SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home And This Is Bad?

THE PLANK JULY 2, 2008

And This Is Bad?

BY JAMES KIRCHICK

Thad Cochran recounts a 1987 meeting between a Senate delegation and Nicaraguan Sandinistas:

The atmosphere was tense, as the U.S. was pressing "pretty hard." Cochran noticed a disturbance at the meeting table in a room lined with armed personnel.

"McCain was down at the end of the table and we were talking to the head of the guerilla group here at this end of the table and I don't know what attracted my attention," Cochran said. "But I saw some kind of quick movement at the bottom of the table and I looked down there and John had reached over and grabbed this guy by the shirt collar and had snatched him up like he was throwing him up out of the chair to tell him what he thought about him or whatever. I don't know what he was telling him but I thought, good grief, everybody around here has got guns and we were there on a diplomatic mission. I don't know what had happened to provoke John but he obviously got mad at the guy and he just reached over there and snatched him."

--James Kirchick

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 22 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

22 comments

He was telling the guy to stay off his lawn.

- mghogwild

July 2, 2008 at 12:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well...yeah, Jamie, it is bad. Just because the guy he got riled up about happened to be a Sandinista doesn't mean that it was okay to physically threaten someone on a diplomatic mission. That really doesn't speak well for McCain.

- benjamin81

July 2, 2008 at 12:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yes, James, it is bad. The word for people who admire a leader for his willingness or ability to beat people up is "fascist." Are you a fascist, James? If so, then of course you would admire McCain for beating up a bad guy. If not, then you would expect the representative of a free people to be able to control his violent urges. Simple as that.

(And I'll stipulate that I kind of approve of McCain roughing up a Sandinista, too, but I also have the self-awareness to recognize that my emotions do not always reflect my better values, and that my values are the higher standard. Again, a difference between a fascist and a non-fascist, since fascism is about substituting emotional satisfaction for reasoned values, while freedom and self-government require us to set and hold ourselves to reasoned standards that transcend immediate emotional satisfaction.)

Further question: If Barack Obama beat up Joe Lieberman, would Kirchick approve of that too? Or does he only fetishize personal violence by conservatives? And while we're on the subject of whether it was a good thing for McCain to rough up a Sandinista, we judge the actions of leaders by outcomes, not the moral consistency or purity of their intentions. So: What, exactly, did McCain roughing up a Sandinista accomplish? If the action cannot be shown to have produced a real benefit to the United States or to American interests, then the action was, objectively speaking, bad.

- rhubarbs

July 2, 2008 at 12:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yes, it is bad, you contemptible troll.

- chrismealy

July 2, 2008 at 12:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yep, thats bad.

Manhandling someone you're meeting with on a diplomatic mission, in a room full of armed folk = bad. Reckless, irrersponsible, inappropriate, whatever you wanna call it.

- jobeek2

July 2, 2008 at 12:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

and it kinda figures into the non-diplomatic approach to international relations that's been the norm for the last eight years.

- scire

July 2, 2008 at 12:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yes, dumbass, this is a bad thing. Diplomacy involving sitting senators only involves fisticuffs in the movies.

- Barnacle

July 2, 2008 at 12:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

TNR: if you're going to have a token conservative on here, at least get a clever one...

- prnoonan

July 2, 2008 at 12:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Someone in the midst of negotiation who goes all Rottweiler on his opponent is just as ineffective as someone who rolls over and plays the submissive puppy. Both are slaves weakened by their own instincts and thus easily manipulated, while of limited utility for all but the simplest tasks.

Dogs, regardless of breed, will always follow and will never lead those of superior intellect (human beings). Let us remember that when Pavlov rang his bell, it was not Pavlov who did the salivating.

Negotiating with the enemy: seems like an important task. Which shall we employ as the negotiator: a dog or a human being? Decisions, decisions...

[Oh, I just remembered that Lenin was a fan of Pavlov, and thus my above analogy must be bereft of validity, in that Lenin was BAD and, hence, Pavlov must have been BAD, too. Sorry, my mistake...]

[And for those who think that I am being unfair to McCain--that I am comparing him to a dog--you need to go back to the author of the post, who described McCain only in dog-like terms--i.e., going for the throat. If the author wishes to describe McCain in human-like terms, then I'm willing to respond within the context that McCain is in fact a human being and not a dog. Until then I must take what I'm given.]

- williamyard

July 2, 2008 at 12:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Jamie, don't you think it's a comtempible smear to insinuate that McCain has a temper?  Isn't it a below-the-belt punch to suggest that there are any flaws in his character?  Isn't it true that only Obama and his detestable minions engage in character assasination, while the noble McCainiacs dish out only truth?  Or did I dream what I read in Politico?

- drwohl

July 2, 2008 at 12:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I agree with the (apparent) consensus, that was a bad move.

However, I can understand the point of view of those who would consider "appeal to might" a valid negotiating tactic, especially if the diplomacy is touching on issues of national or international security.

What is not conveyed in the story so far is the impression this action left on the Sandinistas; did their overall approval of the delegation improve or decline, and why? Also, we don't know what they guy said to rile McCain; I would not be the least surprised if their "diplomat" had been "talking tough", probably regarding martial prowess, or perhaps the size of their guns. In this case, I can give McCain a pass for the seeming violation of the rules of conduct in order to counter their "diplomats" assertions.

- GSpinks

July 2, 2008 at 1:03pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

A "Clever Conservative"? Now THERE is an oxymoron if ever there was one (sorry, but Army Intelligence loses its place as #1 if rumors of social scientists entering service are true).

- GSpinks

July 2, 2008 at 1:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Does McCain speak Spanish? I also doubt that the Sandinista speaks good English either. Let me also add that Nicaraguans are on the small side, McCain is only 5.8 and he lifted the guy up so it wouldn't surprise me if the guy was like 5 feet or so. What next, will McCain have a confrontation with mini-me? (not Kirchick, I am talking about Vern Traynor)

Yes, of course it is bad. He risked the lives of everyone there to act tough against a smaller man.

I remember Republicans used to say Commies would never hold free elections either, so the Republicans were completely wrong about that as well.

- blackton

July 2, 2008 at 1:10pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

McCain would make a great president if he were willing to talk with our enemies.  Imagine him roughing up Ahmadinejad; Iran would then proceed to dismantle their nuclear facilities in a hurry.

- davidsmith192

July 2, 2008 at 1:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Quite apart from McCain's muscular diplomacy, In general it was a pity that the Nicaraguans ended up on the opposite side from the U.S. during the 1980s.  The Sandinistas had actually removed a bloodthirsty dictator, Somoza, and tried to establish something like a fair social order in place of the criminal chaos that had reigned.  There were communist elements in the government, but they didn't really get the upper hand -- there wasn't really a command economy (they didn't want to be a second Cuba) and there was a great deal of press freedom in Nicaragua.  Enough, indeed, that the U.S. was able to massively influence the 1990 elections that led to the Sandistas' defeat.

- ironyroad

July 2, 2008 at 1:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Was Cochran trying to help his shipmate (McCain) by recounting that story to the paper? If so, why? Mississippi will most certainly go for McCain.  And, anyway, MCCain is a vet and a former POW, so why should he need mote tough guy street cred?  Or is this just more red meat for, you know, those people. I can hear'em now: "Yeah, that's what we need more of Ma, poleeticians who kick ass, Dadgummit! That's how you get things done in the world. Beat up everybody."

- tec619

July 2, 2008 at 1:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

So we want a leader who is impulsive and unpredictable across the table from adversaries who think three and four moves ahead...or like the Chinese, who think twenty-three moves ahead? We really can't let go of the John Wayne mythology can we? Reagan, Bush, now McCain. Has anyone learned anything from the debacle created by Tommy Franks and Rumsfeld? All bluster, no brains.

- fougasseu

July 2, 2008 at 1:42pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

OK, first, it was 20+ years ago.  It isn't good, but jeez.

Second, YGBSM with ANY reference to those far-sighted Chinese.  Their far-sightedness then must explain how they've got about 37 million more young men than young women in China, based on the one-child policy, and the predilection for males over females.  This is and will remain a serious social problem. Not to mention the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. Yeah, 23 moves ahead, no doubt.

- butchie b

July 2, 2008 at 3:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

How is it anything but bad? How is it good? How?

- psantillana

July 2, 2008 at 4:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I don't know about this being bad. I mean, consider the year: 1987. You'll notice that this is merely two years before the collapse of the Berlin Wall. Am I wrong to detect causality? McCain showed that Commie he was tough, tough as nails! Comintern probably started gossiping about this tough senator who showed how tough America was. This gossip probably caused Commie resolve to collapse, which is how we won the cold war. Conservatives might find this history inconvenient, as McCain seems to be intruded on Reagan's commie-fighting turf, the turf of Glory!

- skipper2379

July 2, 2008 at 4:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Jamie, you're like our own Joe Lieberman.

Yes, this is obviously bad.  If it were a planned strategy, fine, but there's no indication of that.  As it is, it is just a man with such a bad temper that he can't control it even in a diplomatic setting.  That's what is known a  "character flaw."

- s-kamin

July 2, 2008 at 6:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Jamie, McCain has denied the story:

politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/.../mccain-denies-grabbing-foreign-official

I just wish Sen. McCain had said:

"I did not have fisticuffs with that man, Mr. Ortega."

- Barnacle

July 3, 2008 at 11:53am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close