Here was Schieffer speaking with the Early Show’s Maggie Rodriguez at 7:05 AM EDT today:
BOB SCHIEFFER: I am told, Maggie, that the way McCain got involved in this in the first place, the Treasury Secretary was briefing Republicans in the House yesterday, the Republican conference, asked how many were ready to support the bailout plan. Only four of them held up their hands. Paulson then called, according to my sources, Senator Lindsey Graham, who is very close to John McCain, and told him: you’ve got to get the people in the McCain campaign, you’ve got to convince John McCain to give these Republicans some political cover. If you don’t do that, this whole bailout plan is going to fail. So that’s how, McCain, apparently, became involved.
Continued Schieffer . . .
SCHIEFFER: He has gotten what he wants, he’s going to have this meeting, kind of a summit today with the president and Barack Obama. I’m told that the leaders of both parties are getting close to having some kind of a bill. The question, though, is whether rank-and-file Republicans, especially, are going to vote for this.
…And that’s where McCain comes in.
This certainly contradicts the spin that Senator McCain was motivated by politics. The fact remains that no one really knows how this will all play out. No one knows how much of the current events in Washington are influenced by politics. What is known is that there is an economic crisis that needs to be addressed, and the role Senator McCain is playing is significant.
With the markets in turmoil and a bill and a bailout package up for debate in Congress, Senator McCain has suspended his campaign and returned to Washington to work on the bill. Last night prior to Senator McCain’s decision to return to Washington ABC’s George Stephanopoulos reported,
ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos reports: If Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain doesn’t vote for the Bush administration’s $700 billion economic bailout plan, some Republican and Democratic congressional leaders tell ABC News the plan won’t pass.
“If McCain doesn’t come out for this, it’s over,” a Top House Republican tells ABC News.
A Democratic leadership source says that White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten has been told that Democratic votes will not be there if McCain votes no — that there is no deal if McCain doesn’t go along.
With the ball in Senator McCain’s court, and concerns about the President’s current proposal, Senator McCain is heading back to Washington. The debates and future campaign events are in limbo, as this bold decision has put a priority on the economic package.
If one were to listen to the Democrats over the last couple weeks, you might conclude that Senator McCain is terribly ill just waiting for November or January to keel over. The line of attack is to tell voters that Sarah Palin will be president, and that she is not qualified for that job.
So for a moment lets ignore the morbid, and highly suspect premise of this argument. It’s Palin v. Obama. It’s a first term Governor v. a first term Senator. Both are short on foreign policy experience. They each have some experience, but not an extensive foreign policy record. Palin wins on executive experience; she’s run a state, she has run a town; she’s the commander-in-chief of the Alaska National Guard. What’s particularly surprising is that Governor Palin has the edge of legislative achievements. This is an area that Senator Obama should win as his experience is almost completely in the legislative branch, yet he has no major pieces of legislation in his name in the U.S. or State Senate. It’s not that he has no legislative experience but it is sparse and it is mainly on politically safe issues.
Palin’s legislative accomplishments actually eclipse Obama’s. She pushed through bipartisan ethics reform bill in Alaska. She passed a tax increase on oil company profits, and she enacted the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act (AGIA) to set up a natural gas pipeline in Alaska. She has taken on her own party in big ways by ousting two entrenched incumbants, resigning her post at the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission as a protest to ‘lack of ethics’, and opposed the reelection of Republicans Don Young and Ted Stevens because of ethics/corruption charges. Senator Obama does not have a bipartisan record, or a history of taking on his own party in any way.
So if Governor Palin were running for president I would have some doubts about her foreign policy experience, somewhat similar to those I have about Senator Obama’s foreign policy experience. However, she’s not running for president. Yes, it is possible that she could become president, but on the other hand Senator Obama would definitely be bringing a lack of foreign policy experience to the White House. If Governor Palin did have to take over the Presidency, her vice presidential experience would eclipse any experience Senator Obama now claims to have on foreign policy. The only way the Obama campaign has even the slightest opportunity to win the experience argument against Palin is to convince everyone McCain is on his last legs. Granted no one is guaranteed a particular life span, but this argument is a stretch and rather grim.
It is the team element of the Palin pick that makes McCain/Palin combination so strong. There is legislative and executive experience on the Republican ticket. There is a foreign policy expert, and there is an energy expert, they both have a history of working across party lines and battling corruption, there is military experience, there is ‘beyond the beltway’ experience. They both have a background and history of reform. On the Democratic side Obama chose an experienced Washington insider, who brings foreign policy experience, but dilutes the message of change. The match is awkward with the experienced candidate in the two slot and the novice at the top of the ticket. This has left the Obama campaign with the ‘About to Die’ argument leaving another ding in the ‘politics of hope’ mantra.
As new video surfaces of Senator McCain’s release from a Vietnam prison of war it gives another opportunity to look at why this experience is relevant to his presidential bid. Aside from the military understanding and perspective that McCain’s 22 years in the Navy provides, the compelling reason his P.O.W. experience matters, is that it shows his strength, resiliency, and triumphant spirit. What is riveting about Senator McCain’s story is not how perfect he is, it is about how human he is. He doesn’t tell a story of a hero, he tells a story of flawed human being who survived due to faith, friends, and country. What is compelling is not just that Senator McCain survived, or that he turned down preferential treatment, it’s that he lived through an event that shattered him, recovered, then thrived after his release.
The theme of the Republican convention revolved around service and putting country before party. His biography seen though the prism of a campaign is sometimes thought to be self-aggrandizement. However, if one pays attention to the story he tells himself, it is actually about learning about humility, love, compassion, and forgiveness under the harshest of circumstances. His speech at the convention reflected not on his heroics, but on how others brought him back after he had been broken.
“Then I found myself falling toward the middle of a small lake in the city of Hanoi, with two broken arms, a broken leg, and an angry crowd waiting to greet me. I was dumped in a dark cell, and left to die. I didn’t feel so tough anymore. When they discovered my father was an admiral, they took me to a hospital. They couldn’t set my bones properly, so they just slapped a cast on me. When I didn’t get better, and was down to about a hundred pounds, they put me in a cell with two other Americans. I couldn’t do anything. I couldn’t even feed myself. They did it for me. I was beginning to learn the limits of my selfish independence. Those men saved my life.
I was in solitary confinement when my captors offered to release me. I knew why. If I went home, they would use it as propaganda to demoralize my fellow prisoners. Our Code said we could only go home in the order of our capture, and there were men who had been shot down before me. I thought about it, though. I wasn’t in great shape, and I missed everything about America. But I turned it down.
A lot of prisoners had it worse than I did. I’d been mistreated before, but not as badly as others. I always liked to strut a little after I’d been roughed up to show the other guys I was tough enough to take it. But after I turned down their offer, they worked me over harder than they ever had before. For a long time. And they broke me.
When they brought me back to my cell, I was hurt and ashamed, and I didn’t know how I could face my fellow prisoners. The good man in the cell next door, my friend, Bob Craner, saved me. Through taps on a wall he told me I had fought as hard as I could. No man can always stand alone. And then he told me to get back up and fight again for our country and for the men I had the honor to serve with. Because every day they fought for me.
I fell in love with my country when I was a prisoner in someone else’s. I loved it not just for the many comforts of life here. I loved it for its decency; for its faith in the wisdom, justice and goodness of its people. I loved it because it was not just a place, but an idea, a cause worth fighting for. I was never the same again. I wasn’t my own man anymore. I was my country’s.”
Reform: 1.the improvement or amendment of what is wrong, corrupt, unsatisfactory, etc.: social reform; spelling reform.
Change: 1.to make the form, nature, content, future course, etc., of (something) different from what it is or from what it would be if left alone: to change one’s name; to change one’s opinion; to change the course of history.
From Dictionary.com
There is a difference in the promise of a change versus the promise of a reform. First, a reform ticket acknowledges the good of the initial structure, and seeks to route out what has corrupted it. The promise of change simply says things will be different; possibly better, possibly worse, but definitely different. Change lacks specifics, reform seeks the goal of fixing the problems. While reform includes some change, the basic promise differs, and this is evident in the two campaigns. The Obama campaign promises to be different than President Bush. Different how? In party affiliation, in political philosophy, a broad sweeping promise to not be ‘him’. However, the McCain campaign says through reform they’ll fix Washington. Washington is ‘broken’, but it is not inherently bad. The government structures of America are quite remarkable, however, with power comes corruption and the McCain/Palin ticket seeks to rectify problems of waste and corruption. The ‘reform mantle’ take a sliver of the ‘change argument’ and focus it on specifics. The idea of change is often appealing, but change can be good and it can be bad. Simply promising not to be ‘that guy’ is not concrete plan for what type of change one seeks.
Well it’s a new day! Mayor Guiliani and Governor Huckabee are angered by the main stream media’s sexism towards Governor Palin, and Gloria Steinem is belittling the experience of the first ever female Republican VP nominee.
Mayor Giuliani’s Convention Speech, “How dare they question whether Palin will have enough time to spend with her children while vice president? When do they ever ask a man that question?”
“Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee on Thursday accused the mainstream news media of engaging in “shocking” sexism in its coverage of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as the GOP’s new vice presidential nominee.”
Gloria Stienem, “This isn’t the first time a boss has picked an unqualified woman just because she agrees with him and opposes everything most other women want and need.”
What’s troubling with Ms. Stienem’s postition is two fold. First, she’s undermining the Republican’s #2 for lack of experience when the Dems #1 has the thinnest resume of any Presidential nominee in history. Second, she’s determining what is important to all women. Yet again, all that is supposed to matter to women is equal pay legislation (which many believe is ineffective) and the issue of choice. National security, energy, health care, foreign policy, all apparently not issues for women.
On the other hand, two political figures who no one would have predicted becoming champions of women’s rights are calling the media on their bizarre obsession with Governor Palin’s family life. The media’s double standard has been so blatant that people across the political spectrum (with the possible exception of a handful of people way to the left) are telling the media to knock it off and focus on issues.
The remarkable side story to this year’s presidential election is how useless this Congress has become. Representative Dr. Michael Burgess of Texas estimates the actual days that the Congress will be in session before the November election is between 10-20 days. Senator Mitch McConnell is disturbed by the number of circuit court judge vacancies there are because Congress refuses to hold confirmation hearings. Dr. Burgess believes the only piece of legislation that may be addressed before this election is the Columbia Free Trade agreement, as the Dems don’t want to see the first possible piece of legislation to go before an Obama presidency to be a free trade agreement, as Senator Obama position on free trade has been muddled.
Differences in positions are part of the deal in Congress, but refusal to work or hold hearings is irresponsible. Speaker Pelosi has refused to hear the House energy bill, which has support with both conservatives and moderates as it takes a ‘do everything’ approach to help produce more energy, reducing gas and oil prices. As Dr. Burgess stated the Democratic leadership does not want to see any new laws passed that might make the Bush administration look good. Therefore, they stick the American people for their own political gain. Last session was known as the ‘Do nothing’ Congress, but as Dr. Burgess pointed out this has been the least effective Congress in recent history, and has taken on the moniker of the ‘Please do something’ Congress.
“I’m very proud to have introduced our next Vice President to the country. But I can’t wait until I introduce her to Washington. And let me offer an advance warning to the old, big spending, do nothing, me first, country second Washington crowd: change is coming.”
On solving problems in Washington:
“The constant partisan rancor that stops us from solving these problems isn’t a cause, it’s a symptom. It’s what happens when people go to Washington to work for themselves and not you.
Again and again, I’ve worked with members of both parties to fix problems that need to be fixed. That’s how I will govern as President. I will reach out my hand to anyone to help me get this country moving again. I have that record and the scars to prove it. Senator Obama does not.”
On love of country:
“I fell in love with my country when I was a prisoner in someone else’s. I loved it not just for the many comforts of life here. I loved it for its decency; for its faith in the wisdom, justice and goodness of its people. I loved it because it was not just a place, but an idea, a cause worth fighting for. I was never the same again. I wasn’t my own man anymore. I was my country’s.”
House Republican leadership laid out their plan for a ‘do it all approach’ to energy. They’re upset Nancy Pelosi isn’t allowing a vote on on their bill, which includes drilling, nuclear, coal, renewables, etc.
