Who Is Meghan McCain
I’m reading some of this coverage of Meghan McCain’s latest thoughts on the direction of the Republican Party and I can’t help but wonder to myself who on earth is Meghan McCain? To the best of my knowledge we’re talking about a young woman who’s never accomplished anything or held a job.
But, you know, before I begrudge the success of a not-clearly-qualified young blogger/pundit I suppose I’d better the insulation on my glass house. So instead I’ll just say that the fact that Meghan McCain is, apparently successfully, launching a career as a political pundit capable of garnering a book deal worth hundreds of thousands of dollars all based on being the daughter of a failed presidential candidate should give people pause about the meritocratic nature of American capitalism. I mean, more power to her. But I’d sleep better at night knowing she’s going to pay a very high tax rate on that book deal, and the money could be put to use giving Pell Grants and health insurance to kids who don’t have multi-millionaire celebrity dads.
79 Responses to “Who Is Meghan McCain”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
April 20th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
She’s currently making more sense than the elected Republican politicians and party leaders, so, there’s that.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Of course, argument by anecdote isn’t decisive. The question is what are the statistics relevant to the U.S.’s meritocracy (or lack thereof).
April 20th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
If you’re going to be the “new voice of the republican party” when someone asks you about the economy, “i dont know much about economics” isn’t a sufficient answer. (By the way, this is what she says on the talk show circuit and she sounds like an idiot)
April 20th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
@1: and she’s less obviously disingenuous than David Frum and David Brooks. And less obviously nerdy than Ross Douthat.
Really, she’s filling a very simple vacuum: people want to see somehow who is verifiably *Republican* nevertheless say things that sound *normal* and *sane*. Conservative intellectuals can’t do it without twisting themselves into sophistical pretzels. So you need a conservative nonintellectual.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
And all this time you thought you were the elite one? No way. Meghan McCain is the Paris Hilton of politics. She will be making all kinds of money and having all kinds of visibility even without the talent. But she did go to Columbia. So there is that.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
If you’re going to be the “new voice of the republican party” when someone asks you about the economy, “i dont know much about economics” isn’t a sufficient answer.
To be fair, her father got to be the old voice of the Republican Party by saying the same thing. Might as well go with what works.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
I agree with El Cid, which makes McCain a less-than-suitable choice for a meritocratic rant.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
This is the consequence of living in a celebrity culture. How large an advance do you think Octomom will get for her book deal?
April 20th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Oh, and anyone who has Laura Ingraham viciously going after her must be doing something right.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
Really, very few book deals are good subjects for a meritocratic rant, because being in the right place at the right time, with the right author photo, is always a huge factor.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
Strangely enough, the song “Hey Jelously” came on the radio just as I read MattY’s post.
Mike
April 20th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
You forgot to mention her Admiral grammpa.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
LEAVE MEGHAN ALONE!!!
April 20th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
Chelsea Clinton’s promotion by self and parents is also unappetising. Ugh all around.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
To be fair, at 24, not knowing economics isn’t that big a deal. When you’re her much older father, and you’re running for president, then it’s much worse.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
True story, and in the interest of bettering the insulation of your glass house I eagerly await you making a powerful statement by selling your condo and donating the proceeds, along with most of your salary, to a soup kitchen and moving into a more sustainable studio apartment. Plus, I mean only Bad People indulge their greed by taking more then they need when they Don’t Need It. It would be such a wonderful way for you to show the serious nature of your commitment to sustainability, luck egalitarianism, and economic temperance!
April 20th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
By the way, and slightly more seriously, I wonder whether or not Matt thinks it is important for there eventually to be a sane and viable “conservative” party in the United States (whatever “conservative” might mean in the future). I certainly do, and so I am unabashedly cheering McCain on to the extent that she is seeking that end.
Accordingly, I hope she produces a decent and popular book on that subject. But maybe Matt would just as soon prefer there was never a sane and viable “conservative” party, so is actively rooting for McCain to fail.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
I think there are plenty of shards and remnants of a serious conservative party or faction in the US — many of the things that turn up in the American Conservative magazine are thoughtful, the fellow who does the Cunning Realist blog, who strikes me as a sensible and thoughtful man, etc. Conservatives needing to rely on Meghan McCain to jump start their movement with a book, that strikes me as weird and a reflection of a fundamental shallowness.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
@17 — Actually, I doubt that MY is that short-sighted.
But I also doubt that he *genuinely* sees this as a meritocratic issue, because he’s got to know how the media works.
He probably calculates (correctly) that this is a topic more likely to get readers’ attention than his 988th post on the urban planning implications of TARP oversight.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:34 pm
Conservatives needing to rely on Meghan McCain to jump start their movement with a book, that strikes me as weird and a reflection of a fundamental shallowness.
I didn’t suggest she would be the only, or the most prominent, person working on this project. But if she can prove persuasive, at least among some Republicans, than I wish her well.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Actually, I doubt that MY is that short-sighted.
I dunno–as yet the guy isn’t a very strategic thinker. But he is young and inexperienced too.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Is this really a persuasive indictment of the meritocratic aspects of capitalism writ large? Does the fact that McCain got a lucrative book deal say anything about, say, the quality of engineers being hired at CH2M Hill? Or Google? Maybe it says more about what passes for quality in the political commentary and publishing industries.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
Otto, I’m not a huge Bill or Hillary Clinton fan, and I’m not aware of anything substantive or interesting Chelsea Clinton has ever accomplished, but your comment is just absurd. There has been no significant political promotion of Chelsea Clinton, by her parents or otherwise. You could perhaps question how much her connections have helped her as she has pursued educational and employment opportunities, but in the political sphere her only involvement has been to stump for her mother, about her mother, in a volunteer capacity, much as was done by the adult children of Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, George W Bush, John Kerry, and Wesley Clark, among others.
Where Meghan McCain (and the daughters of Dick and Lynn Cheney, and for that matter the young George W Bush) stand out is that they are given jobs as political fixers and spokespeople that extend beyond merely speaking to crowds about their parent’s awesomeness and into making, enforcing, and expressing actual policy decisions, and in some cases doing so after the campaigns in question are over.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
this post is bitchy
April 20th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
I agree. Kids with rich and famous parents who get them into places like Harvard where they can then network with other children of the rich and famous and land jobs in the national media based on almost nothing other than connections (rather than, say, the ability to spell or write…just for instance) threaten our dear meritocracy.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
“To the best of my knowledge we’re talking about a young woman who’s never accomplished anything or held a job.”
If that’s good enough to get you elected President of the United States, I don’t see why it wouldn’t be good enough to get you a book deal.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
before I begrudge the success of a not-clearly-qualified young blogger/pundit I suppose I’d better the insulation on my glass house.
You suppose you’d better – what? – the insulation on your glass house.
Maybe the reason she got all that extra money is related to her ability to, you know, spell and write.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:44 pm
I love how Matt writes this post as if he were the Susan Boyle of the punditocracy.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:47 pm
being in the right place at the right time, with the right author photo
…and the right agent.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
I have nothing against Al Franken, who will probably soon be senator and possibly a very good one, but if we are going to elect comedians and political family members[hilary clinton , ted kennedy ect.]or actors like Arnold from california ,then why complain when an articulate young woman simply speaks her mind,especially if she makes more sense than the “proffesianals”. Free speech is for everyone
April 20th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
Free speech is for everyone
Paid speech isn’t, it’s for the lucky, meritorious or not.
April 20th, 2009 at 6:01 pm
Maybe the reason she got all that extra money is related to her ability to, you know, spell and write.
Or at least have the sense to hire a proofreader.
April 20th, 2009 at 6:01 pm
I’ve been enjoying Meghan McCain’s recent surge in popularity. She’s refreshing and Republicans would do well to sit up and take notice. Somebody in the party has to be smart enough and famous enough and all covered in Teflon to say the things she’s saying. Meghan is that outlier. More established mouthpieces who might be thinking along the same lines have to put up with crap from Rush Limbaugh, Hannity et al. Meghan McCain doesn’t give a shit. She’s rich, young, hip, cute, and probably more into Miller Lite than health care reform, but so what? The conservative movement isn’t about details and never has been. It’s about emotional identification and I’d rather see younger conservatives buy into the Meghan McCain model than the Sarah Palin model.
April 20th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
Bummer, I glanced at this post and thought it was about McArdle.
April 20th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
She’s rich, young, hip, cute, and probably more into Miller Lite than health care reform
ITYM Bud Light. Cindy would so not approve of Miller.
April 20th, 2009 at 6:22 pm
But she did go to Columbia. So there is that.
I’m not trying to slight Meghan (I follow her Twitter), but America and its history is full of people who got where they did because they had a very well connected surname.
See our last president, for example.
April 20th, 2009 at 6:32 pm
It’s in matt’s contract that he has to glaringly leave a word out of every post.
April 20th, 2009 at 6:32 pm
Hey, at least Meghan McCain is no less qualified than Yglesias, and a good bit more attractive.
April 20th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
I never understand all these right winger commenters, theoretically in favor of free markets, who feel that Yglesias’s prominence in the blogosphere is in some way unearned or illegitimate. It seems true that Yglesias has benefited in his life from some fairly moderate advantages of privilege (comfortably well-off family, expensive private education, able to get in to Harvard and to go there) and it’s true that he has a fairly cushy gig, but his massive readership, which has resulted in his being recruited by three or four blogging outlets in succession, is entirely the product of his blog – that is, primarily his posts, with assists from his ability to get other bloggers to link to him and maybe even something about his commenters. No-one ever gave him a massive platform and a Presidential campaign’s email list and bookings on cable news shows. For better or for worse, Yglesias has worked hard(ish) for his success as a blogger and has earned it – Hector et al ought to be celebrating his success.
April 20th, 2009 at 7:02 pm
No need to declaim MY of his success, but there was no need of MY to begrudge Meghan Mccain of hers. People achieve various successes or failures in their lives for an infinite number of reasons and only some of them are hard work and talent. Luck, connections, family, timing, the right cologne… its all part of the human experience.
April 20th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
@40Luck, connections, family, timing, the right cologne… its all part of the human experience.
Right. Which brings us back to MY’s apparent point. The fact that so many essentially random factors go into just about anyone’s material success means that higher taxes on the rich used to fund good government services for everyone are a good idea.
April 20th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
D’oh. End italics!
April 20th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
I guess Meghan McCain has stumbled upon a way to deal with the incomptence and stupidity as the Bush Administgration. She has decided to embrace it as a feature instead of a flaw. After eight years of budget deficits and pork barrel spending, Meghan says that the Repulbicans need to increase the spending. After eight years of entitlement increases, say that the Republicans need to support even more unsustainable entitlement growth. After eight years of Republicans support of open borders and unlimited immigration that is now bankrupting states like California, argument that the U.S. should support unlimited amnesty so that there will be 40 million illegal immigrants in a couple of years.
Meghan McCain is willing to support very high taxes, a massive government, unsustainable entitlement spending, and a more invasive government just so she can appear hip to her non-Republican friends.
April 20th, 2009 at 8:29 pm
If that’s good enough to get you elected President of the United States . . .
Dude, the election is over, and the next one isn’t going to be about his resume. You can stop lying now.
April 20th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
One thing to consider – alot of the advance that she’ll get will be balanced against actual sales of the books. If she sells zero books (in a given time frame), she doesn’t get any money. That’s why these are generally called “an advance.”
Now I know she’ll sell a few books, but I’m not too worried that we’ve got another Bill O’reilly on our hands.
April 20th, 2009 at 9:18 pm
“better the insulation”, as in “improve the insulation”. It’s not a mistake asshats.
April 20th, 2009 at 10:28 pm
PinNC, Meghan’s a maverick. I bet she cracks a Miller Lite just to cheese off Cindi… Daddy’s little girl.
April 20th, 2009 at 10:49 pm
when someone makes a dig about an unaccomplished man becoming president normal people think W. Bush whereas Obamatrons hear the call to the ramparts
April 20th, 2009 at 10:54 pm
Jim Says:
April 20th, 2009 at 5:44 pm
I love how Matt writes this post as if he were the Susan Boyle of the punditocracy.
============================================================
Leave Matt aloooooooone!
April 20th, 2009 at 11:23 pm
“If she sells zero books (in a given time frame), she doesn’t get any money. That’s why these are generally called ‘an advance.’”
Um… No. That’s not how it works. You get the advance. You put it in your pocket. But that comes out of your expected royalties. So you do not begin collecting royalties until you have earned out your advance. Generally, publishing companies do not come after authors to recoup advances that did not earn out. That is, authors keep the advance, even if their book tanks.
As for the meritocracy: Depends on how you are defining “merit.” She might not bring probing wit and wisdom to the punditocracy. But publishiers do not sell wit and wisdom. They sell books. And famous names sell books. She has a famous name. Therefore, she has “merit.” Or at least “value.”
April 20th, 2009 at 11:25 pm
Here’s the reality, jealous Matt! She’s better looking than you – and probably smarter.
I have no idea what she advocates but if it’s anything to do with Republicans it will be wrong anyway.
Go back to worrying about Natalie Portman, Matt. She’s the REAL threat to you! LOL!
April 20th, 2009 at 11:28 pm
Here’s Meghan McCain. Can Matt match this? Oh, hell, no!
http://timesonline.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/05/20/meghan_mccain.jpg
http://video1.washingtontimes.com/joecurl/meghan-1.jpg
April 21st, 2009 at 12:13 am
In fairness, it wasn’t just the paternity and connections that catapulted her to fame. It’s also the conspicuous absence of moderate Republicans able to face the dreaded RINO label. The current environment in the GOP is controled by the “true conservative” media – Ingraham, Rush, Malkin and the rest of the trope.
An empty curriculum is not the most troubling aspect of the Meghan McCain phenomenon. Let me be a snob: it’s the evident lack of an original discourse or even a very coherent one.
The truth is Meghan has little else to offer besides besides “youth” and “moderation”. Meghan a is a chiché-spewing machine.
April 21st, 2009 at 12:24 am
THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR MEGHAN!!!
April 21st, 2009 at 1:02 am
It’s not like she hasn’t had to work because she has a successful father, she had a successful grandfather and a gold digger father.
April 21st, 2009 at 1:31 am
Yes it is a mistake, NG. “I had better the insulation” doesn’t make sense in any language I’ve ever heard of. Now if MY had written, “I had better better the insulation,” that would have been clumsy enough to count as wit. If only . . .
April 21st, 2009 at 1:35 am
For the record, it was Meghan’s great-grandfather who was the really big John S. McCain. McCain Jr., her grandfather, was also a very accomplished admiral. And if Meghan can write about politics coherently, sanely, and with substance, she’s got one up on her dad.
April 21st, 2009 at 2:09 am
these comments suck-
why is everyone here such haters.
i wont be reading em ever again.
by the way matt-one of your best posts yet.
April 21st, 2009 at 2:40 am
Money and power makes for rich and powerful offspring. I’ve read her blog posts. I’ve read better content in the comments section of Little Green Goofballs. Scott Adams says “You can never underestimate the stupidity of the general public”.
April 21st, 2009 at 6:21 am
As others have said, Meghan’s basic commodity is certainly not her intellect (though she’s not dumb), or her looks (though she’s certainly not ugly), and indeed not her qualifications (though let’s face it, she’s not running for office). Rather, it’s her celebrity. And when it comes to celebrity,is there anyone out there who’s convinced that there is some kind of meritocracy? I’d suspect that even the least thoughtful gossip-rag readers take as a given that up-by-the-bootstraps success stories are as exceptional in Hollywood as they are in Washington. I’d submit that there’s a big difference between Paris Hilton and, say, Sofia Coppolla, but I don’t have much to gain from defending the status quo here.
As long as the Republicans are always happy to follow some windbag celebrity Pied Piper into the next cave, I wouldn’t mind if they went with this one for awhile. Her “vision” for the country, though as hopelessly fractured and ill-informed as her dad’s, is at least less apocalyptic than the ones the Limbaugh disciples are buying into.
April 21st, 2009 at 7:05 am
Sour grapes. Bitchy sour grapes.
April 21st, 2009 at 8:26 am
Re: The truth is Meghan has little else to offer besides besides “youth” and “moderation”. Meghan a is a chiché-spewing machine.
As opposed to the brilliant and original insights of Mr. Yglesias. Honestly, Mr. Yglesias’ opinions, if you have a tolerable acquaintance with cosmopolitan young liberals, are more predictable than a groundhog’s hibernation.
April 21st, 2009 at 8:50 am
Yes, the main problem with the modern conservative movement is too many intellectuals, and not enough of a spotlight on its nonintellectuals, especially the children of prominent Republican politicians.
And Mr. Yglesias is just jealous because he’d love to have a cushy pundit gig and a book deal. Plus heterosexual men don’t find him nearly as sexy as Meghan McCain, so there!
April 21st, 2009 at 9:01 am
Pot meet Kettle. Kettle here’s pot.
April 21st, 2009 at 9:50 am
You know, if you really feel that way, then leave this fucking blog, stop commenting, and go over to somebody like Meghan McCain who overs more of what you’re looking for.
If you’re so god-damned disgusted with Matt Yglesias, no one gives a shit if you leave. You’re not waging some sort of self-sacrificing intellectual battle by coming here, and no one’s lobbying to keep you here.
If you don’t like reading Matt’s posts, go the fuck away. No one’s stopping you. None of us 21st century hipsters will give a shit.
April 21st, 2009 at 11:48 am
“If you’re so god-damned disgusted with Matt Yglesias, no one gives a shit if you leave. You’re not waging some sort of self-sacrificing intellectual battle by coming here, and no one’s lobbying to keep you here.”
Oh, come on, El Cid. If commenters didn’t come here to claim their moral, intellectual and grammatical superiority over Matt, the comment threads would be about one-quarter their present average length.
On the other hand,…
April 21st, 2009 at 11:53 am
El Cid, if everyone agreed with the original blogger, this place would be no fun. I find Hector entertaining. Go get ‘em, Hector!
April 21st, 2009 at 3:59 pm
Because I constantly find myself asking…Who the hell is Matthew Yglesias?
You both started blogs right out of college right? Then you started in the press and then shifted to activism. Meghan started in campaigning and shifted to the press. You both wrote books. You both pontificate about things in which you have no actual experience.
Yes, yes I know Matt can drop the H-bomb. But Meghan went to Columbia, just like our beloved President. (Both had famous fathers, and only one would have potentially benefitted from affirmative action)
So the big question is, what makes you so much better than her?
April 21st, 2009 at 8:58 pm
Great post #68 Good Question… Also agree with Comments about Laura Ingraham. Bumps Meghan up a few notches…. The old guard in the GOP should be worried.
April 21st, 2009 at 10:12 pm
You accidenty the verb.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:30 am
[...] ThinkProgress blogger Matthew Yglesias, who (accurately) wrote yesterday that McCain has “never accomplished anything or held a job,” since Yglesias has written for the Daily Beast. Way to make a girl cry, Matt. Don’t [...]
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:37 am
Meghan McCain seems to have thoroughly enjoyed having people pay attention to her during the campaign. At the time, she appeared to be vapid, but harmless. Unfortunately, she has deluded herself into thinking that she is the voice of young Republicans. I suspect that Meghan McCain has no clue which political party she believes in. She might do better to let her trust officers explain her investments to her and how the economy works before she pontificates on matters beyond her education and experience. Getting into Columbia is not difficult if you have a mother who is wealthy beyond measure and a father who is a sitting U.S. senator.
“It is better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than to open your mouth and remove all doubt”
Sammuel Clemmens (Mark Twain)
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:43 am
[...] convinced that Gawker and Wonkette are paying Meghan McCain a healthy stipend to star in the reality show, I Want To Be The Paris Hilton of [...]
April 22nd, 2009 at 5:02 am
With respect to the Mark Twain quote at 72, I’d like to retract my comment from 60 that McMeghan was “not dumb.” I admit, I hadn’t actually read any of her own writing at the time.
If anything, being dumb (or at least seeming to be in every public appearance) is a prerequisite of being a conservative pundit at the moment. But if that doesn’t work out for Meghan, I think she has a wonderful future in flower delivery ahead of her.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:05 am
Meghan McCain is the Dave Shula or politics.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:05 am
Make that “of” politics…
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:40 am
As to Chelsea Clinton’s accomplishments, I might point out she’s a freaking Rhodes Scholar. Suck on that
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:42 am
Actually, never mind, just googled it. She did go to oxford though, just not as a Rhodes scholar, common misperception apparently. But she certainly has more accomplishments than McCain. And Matt, for gods sake, you really are in a glass house. You act like an expert on everything, and yet your only qualification is that you’ve been a blogger for some magazines and you went to Harvard. Fail.
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:39 pm
[...] A liberal asks: Has Meghan McCain ever really accomplished…anything?? – Matthew Yglesias (Think Progress) [...]