< Back to Front Page Text size +

Convention Perspective: GOP misses anti-terror message slot

Posted by James F. Smith September 1, 2008 04:59 PM

By Peter Canellos, Boston Globe Washington Bureau Chief

ST. PAUL _ As delegates to the Republican National Convention were riveted to TV shots of water lapping over levees, they expressed hope that a potential disaster had been averted on the Gulf Coast and that their own convention could proceed with only the loss of speeches by President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

That may not be much of a loss at all, given the president's very low favorability ratings -- just 28 percent, according to a new CBS News/New York Times poll -- and the fact that Hurricane Gustav gave John McCain a chance to show that he takes natural disasters very seriously.

But the cancellation of Day One of the Republican convention may have a deeper political cost, one that pales in comparison to the potential loss of life on the Gulf Coast but that could have an impact on the presidential race, nonetheless.

Day One wasn't going to look at the Bush-Cheney record in total, but rather at the administration's one big talking point: It's record of protecting the country from another major terrorist attack. This is not only the one aspect of the Bush record that McCain enthusiastically embraces, it's a key part of the party's argument against Barack Obama.

In praising Bush and Cheney, the Republicans hoped to paint Obama as dangerously naive: Too eager to negotiate with hostile regimes, too willing to put excessive concerns about civil liberties ahead of tracking terrorists, and too quick to pull out of Iraq.

The speeches by Bush and Cheney would certainly have rekindled memories of 9/11 and the fears of another attack by Islamic extremists. As in 2004, the president and vice president would have argued that continuing the war in Iraq is a way of fighting back against extremists -- of staying on offense, and never surrendering.

But now the Republicans won't be able to sound those notes nearly as loudly. Other speakers -- such as former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who is scheduled to take the podium tomorrow night, if the convention goes forward -- will try to make these arguments. But the likelihood is they'll be muted by the need to talk about victims on the Gulf Coast, and the attention that the hurricane has placed on domestic concerns.

Tuesday's speakers also include some who don't particularly focus on terrorism, such as former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, who is an evangelical minister, and former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson, whose laid-back persona is ill-suited to any kind of an attack role.

Then, on Wednesday, the party will nominate Alaska Governor Sarah Palin for vice president, and she will offer the usual praise of McCain as a military hero who knows how to keep America safe. But Palin is on the ticket to shore up McCain's domestic credibility, not foreign policy. And her lack of experience makes her unlikely to address fears of terrorism with the forcefulness of Bush and Cheney.

That would leave McCain himself to sound the baleful warnings of another 9/11 -- and he won't hesitate to do so, especially after Obama took him on so directly in Denver last week. But McCain has a lot of other agenda items to cover in his acceptance speech, hoping to present himself as a man capable of rebuilding the economy as well as fighting a war, and of securing home mortgages as well as national safety.

As the choice of Palin indicates, McCain hopes to go toe to toe with Obama as a candidate of change -- offering a more sensible, less intrusive approach to tackling big problems like energy and health care. But national security remains the Republican Party's calling card.

McCain's efforts to show sensitivity to disaster relief, gas prices, housing costs, and other domestic concerns are important only in so far as he can take some of those issues off the table, and win the election on his superior national-security credentials.

But for McCain to win, the nation needs to be focused on overseas threats. Right now, it's not. And the Republican convention, which promised to serve as a reminder of those dangers, has lost its best opportunity to do so.

8 comments so far...
  1. I beg to differ. The majority realizes the expense of the GOP strategy; to execute war plans abroad at all costs; compounding the debt to the grandchildren of the middle class; national debt in the trillions here we come!

    Posted by michael September 1, 08 06:15 PM
  1. Faye Palin, her mother in-law says that the entire family is shocked. "I'm not sure what she brings to the ticket other than she's a woman and a right-wing conservative. Well, she's a better speaker than McCain," Faye Palin said with a laugh. "We don't agree on everything but I respect her passion," she said.

    Being a far right-wing on every issue is what Sarah is. On Sunday August 31, 2008 Pat Buchanan told Chris Matthews that Palin and her husband were his brigadiers in his 1996 presidential campaign. “They attended my fundraiser event in Alaska. She is a terrific gal, she's a rebel reformer." But Democratic Congressman Robert Wexler of Florida lashed out on Saturday at John McCain's choice of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate, accusing her of supporting "Nazi sympathizer" Pat Buchanan, and branding the move an "affront to all Jewish Americans." The National Jewish Democratic Council also issued a statement Saturday saying that McCain's judgment appears "lacking" in choosing Palin.

    Posted by dino September 1, 08 06:48 PM
  1. If Sarah Palin represents family values, then there are two questions for her.
    1,. Why does a woman over fourty, recognizing that downs syndrome skyrockets after that age, not practive birth control. By her inaction, a child is born with a lifetime handicap and someone (not Sarah or her husband) has the task of being a full time parent to this child.
    2. As a staunch conservative, why has she not instilled abstenance only to her own children.
    This is a hyprocite and Americans abideth not a hyporcrite.
    Finally, can anyone imagine this woman sitting across the table from Putin. My God, the idea is chilling.

    Posted by Sally September 1, 08 08:42 PM
  1. Complain about the debt all you want, but when you stop looking so narrow minded, you will see ours is not as bad as other countries. Also, I bet you are trying to compare a nations debt to a typical person, which is stupid.

    Posted by brandon September 1, 08 09:29 PM
  1. Sally,
    1. Are you suggesting that Downs Syndrome children don't deserve to live? Why would someone other than Sarah Palin or her husband be the full time parent to the child?
    2. Conservatives and liberals alike have trouble controlling every action of their teenaged children. Everyone makes mistakes. It is how you deal with the mistakes that shows true character.
    Finally, I'd rather see her sitting across from Putin than Barack Obama - at least she has the courage of her convictions. He doesn't take a stand on anything and he'd give Putin whatever he wanted.
    Thank God the rest of the country doesn't share Massachusetts' warped values.

    Posted by Michele September 1, 08 10:56 PM
  1. McSame was going to lose before he picked Palin, and he is going to lose now, ever bigger.

    Picking a person with no foreign policy experience, makes me wonder if he has already lost his marbles.

    If he hasn't lost them all, by the end of his first term he will certainly have lost several more. and we can't afford to have Palin in the White House.

    Posted by Paul P in MN September 1, 08 11:05 PM
  1. why would the mother in law be shocked...why would sarah palin be shocked...she was pregnant before she was married!!!!!!!!!! she clearly did not instill in her kids a sense of responsibility...or a sense of what it means to be a mother..she was too busy turning into an activist...and one more thing..if she is anti-aortion why would she have amniocentesis...risk to fetus?...her husband's drink driving charge is a nice addition as well..white trash lives outside texas too people...in my view this choice by mccain proves what i have been thinking all along..mccain really is demented...seriously...the man has a plastered phony grin or finger wagging stance 90% of the time..he has no idea what is up or down...you have to pity the republicans a little..arrogance and ignorance...quite the combo..

    Posted by etw September 1, 08 11:07 PM
  1. I think the republicans would do very well at moving to Iraq and governing there.Then they would have a good look at the mess they made. They dont seem to see the mess they made here.

    Posted by A Vet September 2, 08 12:23 AM
add your comment
Required
Required (will not be published)

This blogger might want to review your comment before posting it.

About political intelligence Field reports from Boston Globe reporters and editors covering the 2008 presidential campaign and the national maneuvering of Bay State politicians.

Send your comments to masspolitics@globe.com

archives

browse this blog

by category