Leaving A Man Behind

by dday

When Phil Gramm called the United States a “nation of whiners,” despite the controversy and John McCain’s claim that he would now be up for Ambassador to Belarus you absolutely knew that he would be back on the campaign trail and in McCain’s inner circle in a matter of weeks. This has nothing to do with McCain, it’s part of the axiom that there is nothing a true conservative can do to get thrown overboard. Gramm wasn’t rejected, he was expressly defended by a host of right-wing pundits (“Technically, being that we haven’t exactly seen two consecutive quarters of negative growth, those half a million workers who have lost their jobs ARE whiners!”), and after a brief cooling-off period, he returned right back where he started:

But associates say the senator still dials up former Senator Phil Gramm of Texas, who forfeited his title of campaign co-chairman after a controversy over his remarks that the United States is “a nation of whiners” and is merely in “a mental recession.”

Current and former advisers say they still consider Mr. Gramm, now UBS investment bank vice chairman, a top prospect for treasury secretary in a McCain administration.

Consider the contrast between the Gramm resurrection and Wesley Clark’s situation. I hate to make an equivalence between Gramm’s asinine remark and Clark’s perfectly acceptable and rational one, but both generated controversy, such that it is, and the reaction to that controversy from both parties reveals something profound: conservatives rally around their own, while Democrats are fearful and have no problem dropping them.

General Wesley Clark is not attending the Democratic National Convention. I was told by General Clark’s personal office in Little Rock that he would not be attending.

Clark was informed by Barack Obama’s people that there was no reason to come.

General Clark has been given no role of any kind at the convention.

Rubbing salt in the wound even more, the “theme” of Wednesday’s Democratic convention agenda is “Securing America.”

(I don’t think we totally know what happened behind the scenes here, Clemons’ report has shifted once or twice, but clearly the Obama team didn’t exactly welcome Clark to Denver, although there’s still time to make room for him.)

This is the difference between a party that stands for something and one that stands for nothing. I find the “something” Republicans stand for to be abhorrent, but Gramm certainly spoke a truth as conservatives see it, and while it appalled a lot of people, the party wasn’t going to excommunicate him for it. When Clark says, correctly, that getting shot down in Vietnam is not a qualification for President per se, Democrats get nervous, so worried are they of being perceived as disrespectful of the military (but not of NATO Supreme Allied Commanders, I guess), that they tell him to take a walk.

The worst part of this is that this is a nation of second chances and short-term memories. Marv Albert still commentates for the NBA, fercryinoutloud. Democrats are always playing this game eight or nine steps ahead for no reason. You don’t have to necessarily stand by a prominent surrogate no matter what, but the first instincts here are obviously completely different.

If John McCain wants Phil Gramm to be the compassionate face of conservative America, I’m all for it. But this is really about a party caring for their own. Once again, Democrats have let fear rule them.

.