Jim Lehrer Read online

  And so the play continues with dialogue based on the real debate itself interspersed with exchanges about various subjects such as beer, peanuts, Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, and an evil witch named Rangda.

  Later, “I” am served a glass of bourbon spiked with cyanide and then covered with gasoline to be burned to death. Kerry joins in the desire to kill the moderator before it’s over.

  But there was a bright side—a happy ending of sorts. According to the stage directions, when the lights dim for the last time at the curtain, “I” am still alive.

  There seemed to be little agreement among reviewers—or even two members of my own family who saw it—about the play’s merits or what exactly the play was about.

  A New York reviewer said it was a play in the tradition of Edward Albee and Samuel Beckett. Another said it was inspired by the Albert Camus novel The Stranger.

  The most memorable review line was: “It’s the longest 90-minute play I’ve ever attended.”

  CHAPTER 7

  Number Eleven

  There is a theory that John McCain lost the 2008 election to Barack Obama at their first presidential debate on Friday, September 26, at the University of Mississippi, Oxford.

  As with Richard Nixon in 1960 and Al Gore in 2000, that conclusion was not based on what McCain said.

  McCain seemed nervous, fidgety, and on edge—at times, like George W. Bush in 2004, he came across as annoyed or semi-angry. He mostly refused even to look at Obama, despite the several invitations from the moderator—me—to do so. Obama, in contrast, came over as cool, relaxed, at ease. And he was more than willing to exchange words as well as looks with McCain.

  The debate took place in an atmosphere that lived up to George H. W. Bush’s “tension city” description. There was not even a possibility of gliding into the personal comfort zone that, after having moderated ten of these debates, I had come to relish—and depend on.

  With two days to go, I was already in Oxford putting the final touches to my questions—and thoughts—about the debate’s agreed-to subject, foreign policy and national security, when the full wind from the financial crisis really hit.

  Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke had proposed to Congress a $700 billion recovery plan a few days earlier. That followed the bankruptcy filing by Lehman Brothers, a leading investment bank. Bear Stearns had already been taken over by J. P. Morgan. Other major institutions—housing giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, insurer AIG—were faltering. Credit was freezing, panic was spreading throughout the markets and the land.

  McCain put his campaign on hold to return to Washington to deal with the situation—and the Paulson-Bernanke rescue proposal. He asked that the Oxford debate with Obama be delayed.

  Obama said he was going to Oxford no matter what.

  It was an easy call for me to quickly conclude that the scary economic developments had to be front and center on the debate, whenever it occurred. Never mind “foreign policy and national security.” But I was no expert on financial matters, so I went on a crash course aimed at becoming comfortable asking such questions of the next president of the United States.

  Another difficult mission was to consider how to deal with the possibility of a McCain no-show.

  Through intermediaries, I was politely reminded that officials at the University of Mississippi and the citizens of Oxford had collected—and spent—several million dollars to prepare the town and the campus for a major national event. Also, several hundred people, including many students, were anticipating the “experience of a lifetime” of being in the live audience for a presidential debate.

  I had been most impressed with how important this debate was to the people of the university and Oxford. The whole community—businesses and faces—were decorated and lit up by what was about to happen. Everyone in Oxford seemed part of the debate preparations and logistics. Kate and I had been provided a spacious apartment in a condominium. We rented a large private residence nearby for the rest of our family.

  There finally came a semi-official plea. In order to save the situation a bit, would I be willing to moderate an Obama-only event of some kind, possibly in a town hall format with questions from students?

  I began a round of consultations by phone with Janet Brown of the debate commission and, in person, with NewsHour executive producer Linda Winslow, who had come to Oxford as my professional “keeper/handler.” Winslow, his longtime deputy, had replaced Les Crystal in both jobs.

  I also spoke repeatedly and compulsively with Kate and our three daughters.

  The principal issue for me was the old-fashioned one of not doing anything that had a whiff of favoring one side over another.

  I wanted to know what the possible fallback positions were if the debate was rescheduled for another day in another city or town? There was also the question of whether the television networks, as well as PBS and the cable channels, would likely carry a solo Obama event. And, if not, what difference would it—should it—make?

  And as I finally drifted off to sleep that night I began to consider how I would handle an Obama-only event. How should the questions from the students be handled? Stand up and ask them with no pre-screening? Write them down beforehand and then I select and read them out loud to Obama? How would that be decided—and by whom?

  My wide-eyed wake-up question that next morning—debate day—was: Is McCain coming or not?

  There was still no word when the family gathered for a walk to and around the town square, four blocks away.

  We went into a men’s clothing store. Whatever kind of event there was to be tonight, I had to carry out the debate necktie ritual. We were admiring the stock of blue-and-reds, in honor of the Ole Miss colors, when somebody in the store yelled out: “He’s coming! I just heard it on the radio! McCain is coming!”

  There will be a debate tonight! Hear ye! Hear ye! Hear ye!

  I probably imagined it, but I swear I could pick up such cheers throughout the land of Oxford and greater Mississippi.

  The only problem for me was that now I had to do it.

  Just before 9 p.m. eastern time I sat at the ready.

  As always, the copy was on a TelePrompTer mounted on a camera that was pointed directly toward me through a slot in the background set of the stage. Black fabric covered the camera to hide my big, bold white-on-black words from the TV or hall audience during the opening shots, particularly when the candidates came in, shook hands, and moved to their positions at the podiums.

  The drill, which we had rehearsed more than once, was that the black cloth would be removed during the countdown just before I was cued to begin.

  In my earpiece, I heard the soft count from executive producer Marty Slutsky: “Ten, nine, eight, seven, six, five, four, three, two … go.”

  The background slit remained black—and blank. Somebody had forgotten to remove the cloth!

  So, in a spurt of heroic, emergency ad-libbing, I said to Americans everywhere:

  “Good evening from the Ford Center for the Performing Arts at the University of Mississippi in Oxford. I’m Jim Lehrer of The NewsHour on PBS, and I welcome you to the first of the 2008 … ”

  I reached for the paper script that was on the desk right in front of me, getting ready to read on.…

  And then the black disappeared. Somebody had finally remembered to remove the cloth. The words came up and I read the rest of the opening on the prompter, thus ending the possibility of another personal crisis in presidential debate history.

  I named the candidates and the commission as sponsors of this and the other debates to come, and said:

  “Tonight’s will primarily be about foreign policy and national security, which, by definition, includes the global financial crisis. It will be divided roughly into nine-minute segments. Direct exchanges between the candidates and moderator follow-ups are permitted after each candidate has two minutes to answer the lead question in an order determined by a coin toss. The specif
ic subjects and questions were chosen by me. They have not been shared or cleared with anyone.”

  I moved on to the opening question but I did so poorly.

  “Let me begin with something General Eisenhower said in his 1952 presidential campaign. Quote, ‘We must achieve both security and solvency. In fact, the foundation of military strength is economic strength,’ end quote.”

  It was a dumb and unnecessary justification for asking about the financial crisis. I also violated my own rules about getting right to the point. The words were barely out of my mouth when I thought about all the times I had shouted through a television screen to a moderator/interviewer, “Just ask the question!”

  Finally, I did so.

  “With that in mind, the first lead question:

  “Gentlemen, at this very moment tonight, where do you stand on the financial recovery plan? First response to you, Senator Obama. You have two minutes.”

  OBAMA: Well, thank you very much, Jim, and thanks to the commission and the University of Mississippi, Ole Miss, for hosting us tonight. I can’t think of a more important time for us to talk about the future of the country.

  You know, we are at a defining moment in our history. Our nation is involved in two wars, and we are going through the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

  And although we’ve heard a lot about Wall Street, those of you on Main Street I think have been struggling for a while, and you recognize that this could have an impact on all sectors of the economy. And you’re wondering, how’s it going to affect me? How’s it going to affect my job? How’s it going to affect my house? How’s it going to affect my retirement savings or my ability to send my children to college?

  So we have to move swiftly, and we have to move wisely. And I’ve put forward a series of proposals that make sure that we protect taxpayers as we engage in this important rescue effort.…

  After a while, it was his opponent’s turn.

  LEHRER: Senator McCain, two minutes.

  MCCAIN: Well, thank you, Jim. And thanks to everybody. And I do have a sad note tonight. Senator Kennedy is in the hospital. He’s a dear and beloved friend to all of us. Our thoughts and prayers go out to the lion of the Senate. I also want to thank the University of Mississippi for hosting us tonight.

  And, Jim, I—I’ve been not feeling too great about a lot of things lately. So have a lot of Americans who are facing challenges. But I’m feeling a little better tonight, and I’ll tell you why. Because as we’re here tonight in this debate, we are seeing, for the first time in a long time, Republicans and Democrats together, sitting down, trying to work out a solution to this fiscal crisis that we’re in.

  And have no doubt about the magnitude of this crisis. And we’re not talking about failure of institutions on Wall Street. We’re talking about failures on Main Street, and people who will lose their jobs, and their credits, and their homes, if we don’t fix the greatest fiscal crisis, probably in—certainly in our time, and I’ve been around a little while.

  But the point is—the point is, we have finally seen Republicans and Democrats sitting down and negotiating together and coming up with a package. This package has transparency in it. It has to have accountability and oversight.…

  When both had finished their two minutes, I spoke again.

  LEHRER: All right, let’s go back to my question. How do you all stand on the recovery plan? And talk to each other about it. We’ve got five minutes. We can negotiate a deal right here.… Do you favor this plan, Senator Obama, and you, Senator McCain? Do you—are you in favor of this plan?

  OBAMA: [speaking directly to me] We haven’t seen the language yet.…

  And he went on to attack the Bush administration’s policies and corporate greed that led to the financial crisis and the failures of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, among other things.

  LEHRER: [to McCain] … you’re going to vote for the plan?

  MCCAIN: [speaking directly to me] Sure. But—but let me—let me point out, I also warned about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and warned about corporate greed and excess, and CEO pay.…

  LEHRER: Do you have something directly to say, Senator Obama, to Senator McCain about what he just said?

  OBAMA: [looking back and forth between McCain and me] Well, I think Senator McCain’s absolutely right that we need more responsibility, but we need it not just when there’s a crisis. I mean, we’ve had years in which the reigning economic ideology has been what’s good for Wall Street, but not what’s good for Main Street.

  And there are folks out there who’ve been struggling before this crisis took place. And that’s why it’s so important, as we solve this short-term problem, that we look at some of the underlying issues.…

  Obama was glancing at McCain, but his answer referred to McCain in the third person.

  “Say it directly to him,” I commanded.

  Still not looking at McCain, Obama said, “I do not think that they [the economic fundamentals] are …”

  “Say it directly to him,” I urged again.

  The formal, written rules for the debate, as negotiated and agreed to by the debate commission and the candidates, included a tricky wrinkle. For the first time in several election seasons candidates would be permitted to address and question each other directly.

  I had assured commission officials that I would make a strong effort to facilitate that interaction, discouraging the then-prevailing practice of candidates mostly speaking only to the television camera or the moderator. I was keeping my promise.

  Talking toward McCain, the next president of the United States did what he was told.

  “Well, the—John, ten days ago you said that the fundamentals of the economy are sound. And—”

  “Are you afraid I couldn’t hear him?” McCain asked, looking right at me.

  The audience laughed—and laughed.

  I was sure the laughs were all directed at me.

  “I’m just determined to get you all to talk to each other. I’m going to try.”

  Rightly or wrongly, I hung in there. A moment later, I asked McCain if he agreed with Obama about something.

  “And if you don’t, tell him what you disagree with.”

  McCain answered, but again he spoke and looked directly back at me—and the camera.

  The pattern held for the remainder of the ninety minutes. While Obama often addressed McCain directly, referring to him as “John,” McCain always looked either at the audience, the camera, or me.

  The word “Barack” never passed his lips.

  I had a feeling sitting there that night that McCain’s refusal to address Obama directly, as well as McCain’s tense body language, would affect the final outcome of the election.

  Two of America’s top political journalists, Dan Balz and Haynes Johnson, came to a similar conclusion. In their 2009 book, The Battle for America, 2008, they called the Oxford debate the campaign’s “turning point.” The contrast between “a cool, composed” Obama and McCain, who “continually dismissed his opponent” and wouldn’t even look at him, made the difference:

  “It wasn’t a knockout, but it seemed to signal the moment when Obama crossed the threshold to answer the ‘is he ready’ question.”

  Is he ready? That, I believe, is the question that underlies most moments of most presidential debates. At Oxford, Obama’s and McCain’s differences on the financial crisis, Iraq, terrorism, et al. were props for the main event—Cool versus Edge. For Kennedy-Nixon and Mondale-Reagan the comparative issue was charm, while human emotions were central to Dukakis-Bush I as was general likability to other encounters, most specifically Bush II against both Gore and Kerry.

  There is a natural follow-up to the “ready” question, of course. How will he/she deal with the unexpected?

  The Soviet Union sends missiles to Cuba. The Vietnam War escalates. Watergate gets covered up. Hostages are taken at the U.S. embassy in Tehran. Iraq invades Kuwait. Impeachment charges are filed. Terrorists fly airliners into U.S.
buildings. Hurricane Katrina hits the Gulf. A deep-water oil rig explodes.…

  Voters watch debates for candidates’ body language and temperament—indications of how candidates might react under pressure, under severe testing. Some answers do come from direct statements about policy. But there were no debate questions in 1960 about Fidel Castro, for instance. And there were none in 2008 about possible threats from gigantic oil spills.

  A speculative thought: Might Bill Clinton have been more careful in his personal life afterward if the women/character issue had been raised with more public force in the 1996 debates?

  THERE HAVE YET to be any purposeful postmortem reflections about the 2008 debates from President Obama or Senator McCain, Vice President Joe Biden or Sarah Palin, the Republican vice presidential nominee.

  Most of what either Obama or McCain has had to say was to reporters or in television appearances right afterward.

  George Stephanopoulos on ABC’s This Week noted to McCain that it seemed as if he was reluctant even to look at Obama during the Oxford debate.

  “I wasn’t,” McCain said. “Of course not.”

  Stephanopoulos asked about commentators who suggested that he was showing disdain for Obama.

  “I was looking at the moderator a great deal of the time. I was writing a lot of the time. I in no way know how that in any way would be disdainful.… I’ve been in many, many debates, and a lot of times I don’t look at my opponents because I’m focusing on the people and the American people that I’m talking to. That’s what a debate is all about.”

  Obama was interviewed by Bob Schieffer on CBS’s Face the Nation. Schieffer said Democrats had suggested McCain was being condescending to him.

  Schieffer asked Obama if he believed that.

  “Well, I think it was a debating trick, which is to essentially keep on asserting that because of my vast years in Washington somehow I’m better qualified to be president. And one of the points that I’ve made consistently in this campaign is that if the length of tenure in Washington is a measure of your wisdom, then people should vote for somebody else. But I think the American people understand that the conventional wisdom in Washington, which John McCain has followed for the last eight years, is exactly what needs to be changed.”