Roger Ebert on John McCain, personally
Often people talk about how the election is just as much about which guy you “like” as it is about the issues. Now, obviously I think people had better pay attention to the issues, as well as the actual voting records and real-world experience of the candidates (if one more person tells me the Republican ticket this year is in any way pro-woman, I will whop them with the heaviest object at hand); but I also see nothing wrong with a little “going from the gut”. The gut is often quite sensible, even if it’s not obvious why.
That said, here’s someone (Roger Ebert) who doesn’t mind explaining exactly why his gut lands where it does, and who, in doing so, offers a good example of what to look for in a “good guy”. As my mom used to say (usually about guys I was dating), “Someone who is nice to you but mean to the waitress is not a nice person.” And she was right, too.
I do not like you, John McCain. My feeling has nothing to do with
issues. It has to do with common courtesy. During the debate, you
refused to look Barack Obama in the eye. Indeed, you refused to look at
him at all. Even when the two of you shook hands at the start, you used
your eyes only to locate his hand, and then gazed past him as you shook
it.
Obama is my guy. If you are rude to him, you are rude to me.
If you came to dinner at my house and refused to look at or speak with
one of my guests, that would be bad manners and I would be offended.
Same thing if I went to your house. During the debate, you were
America’s guest.
What was your problem? Do you hold this man in
such contempt that you cannot bear to gaze upon him? Will you not even
speak to him directly? Do you think he doesn’t have the right to be
running for President? Were you angry because after you said you
wouldn’t attend the debate, he said a President should be able to
concern himself with two things at the same time? He was right. The
proof is, you were there. Were you angry with him because he called
your bluff?
During the debate, Jim Lehrer repeatedly called upon
both candidates to speak directly to each other. Obama looked at you.
He addressed you as “John,” which as a fellow senator is his privilege.
His body language was open. You stared straight ahead, or at Lehrer, or
into space. Your jaw was clenched. You had a tight little smile, or a
grimace, or a little shake of your head.
I had to do two things
at once while watching the debate. I had to listen to what was being
said. And I had to process your rigid and contemptuous behavior. If you
were at a wedding and the father of the groom refused to look at or
speak to the bride, how would that make you feel? Especially if you
were the father of the bride?
You made a TV commercial
showing the moments Obama agreed with you. Everybody knows he did. Did
his agreement show honesty, or weakness? It is significant that you
said it proved he was not ready to lead.
What is the better
leadership quality: (1) Willingness to listen to your opponent, and
keep an open mind? (2) Rigidly ignoring him? Which of the two of you
better demonstrated the bipartisan spirit you say you represent? Was
there anything he said that you agreed with? Could you have brought
yourself to say so?
I’m not the only one who noticed your odd, hostile behavior. Just about everybody did.
I’m sure many of your supporters must have sensed the tension. Before
the debate, pundits were wondering if you might explode in a display of
your famous temper. I think we saw that happen, alright, but it was an implosion. I have instructed my wife to exclude you from any future dinner parties.
Oh, me too, Roger. ;)
Thanks (again!) to jblaque for the coolosity.