Submitted to a Candid World

By all accounts, if nothing else, it’s been an interesting week in politics. First – have we forgotten? – Barack Obama won the rousing endorsement of his longtime rivals & gave a compelling speech articulating a moderate vision for America, and framed his opposition to John McCain in compelling, value-neutral terms.

Alas, the media has already moved on. While history will judge the enduring wisdom of McCain’s Palin pick (hopefully from the perspective of “what went wrong”), the GOP succeeded wildly at stealing the spotlight. While the netroots have been wildly critical of Palin, the official Democratic response continues to be tepid, and with good cause. Attacking this historic candidate promises to be like navigating a minefield. What follows are my suggestions for an effective but cautious line of attack.

John McCain’s Pick Proves He’s in the Right’s Pocket

Not a Maverick: Part of the spin on McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin over other traditional candidates has suggested that the candidate “instantly reclaimed his status as a maverick” from the grips of an increasingly Rovian campaign. Not true. If the Palin decision was unexpected, it was nonetheless deeply tied to the Republican heirarchy, and betrays the true extent of McCain’s dependency on the far right. As the New York Times has reported, McCain wanted to pick Lieberman – but was forced away from the decision by an angry base. Palin was not McCain’s first choice; she was the far-right’s first choice. Besides, McCain still flip-flops when it suits him (Bush’s tax cuts, timetable for withdrawal, offshore drilling, and now the minimum wage). Why should one decision halt his fall from grace?

Impulsive & Dangerous: Democrats ought also remind the public of what the Palin decision means for McCain’s decisionmaking process: it’s impulsive, hastily researched, and bucks not just conventional wisdom, but indeed all wisdom. If the Palin decision backfires, it ought to have consequences for any evaluation of McCain’s judgment as a whole. This is the line of attack that we have pursued.

Sarah Palin is a New George W. Bush

Haven’t we heard this story before? A “compassionate conservative” with an evangelical background & no national experience tries to parley huge popularity in a deep-red state into success at the federal level. As Bush himself would say, fool me once…

Palin is a Hardline Conservative: despite the media’s urge to paint her as a maverick in her own right, Palin’s high approval ratings come from a Bible-belt Alaskan backwater, Wasilla, where in one Alaskan’s words, the locals believe that “creationism should be taught in our public schools, homosexuality is a sin, and life begins at conception.” That 5,000 of the far-right adore Palin ought not convince you that you should. Further, she has ties to Dominionist, far-right, radical Christianity, and opposes abortion except where the mother’s life is threatened. Very few Americans share any of those views, save one: George W. Bush (though she does, apparently, find contraception tolerable: thanks Magda!). And she’s flip-flopped on issues of fiscal responsibility and faces investigation on two fronts, casting a shadow over her “reformer” credentials.

Palin is too Alaska-Focused & Inexperienced to Lead a Nation: no-one knows how Palin’s ideology will influence her if she makes it to the national stage. She’s only ever discussed her national experience in the context of it being “good for Alaska” (even recently). She’s clearly never thought about her plans for America, making her a risky choice for any moderate voter (even Alaskans agree). And she lacks any international policy experience: living near Russia is not a qualification for office, and the GOP would plainly have agreed just four short years ago.

While Palin’s fresh face suggests otherwise, she’s just a fresh new look masking inexperience and extremist personal beliefs: a dangerous recipe, as America ought to know by now.

Steer Clear of Babygate

While Palin is vulnerable on her experience and personal beliefs, discussion of her family history and related potential scandals ought to be off the table and avoided at all costs by sensible political operatives. Background: the Daily Kos – in a story worthy of “Teen People” – has run articles suggesting that Sarah Palin’s son, Trig, is in fact her grandson, a family secret Palin apparently covered up to spare her daughter the shame of a birth out of wedlock.

Seriously, Kos needs to take off his tinfoil hat. While I note that anecdotal evidence of this little conspiracy theory seems persuasive, that’s all it is, and to tar Palin with a flimsy family scandal is both disrespectful and politically irresponsible. While the indecency of the smear is obvious to any sensible individual, it should be equally clear that the Democrats would stand to lose if the scandal turned out to be phony, and would risk sparking a massive sympathy backlash even if the allegations turn out to be true.

Thanks to the Huffington Post for condemning (once, twice) this ridiculous smear. The minute it becomes anything more than a ridiculous smear – i.e., if the mainstream media picks it up – Barack Obama & the Democrats must issue a strong, authoritative statement condemning further inquiries into Palin’s personal life. Common decency and political efficacy both point to the high road.

That said, use the “McCain-Failin” line responsibly and in good health! Credit to Andrea for a great catchphrase.