

Unintentional Offense

Like Barack Obama's "lipstick on a pig" comment, Prof. Blanchard unintentionally gives offense to Vikings fans across the upper Midwest by posting a picture of the original "Hail Mary" pass, which really is an example of Drew Pearson of the Cowboys committing pass interference against Nate Wright of the Vikings.  Vikings fans seethe with anger to this day.  The only thing more insulting than posting this picture of the Vikings is the current incarnation of the Vikings. 

The Left’s Contempt for the Old Time Religious

I wrote in support of Darwinian Evolution in a recent post.  My frequent interlocutor, BB, responded as follows:

I think this argument speaks volumes about the state of American society and its leaders. Considering that a majority of Americans reject evolution in favor of some form of creationism is it really so surprising that politicians pander to this group? Bush is on record as stating that the "jury is out" on evolution and Palin outright believes in it (perhaps she should reconsider the nomination; after all what would happen in the event of the rapture?). The Scopes trial is over. Scopes lost but evolution won in the court of national opinion (reference Mencken for the typical person on the jury in Tennessee). What does this say about our leaders? I guess we should blame God for the war in Iraq since Bush "prayed" about it and apparently got the go ahead from the big guy. And Evolution? How can anyone raised in modern society not believe in it? The great debates in the mid nineteenth reconciled the debate between science and religion (God would not leave so much evidence supporting evolution since He is the creator and the devil is incapable of creating anything: in this case dinosaur bones millions of years old). Which creation myth does the religious right subscribe to? There are two in Genesis. Perhaps they need to find a Jew to let them in on the true exegesis since it is after all their book! I find it hard to believe how ignorant and gullible these well intentioned (but horribly misguided) people are...

See the post for further exchanges.  What I noted about BB's comment is that it is dripping with contempt for a group that consists of a lot of Americans.  I teach a course on Darwinism and politics, and I have a lot of students whose perspective is formed by traditional Protestant Christianity.  I have always tried to tried to respect their beliefs while showing them that it is possible to think a little bit outside of the box without offending their faith.  It is because I respect them that I am able to make some progress on this front.

When Barack Obama made his infamous comment about folks clinging to religion and guns, he thought he was speaking to a safely leftist audience in San Francisco.  Maybe it was not indicative of what he really thinks about rural Ohio, but it was surely indicative about what San Francisco thinks about rural Ohio!

Governor Palin has brought the Left's contempt for the pious right up to the surface.  Here is Juan Cole's opening paragraph in his Salon piece on Palin:

John McCain announced that he was running for president to confront the "transcendent challenge" of the 21st century, "radical Islamic extremism," contrasting it with "stability, tolerance and democracy." But the values of his handpicked running mate, Sarah Palin, more resemble those of Muslim fundamentalists than they do those of the Founding Fathers. On censorship, the teaching of creationism in schools, reproductive rights, attributing government policy to God's will and climate change, Palin agrees with Hamas and Saudi Arabia rather than supporting tolerance and democratic precepts. What is the difference between Palin and a Muslim fundamentalist? Lipstick. [my italics]

Palin has driven Cole right off the edge.  Yes, many American churches may profess things that Cole, or BB, or I don't believe.  But American Liberal Democracy was always based on the premise that theology was private, and that anyone of any faith could participate in politics so long as they accept the distinction between Church and State.  Is there any evidence, beyond a comment in a debate, that Governor Palin has tried to use political power to advance the agenda of her church?  Did Governor Palin try to push the teaching of creationism (assuming she agrees with that teaching) once she was in office? 

Juan Cole's statement is as offensive as it is absurd.  Does Palin support the murder of heretics?  Does she push for religious law to be enacted by the state legislature?  Cole's comparison is ridiculous.  It is evidence of mind unbalanced by contempt. 

Here is Clive Crook on precisely this matter:

Democrats regard their policies as self-evidently in the interests of the US working and middle classes. Yet those wide segments of US society keep helping to elect Republican presidents. How is one to account for this? Are those people idiots? Frankly, yes - or so many liberals are driven to conclude. Either that or bigots, clinging to guns, God and white supremacy; or else pathetic dupes, ever at the disposal of Republican strategists. If they only had the brains to vote in their interests, Democrats think, the party would never be out of power. But again and again, the Republicans tell their lies, and those stupid damned voters buy it…

Because it was so unexpected, Sarah Palin's nomination for the vice-presidency jolted these attitudes to the surface. Ms Palin is a small-town American. It is said that she has only recently acquired a passport. Her husband is a fisherman and production worker. She represents a great slice of the country that the Democrats say they care about - yet her selection induced an apoplectic fit.

Some more sober Democrats have shrewdly urged their colleagues to ignore Palin and get on with attacking McCain.  My friend and esteemed Keloland colleague Todd Epp for example.  But the Juan Cole's of the Left (and there are a lot of them on the blogosphere) just can't let this go.  Their contempt boils over, it cannot be contained.  It's not the issues that matter most, not even Iraq.  It's these people. 

Cook urges Liberal Democrats to learn some respect.  Don't hold your breath. 

The Palin Effect

Like my friend Cory Heidelberger, I am little bit embarrassed by the number of posts I have devoted to John McCain's running mate.  After all, the conventional wisdom in political science is that running mates don't really matter.  People vote for the top of the ticket. 

But I think that neither of us should be embarrassed.  Who knows what the race will be about two weeks from now, but we live in the now and now is all about Governor Palin.  Palin may yet turn out to be a liability for McCain, as Professor Schaff and I suggested in our first posts on the choice (though he much more strongly than I).  But there is no doubt that it shook the race up and reshuffled it into a deck much more favorable to the Republican.  Why is that?

I note five major reasons, though one could think of more.  First, Palin dramatically brought the conservative base back on board.  This was always a problem for McCain.  Prior to the Palin choice, he was in danger from two fronts: conservatives who didn't think he was one of them, and Obama, who was trying to tie him to Bush.  Palin brings back the right with no ties to Bush at all.  Of course, social conservatives, and especially the religious right, were never going to vote for Obama.  But they might have stayed home, and they were holding on to their wallets.  All that has changed.  The Republican base is head over heals in love with her, and the money is flowing again. 

Second, Palin is clearly attracting women to the ticket.  This is especially true of Republican women, who can easily imagine being Sarah Palin.  But it looks like it is true of independent women as well, and especially of White women.  That's a big chunk of voters. 

Third, Palin neutralizes McCain's biggest vulnerability: his age.  What if he dies or becomes incapacitated?  Well, voters who are not ideologically committed to the Democratic Party are comfortable, if not delighted with Palin.  Smart or not, they seem to think that the White House will be in good hands if she has to take over.

Fourth, her addition restores McCain's "outsider" appeal.  Maybe that's nonsense (and it is), but no more so than Obama's claim to be a "bridge builder."  McCain is surely an insider, but he is also surely an independent minded Republican.  That's why he had so much trouble with a lot of Republicans.  Palin put wind back into those sails. 

Finally, I have to admit that I was wrong and one of our readers was right about "the experience thing."  Anne wrote this, in response to my first post on Gov. Palin:

I disagree with you and Prof Blanchard about the nomination of Sarah Palin neutralizing the experience issue.  I think it emphasizes it.  It has the Democrats furiously insisting that Sen Obama is so too more experienced than Governor Palin.  Well, that has them comparing the top of their ticket to the bottom of the Republicans'.  Eventually people will recall that Sen McCain exceeds them all in both experience and judgment.

Anne hit that nail right on the head.  Every time Obama or someone else questions Palin's qualifications for office, it immediately invites comparisons with Obama himself.  A state legislator who began to run for president as soon as he was elected to the Senate has no qualifications that trump Palin's.  Rather, she comes out slightly ahead, having had at least two jobs as an executive officer. 

More important, it pulls Obama down when he is compared to Palin, who is, after all, only the running mate.  That leaves McCain above the fray!  And it pushes Biden down below consideration. 

McCain's choice of Governor Palin has been frequently called a "Hail Mary Pass."  When someone throws a Hail Mary, and it is received in the end zone, one can never know whether it was genius, or dumb luck, or maybe the Mother of Jesus was intervening.  But the quarterback doesn't really have to care. 

Rain On Parade

I'll be the party pooper.  I'll believe John McCain has an 11 point advantage among likely voters when I see it replicated in other polls.  Weekend polls are notoriously inaccurate and I find it hard to believe that McCain had something like a 15-20 point bounce from the convention. 

Also, in addition to Prof. Blanchard's list of issues that didn't get mentioned.  Entitlements.  The most important domestic issue, in my opinion.  Not a word from either party. We know why, of course.  Anything approaching fiscal responsibility costs you the election.  See below.  I want to point out that John McCain voted against the prescription drug benefit for Medicare, called by David Walker "the most fiscally irresponsible piece of legislation since the 1960s.":

McCain Bounce Now Confirmed

From USAToday:

The Republican National Convention has given John McCain and his party a significant boost, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll taken over the weekend shows, as running mate Sarah Palin helps close an "enthusiasm gap" that has dogged the GOP all year.

McCain leads Democrat Barack Obama by 50%-46% among registered voters, the Republican's biggest advantage since January and a turnaround from the USA TODAY poll taken just before the convention opened in St. Paul. Then, he lagged by 7 percentage points.

The convention bounce has helped not only McCain but also attitudes toward Republican congressional candidates and the GOP in general.

Now that looks like an 11 point bounce.  But it is not quite the most significant news.

In the new poll, taken Friday through Sunday, McCain leads Obama by 54%-44% among those seen as most likely to vote. The survey of 1,022 adults, including 959 registered voters, has a margin of error of +/— 3 points for both samples.

"Likely voters" is obviously a more important category than "registered voters."  I wouldn't put much weight on this poll, unless it is confirmed by others.  But if it's real, 10 points is a dramatic shift in McCain's favor.  And there has clearly been movement toward the Republican side.  The Gallop tracking poll has McCain up three, and Rasmussen has it tied.  The RCP average now gives McCain a slight advantage for the first time. 

The Return of Wright

New York Times:  From Newark Pulpit, Rev. Wright Praises Obama

Issues Ignored by the Conventions

I am not a big convention basher.  Yes, they are spectacles with no real institutional function anymore, but it's not so bad to have the two parties show their faces and funny hats to the voters at least once before an election.

But it's worth noting that most of the real issues that are facing and will face the next government are either ignored entirely, or treated in the most superficial way.  Here are a few that come to mind:

Energy Policy.  Yeah, I know, there was lots of wind about wind power, spin about drilling, but both of the parties talked as if energy independence was either possible or would be beneficial.  It isn't, and it won't be.  There is no conceivable way that the U.S., or any other major power (with the possible exception of Russia, if you think it's a major power) can be self-sufficient on energy.  The world will be powered by oil for the foreseeable future, and the U.S. and Europe (along with India and China) will have to import lots of it, no matter what happens.  It would be nice if someone in either convention could just say that, but such honesty would be viciously exploited by the other side.  A sound energy policy would consist of research into new energy sources, more energy efficient technologies across the board, and yes, drilling.  But none of that is going to make us independent.  And independence is not something we should want.  The world civilization is interconnected, and cheap energy in one place should flow to wherever it can be efficiently used.

Free Trade.  Trade has been the single most powerful engine of economic growth since human beings first began to live in cities.  Barriers to trade always hurt the nations that put them up, and just right now progress in removing these barriers has stalled.  Protectionism always rests on two motives: protecting some industry and interested population at the expense of the national interest, and dislike of foreigners.  The Democrats are openly hostile to free trade just now, and the Republicans lack the courage to make the case.

Immigration.  Americans care a lot about this, but the campaigning classes are determined not to do anything about it; rather, they have engaged in mutual paralysis.  The U.S. probably cannot, and definitely should not, close its borders.  We need a steady supply of workers for many industries, and we need skilled and industrious people at all levels of our industrial plant.  But we also need to manage immigration.  Right now we are importing poverty and large unassimilated blocks of peoples, most from the south, faster than we can deal with them.  I don't believe that we can't manage immigration, but both parties seem to be determined to make sure that we don't 

That's just three issues that the conventions are realistically facing.  You can probably think of more.