Back from the Dead?

By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, September 7, 2007 7:14 AM

We knew that the punditocracy would be all atwitter about Fred Thompson's star turn with Leno while yet another lackluster debate between eight white guys quickly faded from memory.

And yet the loudest buzz out there has been about . . .McCain.

That's right, Senator John McCain (R-Toast), written off by the journalistic establishment as a pathetic shell of his former self, his poll numbers plunging along with his fundraising, is suddenly winning plaudits.

Maybe, just maybe, the media mob was too quick to toss dirt on his political coffin.

Clearly, McCain made plenty of mistakes this year, spending too much money and trying to run everywhere until he wound up firing most of his staff. Now the Arizona senator is running a bare-bones operation, with no TV ads, limited to Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. And McCain has always been a guy who ticks off part of the Republican base with a maverick streak that, in his last White House run, attracted a healthy contingent of independents and Democrats.

What the prognosticators seem to have forgotten is that in an age of terror, McCain clearly has the most military and foreign policy experience. He has a heroic life story, having suffered through 5-1/2 years in a Vietnamese prison camp. He is saddled with his unflinching support of the Iraq war, but the war still enjoys considerable Republican support. And McCain has the knack of seeming to stand for something, even to people who disagree with him on key issues.

Will one strong debate performance change the dynamic of a campaign that now includes the Fredheads' favorite candidate? Who knows? But the people in that Fox focus group sure seemed to like McCain, and sure seemed not to like Rudy, the national front-runner. And remember, in the fall of 2003, how the national press had largely written off John Kerry?

Christian Broadcasting's David Brody sounds like a McCainiac:

"John McCain may have been left for dead a month ago when his campaign imploded but in New Hampshire, he roared back with a strong debate performance where he highlighted his military service, honor and leadership credentials . . .

"McCain looked like a very strong commander in chief. He had a game plan going in to let people know he's the man to lead in Iraq and beyond and if the military surge keeps working and political reconciliation begins to take hold, he may be in a position for a comeback.

"Now, as for Mike Huckabee, can someone explain to me why he's NOT in the top tier?"

The Weekly Standard gives McCain two thumbs up, starting with Matthew Continetti:

"Wednesday night's Fox News Channel debate saw McCain reassert his place in the top tier of Republican contenders."

And seconded by Fred Barnes, noting that McCain jumped all over Romney for saying that the surge is "apparently" succeeding:

"John McCain helped himself and Mitt Romney hurt himself. And while Rudy Giuliani was no slouch, he became tedious by droning on about his accomplishments as mayor of New York. The five other Republican presidential candidates didn't matter much . . .

"The alacrity with which McCain went after Romney on Iraq reflected the Arizona senator's view that Romney shades or modifies his position on the war, depending on his audience. After the debate, McCain aides accused Romney of having three different positions on Iraq in four days . . .

"How far McCain went last night in reviving his battered campaign is unclear. A single strong debate performance can't, by itself, resurrect a candidacy. But it can help by guaranteeing McCain more press coverage--and more respectful treatment, at that--and perhaps a bump in the polls that come out almost daily."

At Slate, John Dickerson also gives props to the former front-runner:

"If McCain revives his campaign, his debate performance will be the moment observers seize on as the start of the turnaround . . . McCain took his opportunities to highlight his military and foreign policy experience relative to his opponents--particularly Mitt Romney-- without looking desperate. He was also praised several times by his opponents. Mike Huckabee went on so long about McCain's honor it sounded like the generosity rivals only show each other when one of them is getting out of the race.

" Rudy Giuliani: Perhaps in future debates moderators can find an experience in the human condition which Rudy cannot use as a pretext to talk about an achievement from his tenure as mayor. Time and again Giuliani answered questions with data-laden examples of how he reduced crime or cut taxes that he said proved he was tested and ready . . .

" Mitt Romney: No matter how well you do, when a civilian questioner rebukes you it's a bad night. Romney was on his way to completing a competent if not distinguished performance when a father with a son completing his second tour in Iraq clubbed him. 'I don't think you fully understand how offended my wife and I were and probably the rest of the people who have sons, daughters, husbands and wives serving in the war on terror to compare your son's attempts to get you elected my son's service in Iraq,' he said, nervously. 'I know you apologized a couple days later up there, a firestorm started. But it was wrong, sir, and you never should have said it.'

"Romney, who was already taking heat from McCain for not giving a full-throated support of the surge and whose Iraq answers sounded tentative and unwieldy, had trouble responding. He heaped praise on those who serve but it sounded more like an act of damage control than a response to the father's clear emotion."

National Review's Rich Lowry, not a previous member of the McCain fan club, changes his tune:

"I think McCain won . . . Republicans tend to disagree with him on immigration, the tax pledge, and interrogation, but he scored against Romney on immigration, had a fine answer on the tax pledge, and put his interrogation position in the context of his national security/military experience, which was his real strength. His answers on Iraq and Iran were passionate and deeply informed. It also helped create the impression that he had the upper-hand tonight that Giuliani and Huckabee gave him props three times. Combine all this with the fact that he was relaxed, feisty, and fluid, and it was a strong night for him.

"Rudy was impressive as always. My criticism--like that member of the Luntz group--is that he cited New York so much and in such an over-the-top way (everything he did was 'impossible') that he risked seeming a backwards-looking braggart."

Ed Morrissey has a totally different take:

"John McCain sounded a little passive most of the night, only really coming to life to scold Romney on his hesitation to acknowledge the success of the surge, and on the torture question."

Liberty Pundit is also lss than impressed:

McCain had some good points, as usual, about Iraq and about our foreign policy. Unfortunately for him, I don't think that's going to be enough. He flopped around on the immigration issue, and that hurt. His evasiveness on the tax pledge and on his opposition to the Bush tax cuts also didn't help him, in my opinion."

As for the war, Time's Joe Klein lowers the boom on McCain--and his rivals:

"Watching the Republicans talk about Iraq makes me want to scream. There is absolutely no recognition of the complexities, the difficult choices, the reality there. The most upsetting performance was by McCain, who knows the military and should know better. His granite-skulled insistence that the surge is working, 'absolutely' working--and his attempt to browbeat Romney into agreeing with him--was nothing short of demagogic. The progress in turning the Sunni tribes against Al Qaeda in Iraq is real; Petraeus was wise to see it and take advantage of it . . . But that has practically nothing to do with the 'surge,' which was originally all about pacifying Baghdad through the use of counterinsurgency tactics and creating the 'space' for an Iraqi political resolution.

"Well, Baghdad has been quieter--mostly because it has been ethnically cleaned, with many Sunnis fleeing, and is now largely under the tacit control of Muqtada Sadr's populist movement. . .

. As I reported a few months ago, the shopkeepers and shoppers in Shorja market, where McCain took his famous walk, overwhelmingly support Sadr. McCain never mentions this. He talks 'victory' or 'surrender,' neither of which is an actual possibility here. His unwillingness to talk about the complexities of the situation represents, I believe, a willful misleading of the American public.

"Actually, Romney--confused, constricted, embattled Romney--came closest to being reasonable about Iraq. Beneath the scrambled verbiage and unfamiliar terms--what is a 'support' role?--he seemed to be saying that as soon as we finish off AQI, we should start getting out, leaving Iraq to the Iraqis while maintaining a small regional presence. But he didn't exactly say that...and he allowed McCain to bully him on the surge."

"Rudy Giuliani is out-to-lunch on Iraq in a peculiarly toxic, neoconservative way. His utterly delusional definition of 'victory' is when Iraq joins us in the fight against Islamic radicalism."

What about Thompson? He had to love this NYT headline: "For Thompson, Goal is to Don Reagan Mantle":

"Fred D. Thompson had one central strategic goal as he formally began his presidential campaign on Thursday: to win over conservatives who are disheartened at their current choice of Republican candidates by positioning himself as the ideological and stylistic heir of Ronald Reagan.

"Mr. Thompson is certainly conservative, and has been throughout his public life -- particularly on the question of federalism, the size of government, tax cuts and his unwavering support for the war in Iraq.

"Biographically and stylistically, Mr. Thompson, another former actor trying to become president, recalls the easygoing manner that Reagan used to advocate conservative solutions to the nation's challenges, as he made clear with his announcement speech in Des Moines on Thursday. He spoke of 'common-sense conservative beliefs,' including the notion that 'we still get our basic rights from God, not government.' "

Ah, but here the paper knocks down the premise:

"Yet in some notable ways, Mr. Thompson is different from Reagan . . . Mr. Thompson, the former senator from Tennessee, has at times voted in support of affirmative action, at other times against it; Reagan's Justice Department consistently championed efforts to eliminate it. Mr. Thompson, a former trial lawyer, has voted against efforts to impose federal caps on punitive damages and lawyers' fees, a central part of the conservative agenda."

Thompson wasn't exactly mobbed, says USA Today:

"Fourteen TV cameras jammed the press platform, but the 250 or so Iowa voters in attendance failed to fill the room. Their response to Thompson's conversational, rambling remarks was friendly but not frenzied."

The Chicago Tribune contains its excitement:

"In a speech notable for its lack of verve, Thompson said he has always believed in less regulation, free trade, a market economy and respect for private property rights . . .

"No one really knows what kind of candidate Thompson will be. His months of exploration and testing the waters were rocky, with repeated staff shake-ups, fundraising that fell short of projections and activists' complaints about speeches short on ideas. Republicans who know the former senator have accused him of laziness, a charge his allies rebut."

The Boston Globe underscores the Tennessean's challenge:

"Rival campaigns have already prepared thick dossiers of 'opposition research' chronicling the former Tennessee senator's zigzags on such key issues as abortion rights, immigration, a gay marriage ban, and campaign finance reform . . .

"How he responds to the criticisms, in the form of media scrutiny as well as sniping from rival candidates, will be critical to his viability in coming months."

After 24 hours, we're pronouncing him dead?

"Fred Thompson joined the Republican field yesterday already vying for the lead in one early presidential primary state, but analysts say as a first-time national candidate, he may have entered too late," says the Washington Times.

What happened to the honeymoon?

Politico's Mike Allen lets Freddy's advisers make the case--anonymously:

"Had Thompson missed his window? Has his niche been filled? Some activists complain that he's the cute girl who rebuffs you so long that you lose interest."

According to the Thompson sources, "against rivals who can seem alien, programmed or off-putting, Thompson looks down-home and approachable. He's bald and roly-poly (though slimmer than before), and anything but robotic. At a time when Washington's out, Southern charm looks appealing -- even though he's a former lobbyist who lives in McLean, Va. -- Star power has always made a difference through political history, and even more so in a culture saturated with mass media.

"Thompson advisers say that because of his roles in NBC's 'Law & Order,' the big-screen 'The Hunt for Red October' and other acting gigs ranging from 'Matlock' to 'Die Hard 2,' people recognize his face, even if they don't know the name. 'Once you recognize the face, you're more likely to listen to the voice,' said one of Thompson's longtime advisers. 'It's distinctive. It's Southern. It's homey.'

"Thompson -- from his calm manner to his teddy-bear-like physique -- cuts a soothing persona at a time when polls show that voters are extremely worried about security. 'He's the biggest daddy bear around,' chortled one longtime friend."

And no one would say that on the record?

Are we about to go through deja vu all over again on the Clinton scandals? From the highly conservative WorldNetDaily:

"Kathleen Willey, the woman who says Bill Clinton groped her in the Oval Office, claims she was the target of an unusual house burglary over the weekend that nabbed a manuscript for her upcoming book, which promises explosive revelations that could damage Sen. Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign."

She believes-- shocker--that the mean old Clinton machine was behind the break-in. And the book, it turns out, is being published by the Web site's corporate partner.