Vice President Choice - Yes It Matters

Last week, John McCain introduced his choice of a running mate to the American People. Someone out of everyone’s radar screen, a political unknown from Alaska. A female on the Republican ticket for the first time. There is no question that her very newness has moved the spotlight, and her acceptance speech has generated cohesion and excitement in the diminishing Republican Party’s base of voters. But over the next weeks after the celebrity attention wears off, and the lens of detailed inquiry clarifies the focus, what has truly emerged here?

The short answer is that we see the continuation of raw and blatant politics, packaged up in the Karl Rove “spin and big lie” marketing tactics. If “experience” has been John McCain’s claim on the presidency, then how does his VP choice stack up to that? To wit:

· Fresh faces can be refreshing. But only if they bring something new to the fore. A new face on an old package will be seen through very quickly.
· Based upon her pronouncements and her record, former Buchannan-for-president supporter Palin’s politics are to the right of even George Bush! Be it energy policy (drill and drill some more), fiscal policy (more high salary tax cuts), anti-abortion (not even allowed for rape and incest, nor are individual “decisions” allowed --- even for her daughter). I expect more of these positions will continue to be detailed by others over the next weeks.
· The length and nature of her political and governmental experience are frankly laughable vis-à-vis becoming the #2 leader of this nation. What is even more sadly laughable is watching McCain campaign and honorable Republican officials squirming to try to convert that non-experience into something believable. Service in the PTA and mayor of 9000 people is creditable public (or community organizing!) service, but it hardly makes one specially qualified for the #2 national office.
· Neither does being the civilian leader of the Alaska National Guard make one a military leader. The real role of our national guards has been to provide local and humanitarian support, not a true military function. In their present service as part of the Iraq military force, however, they are totally subsumed to the US Department of Defense --- the governors are non-players. Sarah’s son going into military service may provide her with an empathy toward the difficulties faced by military families, but it will not provide any insight into managing the role of that military.
· Foreign affairs experience requires one to have experience with the needs and concerns of foreign nations and their leaders. Simply “living in a state next door to Russia” does not give any special insight into the conduct of foreign affairs, which requires dealing with over 175 countries which do not border Alaska. As one commentator said, “Saying that living next to Russia gives someone foreign policy experience is like saying that living next to Lake Michigan makes me a catfish!”
· If her gender is supposed to attract a new female vote, that does not seem to be working out. Her extreme domestic positions, once better known, will never pull over the Hillary voters. By several polls already, working mothers and traditional-mom Republican women are not necessarily supportive of her “5 kids with new baby + vice president” ambitions. She complained last spring about Hillary playing the “gender card” when complaining about the attacks on her, and said that she should be tough enough to play with the big boys, yet now any complaints on Sarah are “inherently sexist and unfair.” You can’t play it both ways.

I would normally agree with Obama and McCain that “family is off limits for political discussion.” But when your role as “mom” is presented as a qualification for the job (versus simply being a biographical line item), AND when as governor you line-item veto funding for sex education programs, then in that instance what happens in your own back yard thereby becomes a topic of legitimate discussion.
· So then we come to her acceptance speech. It was easy to see why many in Alaska like her, and probably many others in America who embody western frontier self-reliance and feisty take-‘em-on politicians. The self-described shotgun-toting moose-burger reformist proved this image true on that night. Except that she also showed a continuing sarcasm and insulting denigration to her opponent and people of different beliefs, while she conveniently made NO mention of her own political beliefs. She was able to talk at length about the only one issue with which she has apparent knowledge (oil energy). Then she lied about Obama’s tax proposals and her sale of the governor’s airplane (yes she listed it on E-Bay, but it didn’t sell and was subsequently sold privately). She further managed to completely skip over her being the object of a legislative investigation in Alaska about her ethical conduct.

All I saw in her speech was the specter of 4 (8?) more years of stalemate government in Washington, with continued bitter and ugly partisan battling. A naive in-your-face outsider reformer will be eaten alive by the Washington power structure, virtually assured to be Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress. It takes compromise and good working relations with respectful goodwill to bring change to the mini-kingdoms of Washington, D.C. Sarah Palin’s style of meat-ax combat may work in Alaska for a time, but will bring neither change nor benefit to the American public.

So is it reasonable to question Governor Palin’s positions and experience with respect to her being a potential vice president? Yes, given that a) it substantively consists of only 1.5 years as an isolated governor, preceded by typical introductory community activities and positions that can be attributed to millions of other Americans, and b) her positions are so out of sync with millions of voters. John McCain and his team profess shock that her background is being questioned by the national press and American public, such that he cancelled a Larry King interview because of a CNN reporter’s tough questions to a senior McCain aide about Palin’s experience. The real shock is that McCain and company were so unrealistic to believe that they could spring a complete surprise on a voyeur American public and not expect all of this snooping and grilling to roar forward. It is reflective of the same disdain of “the public’s right to know” that we have witnessed these past 8 years.

Someone recently asked me, “So does the VP choice really matter? Isn’t it really all about the presidential candidates and what they believe?” My answer was, and is, a resounding “No,” that the VP choice matters a lot. For 3 reasons:
1. Other than selecting his campaign team, the VP choice is the first real statement about the kind of people a president will surround him-/herself with. You ultimately elect a governing team, and the many Department Secretaries and policy minions that make up the Executive Branch are as important and consequential as the president. (Think “Brownie, you’re doing a heckofa job!”) Just look at the cast of characters who have come and gone over the last 8 years, where they’ve taken us, and the results of their tenure. Who has John McCain now implied will be the members of his cabinet and advisors?
2. Since Walter Mondale’s VP service to Jimmy Carter, the VP has come to have a very substantial role in Washington. The role has become a true advisor to the president, a key voice in decision-making, and a direct influence over some operational functions. As the past 8 years demonstrates, we need to be very concerned about what advice and input our president is receiving.
3. Since 1841, 7 vice presidents have become president upon a president’s death; another one upon Nixon’s resignation; and under today’s presidential succession/incapacity laws, Wilson’s VP would have ascended to the presidency. On that count, 1 in 5 VPs have had to step into the job. 72-year-old John McCain would be the 6th president since the last succession occurred. This is a real statistical probability.

We not only elect a vice president, we also elect a president-in-waiting. Think a potential President Dick Cheney (the most arrogant and destructive Washington player since Joe McCarthy’s excesses in the 1950s), or even a president Dan Quayle. With all the persons of real talent, experience, and character available in the Republican Party, some of whom were fully tested and vetted by the recent primaries (think Huckabee if you really wanted to appeal to the right wing without having to pick an unknown inflammatory loose cannon), is Sarah Palin really the best choice John McCain could come up with? A person who is now completely under wraps because the campaign refuses to allow her in front of interviewers until they can properly train her for the national stage? Most importantly, what does this first “executive decision” say about John McCain?