Kiner's Korner: "Game Change" On a Personal Level

In the world of politics I like to think that there are two kinds of people. There are the "me" candidates who run for office to satisfy their own ends. And then there are the "us" candidates, who run with the goal of helping us, the community. The movie "Game Change" on HBO highlighted the two differences. There was the "us" candidate, John McCain, statesman and war hero, who truly wanted the best for our country. There was also Sarah Palin who was characterized more as the "me" candidate who believed the campaign and election was more about her.

I watched the movie Game Change on HBO last night. It is a portrayal of the McCain-Palin campaign of 2008. You really don't have to be a political junkie to enjoy this movie. The  story line is based on a book by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin. The three major characters in this portrayal are John McCain (played by Ed Harris), Steve Schmidt (played by Woody Harrelson) and Sarah Palin (played by Julianne Moore).

John McCain is portrayed as a man who like us, has his faults. He knew, as did Republican strategist Steve Schmidt that a "game changer" was needed to win the 2008 election. Though he must have understood, as did Steve Schmidt, that the 5 day vetting process of Sarah Palin hardly scratched the surface of her background, the campaign was desperate to accept someone who could be a "game changer" and turn the election around. A man like John McCain was not ignorant of the potential pitfalls of bringing Palin onboard. I believe that he merely turned a blind eye to those problems and hoped for the "Hail Mary" to work. McCain, at this point, was behind Obama in the polls by double digits.

Senator John McCain is portrayed as a descent person. To salvage the campaign, McCain's staff wanted the Senator to go negative and urged Senator McCain to use Obama's relationship with  Minister Jeremiah Wright. The idea of racism was repugnant to the Senator. Using Obama's friendship with Bill Ayers, "the homegrown terrorist" however, was on the table.

In the eyes of McCain's two top advisers, Palin was not ready for the big time. Her knowledge of history and current events was lacking. She had no idea why President Bush attacked Iraq (she thought it was in retaliation for 9/11). She thought that the Queen of England was the head of government (it's the prime minister)  The list goes on.

But I am not writing this article just as a critique of the movie. I'd like to highlight something more appropriate for this column.

When Sarah Palin was approached to join the McCain campaign, she was told that everything in her family's history would be fair game for the media. The questions raised to Sarah were (1) was there anything that the McCain campaign should know about Palin and her family, and (2) could she accept the fact that the media would look into every detail of her life and that of her entire family as well? Palin had no problem with putting her family out there for the world to see and to disparage. That is what I consider to be her most major weakness.

Look, maybe she didn't do well in high school civics and current events. Perhaps she didn't read the papers or watch MSNBC or FOX news. There would always be time to learn the facts and bone up on issues. What I find most objectionable was allowing her children to pay the price for her own stardom and for her own political desires.

She knew that her 17 year old unmarried daughter, Bristol, was 5 months pregnant, and yet she still went ahead with her quest for political office. At a time like this families come together, quietly, and become a source of strength for each other. Palin knew that  Bristol's pregnancy would be pounced on by the media. How could she not understand that?

Growing up as a child of political parents can be very difficult. If children could be kept out a parent's foray into politics, it would be great. It doesn't often happen.

Bristol's case certainly was exceptional. Her mother should have known better and not have subjected her to the ridicule that followed. Parents who serve in elective office tell us they do so to benefit their community-I'll accept that. But what about benefitting the family? If one has to determine priorities, it's really a no brainer - it's the family that must and should always be the priority.

Look, I am not naive. No one running for elective office "walks on water". No one is completely without fault. We all have our faults. But, a mother or father, has to look at their children (especially if they are young)  and ask themselves "is there anything in the family background that could potentially hurt our children if we do run". Kids, after all,  can be awfully mean to each other.

It's a tough decision for a parent to make. Sarah Palin made her decision. I think it was a wrong one.