The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Campaign Crawlers
Print Email
Text Size

Campaign Crawlers

The Barracuda Bites Back

In last night’s debate, Sarah Palin gives the best interview of her career.

(Page 2 of 3)

I’m no big fan of Katie Couric (see my article of one year ago, “Katie Couric At One Year; Somebody Fire Her” for a nuanced perspective), but I’m especially not a fan when I see someone who has an upside-down journalistic sensibility. You’re supposed to question authority and get an understanding of the common life. A side by side comparison of these interviews shows quite a bit of respect for authority, and a bucket of contempt for common life.

One could not glean from the questions Couric offers that she has any sense of perspective. Citizen-politicians’ stock in trade is more character and aptitude than expertise and political clout. Couric’s used to establishment types. But they’re different animals that should be handled differently, just as it would be strange to ask a man what it’s like to be a woman.

Obama’s been treated as a citizen-politician, for example, but as David Freddoso’s book has shown, he’s far more establishment. If the interviews he’s done treated him that way, he might have fared worse, as he would have had to address the small bits of his career that have raised eyebrows, from Jeremiah Wright onward.

George W. Bush was pitched as a citizen-politician, but the son of a dynastic political family is no such creature. Clinton, in all his conniving and Machiavellian devices, might be considered one. Reagan, whose career was made elsewhere from politics, might be too.

Citizen-politicians are different from populists. They serve because they have a vision, but they understand the limitations of public office. They can be jarring to elites because they lack expertise and provincially (but most times wholesomely) tend to prefer to stay away from the leisure activities of the powerful.

SOMETIMES elites can favor the citizen-politician or the common man image. Thomas Jefferson certainly did, as did Andrew Jackson. When politicians run for office, they go out of their way to show us how they’re just one of us. Jon Grinspan, in an article in the October issue of The American Spectator, discusses how William Henry Harrison defeated Martin Van Buren by deploying hard cider to the masses to show just how down to earth he could be.

It’s puzzling to see, however, that the moment a person does walk onto the stage with that genuine, down-to-earth flair, she’s dismissed as gimmicky and stupid. This is probably because those speaking to her haven’t really tried to talk to someone like her in years. Katie Couric, who is a sort of common fun girly-girl caught up in this thing called a news show, reveals that sensibility when she shrinks from every opportunity to challenge Joe Biden.

When you interview such a person, obviously you don’t do so with a feather duster for a microphone. But if you’re really after the measure of the man (so to speak), you don’t look to nail her on foreign policy stuff that no reasonable person would expect her to know as an Alaskan governor. Would you do that with Bill Clinton in 1992? Would you flunk him if he didn’t have as firm a grasp? One looking for a better sense would ask about past experiences, and allow the audience to glean from the candidate’s past judgment what that candidate might do in the future. Interviews have become an absurd exercise in careerist gotcha moments — they serve more of a political purpose than they do give voters an opportunity to flesh out the views of a candidate.

Hence a senator of 35 years can assert nonsense and avoid a criticism Couric lobbed at Palin, that she was “not always responsive when asked questions,” and sometimes slipping back to talking points. Really, Katie? Hooey. Senator Biden is a politician, as is Governor Palin, and he certainly slips back to talking points because he is a politician. Start with any phrase that begins with, “I’m the guy who…” and you have yourself a talking point. Memorize that.

THE REASON Governor Palin has performed badly up until last night is, by all accounts, because she’s been cramming for a test. What is revealing is not that she had to study, but that her advisers were bulls-eye correct that reporters would quiz her rather than interview her. I would like to think that the idea of “letting Sarah be Sarah” is probably the best strategy (and Thursday night’s debate is a perfect argument for it), but the advisers she has are bright people, particularly aware of how reporters behave. If you put Sarah Palin in an interview with Katie Couric, Couric’s going to use it as an opportunity to show how she’s probably more qualified to be the veep choice. That would be silly, of course, because as it is, she’s barely qualified to be the anchor on CBS. Heck, look at this:

p> object width=”425” height=”344”> param name=”movie” value= “http://www.youtube.com/v/A0xvmYwOwkU&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&fs=1”> param name=”allowFullScreen” value=”true”> embed src= “http://www.youtube.com/v/A0xvmYwOwkU&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&fs=1” type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” allowfullscreen=”true” width= “425” height=”344”>
Page:   12 3  

topics:
Foreign Policy, Trade, Joe Biden, Sarah Palin, Bill Clinton, Business, Law, Supreme Court, Iraq, NATO, Alaska

About the Author

J.P. Freire is a writer in Washington and a former editor at the Washington Examiner and The American Spectator. You can follow him on Twitter @jpfreire.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (5) |

Francesca De Stefano| 10.17.08 @ 11:51PM

Sarah Palin has been the McCain campaign's albatross. The Hillary voters McCain thought he could grab by cynically offering them a woman who could do double duty by appealing to the base saw through the ruse and many of them moved to Barak. And McCain's VP choice made McCain look impulsive, a quality sometimes useful to heroes, not so much to presidents. Blaming the media for Palin's failure to appear to be someone most of the country would have confidence in as possible presidential material is convenient, but fails to recognize Palin's very real limitations. Refusing to answer questions in a debate, and continuing to repeat talking points instead, along with that ridiculous winking behavior, failed to legitimize her in the eyes of the majority of undecided voters.

Related Articles

More Articles by J.P. Freire

More Articles From Campaign Crawlers

http://spectator.org/archives/2008/10/03/the-barracuda-bites-back

ADVERTISEMENT

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

Obama and the IRS: The Smoking Gun?

Jeffrey Lord | 5.20.13

The Inoperative Jay Carney

Jeffrey Lord | 5.23.13

Holding AWOL Obama Accountable

Betsy McCaughey | 5.23.13

Obama's Imbroglios

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. | 5.23.13

Lerner's Plea

Ray V. Hartwell | 5.23.13

Time to Go for the Kill

Peter Ferrara | 5.22.13

Laying Down My Pen

Quin Hillyer | 5.23.13

ADVERTISEMENT