I have made no secret of the fact that Senator McCain and I have some serious disagreements on policy issues, but I have nothing but respect for McCain’s military service. That impression was reinforced by reading Karl Rove’s account of some of McCain’s adventures in Vietnam. It’s a must read for those who want to know more about McCain’s background, and I agree with Rove that he needs to make more of his personal bio part of the campaign. We know enough about his policy positions, and not much about his personal story. His campaign would benefit from making this side of McCain more visible, and it will help his chances in the general election, no matter what happens with the Democrats.
’08 Election
he’s not going away quietly
And after all John McCain’s complaints about the NCGOP and how mean and nasty they were to bring up Senator Obama’s relationship with Jeremiah Wright, the man himself says that his relationship with his former pastor is a “legitimate political issue“. Then it should be ok for Republicans to bring it up in ads, right?
Here’s the exchange between Obama and Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday:
WALLACE: I wasnt sure whether I was even going to ask you about your former pastor, Jeremiah Wright, but he made it easy for me because hes now begun this
OBAMA: Right.
WALLACE: public campaign to redeem his reputation. The other night he said to Bill Moyers that he has been the target of a smear campaign.
Question: Do you think that Reverend Wright is just the victim here?
OBAMA: No. I think that people were legitimately offended by some of the comments that he had made in the past. The fact that he is my former pastor I think makes it a legitimate political issue. So I understand that.
I think that it is also true that to run a snippet of 30-second sound bites, selecting out of a 30-year career, simplified and caricatured him, and caricatured the church. And I think that was done in a fairly deliberate way.
And that is unfortunate, because as Ive said before, I have strongly denounced those comments that were the subject of so much attention. I wasnt in church when he made them. But I also know that I go to church not to worship the pastor, to worship God. And that ministry, the church family thats been built there, does outstanding work, has been I think applauded for its outreach to the poor.
He built that ministry. And I think that, you know, people need to take a look at the whole church and the whole man in making these assessments.
The good and bad news for Senator Obama is that we will get to hear more from Rev. Wright, and we can get the full context we need to make a judgment call on whether all this negative press Wright’s been getting is deserved. I say that it is. He isn’t taking back any of the inflammatory things he’s previously said, and he keeps adding more fuel to the fire as he attempts to defend his reputation and his church. Even though I disagree with Rev. Wright on 99% of the stuff he says, he did say one thing to Bill Moyers and in his speech to the National Press Club that I agree with — he said that Barack is just a politician and that he does what he does for political reasons. That’s the point that we have been trying to make — there’s nothing special about Barack other than his ability to wow people with his speeches. He believes the same nonsense on policy that Hillary does, and the left won’t see much difference in a President Obama as opposed to a President Hillary. No doubt Barack is a nice guy, but that’s not enough to make him President.
mccain is wrong
I’m not sure why John McCain is overreacting so much to the North Carolina GOP ad. It is an ad that mentions Obama’s association with Jeremiah Wright and pointing out that Democratic candidates for governor Bev Perdue and Richard Moore support Obama. Oh yeah, and the ad might have said a little something about Rev. Wright being too extreme for North Carolina. There’s nothing racist about that. There’s nothing controversial about that. In fact, I’m not entirely sure this would be an effective ad. The only thing that’s keeping this story going is that Rev. Wright feels obligated to defend himself against the injustice of bloggers and media people reporting on what he actually said. If he didn’t, I honestly believe this issue would go away. John McCain won’t run ads on it, based on what we have seen this week from him.
I don’t think the ad is going to work because this is similar to the argument Republicans were trying to make in 2006 — beware Nancy Pelosi and the EVIL Democrats, because they will do all sorts of horrible things to make your life miserable. Or something like that. Did that work in ’06? Did we gin up enough reasonable fear of scary Democrats to drive the vote for Republicans? Umm…no. Republicans were unmotivated and the undecided were willing to take a chance on the Democrats because the ruling party failed. The Republican brand has been damaged, and it’s still damaged. John McCain is doing nothing to help the Republican party rebuild that brand, and he doesn’t seem to have an interest in making that attempt.
This is why I believe John McCain overreacted to the ad. He’s more concerned about losing those Democrats and independents than he is in keeping the Republicans he has won by default from deserting him in the general election. It’s one thing to say that this isn’t the ad he would have chosen to run, and another to say that the NCGOP is “out of touch”. McCain still doesn’t get it. He’s the one who doesn’t understand conservatives, and it’s clear that he doesn’t respect us. Could the NCGOP have created a different ad based on pointing out differences between Democrats and Republicans on issues? Yes, and I would have preferred that. But McCain doesn’t have the right to demand that they pull the Wright ad.
still alive
Hillary Clinton got her needed Pennsylvania win over Barack Obama, and the final margin will probably be around 8 points. It does give her enough of an argument to keep going in the race, and many Republicans hope she will prolong this contest a few more months, even though we know that Barack will prevail in the end. It is surprising that even with all Barack’s strengths as a campaigner and his overall charisma, his lead is not expanding by a much wider margin over Hillary Clinton. Hillary is right when she says that Barack can’t seem to close the deal with Democrats. It should be a no-brainer for them, with all the negatives Hillary’s carrying around. She has stayed in this race long enough to expose some of Barack’s weaknesses, and that’s another reason why Hillary isn’t giving up yet. She’s holding out hope that he will make a more serious mistake than the minor gaffes we have seen from him so far. It could happen. However, it’s a hard case to make to the superdelegates that she will be the strongest candidate against McCain in November if she loses the popular vote and the delegate count to Barack Obama.
Update: The final numbers are closer to 10 points. It still may not make much difference to the final outcome, but Hillary’s still in and not going away any time soon.
untouchable
Sensei Kreese has issued the marching orders. No one touches the prima donna until the tournament. Is that clear? No hard punches. No hard questions. Let the man skate. Keep the kid gloves on, because we don’t want to hurt the guy’s chances of becoming President. This may sound harsh to some of my friends on the left (and one person in particular), but the free ride Barack Obama has been getting for the majority of his run for the White House is flat-out ridiculous and it’s about time someone started asking him questions that he can’t answer from the Democrat talking-point quote book. It doesn’t do him any good to complain about the press coverage. If he can’t handle the few hard questions he’s getting now, he’s got some work to do before he is ready to handle White House press conferences.
Tony Resko shouldn’t matter. The Rev. Wright and his controversial comments shouldn’t matter. Louis Farrakan shouldn’t matter. Barack Obama doesn’t have official endorsements from these folks, so it’s perfectly clear that Barack Obama doesn’t agree with Rev. Wright and Louis Farrakan and some of the outrageous things they have said in the past. At least that is the answer Obama’s supporters have when we dare to bring this stuff up. Then there’s the question of William Ayers. Maybe most of this was part of breaking into Chicago politics, for Obama to temporarily associate himself with some shady characters in order to get elected. That’s a possibility. But it’s fair to ask questions about these things.
Here’s why. All along Barack Obama has been telling us that he is the candidate with the best judgment, because he was opposed to the Iraq war from the beginning. Should this be the only factor we use to determine how good Barack’s judgment would be as President? Do we know exactly what he will do as President? Of course not. We have to look at what he has said, and we have to look at what he’s done in the past. Obama is still undefined to some degree, so we still have to try to fill in the blanks. Are we now saying that you cant really judge a person by the company he keeps? Its no reflection on Barack himself that all these no-good creeps like him. Got it. Sometimes a President can get the good guys and bad guys mixed up. Former Presidents like Jimmy Carter find this distinction rather difficult. (And yes, Chris, even Bush does it. There. Happy now? 🙂 ) My concern about Obama is that he hasn’t shown much aptitude for determining that in his own life, and what would he do when confronted with foreign heads of state who have every incentive to try to fool him?
Then theres the perfectly legitimate question of why Hamas thinks Barack Obama would be supportive of their interests. We arent calling Barack Obama a terrorist. We dont think hes a terrorist. We do think that he will misread the intentions of groups like Hamas, people like Ahmadinejad, and terrorist-supporting countries like Iran and Syria. Thats the concern, and its a legitimate concern. Foreign policy is a tricky business and we just dont think hes ready for that challenge. I just hope that if he becomes President, he will appoint some folks to his foreign policy team that can help him with this.
Dont misinterpret this as a shredding of the future Democratic nominee. We are actually doing you a favor by talking about Rev. Wright and flag pins, because the more time we spend on the stuff Democrats consider trivial, less time will be spent finding out how much he doesnt know or understand about foreign policy and the economy. Besides, isnt it better that Obama gets these questions out of the way now, rather than waiting until closer to the election? Its not entirely unreasonable to believe that all this will be old news when the election rolls around, and we will get back to healthcare and the economy soon enough. Maybe the media has finally decided to start asking Obama questions that he cant answer in a soundbite. Theres nothing wrong with that.
are you impressed yet?
Ladies and gentlemen of the Democrat party, here are your candidates for President — Senator Clinton, the Washington insider and Senator Obama, the photogenic rookie. I guess you have to fight an election with the candidates you have, not the candidates you wish you had. One important thing I took away from the debate tonight is that Barack is beatable. Even this election year. Even with an unpopular (at least according to polls) incumbent President. What we have been seeing recently is the humanization of Barack Obama. He has fallen off his high perch from self-inflicted wounds and harmful associations with America-haters like Reverend Wright. We saw more of this in the Hillary v. Obama debate this evening. He actually looked like he was unsure of himself and his answers to the questions reflected that. John McCain can beat this Barack Obama. He couldn’t beat the one we saw 6 months ago.
bittergate
So Obama said some inartful things about the good citizens of Pennsylvania while speaking to some fat cats in San Fran, about which Republicans are supposed to be outraged at the great slight he made to average Janes and Joes everywhere in this country. Do I have the story correct here? That seems to be the common interpretation of my friends on the right. This campaign season has already gone on too long, and we have run out of things to say about this race. That’s why all these little slip-ups take on such great importance. I have no doubt that Obama regrets saying what he said the way he said it, but I’m not really surprised that he would say something like this.
The honesty is refreshing. Wouldn’t we rather have a candidate who tells us how he really feels, instead of this mindless pandering we see every presidential election? What we have here is someone who, despite all of the photo-ops done by both Democrats and Republicans with the cheesesteaks and the beer and various average-Joe activities like hunting, doesn’t really identify with those people. There’s nothing shocking about this revelation. That’s part of Obama’s whole appeal — that he is something greater than all of the average people and that he alone has the ability to rise above the masses and above partisan bickering to actually get things done for the country.
He is different from John Kerry because he can overcome mistakes like this. People will still like Barack no matter what he says, and they will always prefer him to the ultimate Washington insider Hillary Clinton.
more cheap shots
Apparently my previous post struck a nerve with my buddy Chris. I don’t recall saying anything about cheap shots being the sole domain of the Democrats. I also think there’s a difference between saying something really stupid, like the GOP Congressional candidate he mentions in his post, and calling a candidate a “warmonger” and a “blatant opportunist”. I do give Obama credit for apologizing for Ed Schultz, but he had to do that, even if he agrees with Schultz. It’s hard to decide how outraged to be about what this McCain supporter said about Obama when it’s unclear what the guy meant by that statement (as Chris admits in his post).
I disagree with Chris and with Ed Schultz about McCain being a warmonger. Maybe it’s the definition we disagree about here. McCain intends to keep troops in Iraq as long as they are necessary to keep Iraq from falling apart. You can support that position or not, but this doesn’t automatically make him a warmonger. McCain won’t be trigger-happy on potential future wars. No one who has served in the military would be. I thought the Democrats had this view — that those who have never served should have less credibility than those who have when it comes to discussions of war. There’s another reason that McCain has a stake in Iraq, and it’s that his son is serving there. Do the Dems really want to argue that McCain wouldn’t take every future decision on what to do next in Iraq seriously with his son’s life on the line?
I’m not trying to defend Iraq. I don’t think it’s possible to make any progress on that argument at this point, since both sides have dug in their heels and nothing will keep them from believing what they believe about Iraq. But McCain has less faith in the Bush democracy project than he will admit.
cheap shot artists
Thanks for reminding John McCain who his opposition really is, Democrats. In case he wasn’t sure that the Democrats would say anything mean about him before the election, now he knows differently. Step right up and take those cheap shots. I’m talking to you, Ed Schultz, Howard Dean, and John F. Kerry. For those who have never heard of Ed Schultz, he is a liberal talk radio guy who occasionally appears on cable news shows and represents the Airhead America point of view. He called John McCain a warmonger. That doesn’t sound all that inflammatory in print, but it suggests that McCain is someone who is looking to pick fights that have nothing to do with our national security interests. I don’t see McCain this way, and in spite of his bad joke about bombing Iran, I don’t think he would be as willing to do it as the Democrats suggest that he is. I also think he’s more open to the kind of diplomacy Hillary and Obama keep talking about than he can admit as the Republican nominee.
DNC chairman Howard Dean is the gift that keeps on giving for Republicans. He always gives us such great material for our campaign ads. Think you might see this quote again?
John McCain can try to reintroduce himself to the country, but he can’t change the fact that he cast aside his principles to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with President Bush for the last seven years.
While we honor McCains military service, the fact is Americans want a real leader who offers real solutions, not a blatant opportunist who doesnt understand the economy and is promising to keep our troops in Iraq for 100 years.
That’s right. Howard Dean calls John McCain a blatant opportunist. I suppose that this could be interpreted any number of ways, but to suggest, as Media Matters does, that Dean wasn’t accusing McCain of playing politics with his military service — that claim is laughable. Besides, under the Democrat rules of engagement, only those who have served in the military are qualified to support or criticize wars. I’m pretty sure that doesn’t include Howard Dean. Also, Dean is being disingenuous with his claim that McCain is promising to keep our troops in Iraq for 100 years. McCain did no such thing.
McCain has every right to include his military service in his re-introduction to the American people, because that’s a big part of who the man is. If his intention was to exploit that military service for maximum advantage, he would probably mention it every three seconds like John F. Kerry did in 2004. He also wouldn’t keep the fact that his son James is serving our country in Iraq a secret (more on that later).
leave mitt alone
Some social conservatives can’t accept victory. Mitt Romney will not be our next President. They got what they wanted. They won. Seems to me they can’t take yes for an answer. Thanks to their support of anyone but Romney, we are now stuck with McCain. Now a small vocal group of malcontents is making threats not to support McCain if he picks Romney as VP. They even have printed an ad (see PDF here). First of all, McCain knows that he got this far without their support, so what makes them think they have any influence on him now? There’s also no guarantee this group wouldn’t sit the election out no matter what McCain does with Romney.
This is incredibly stupid on their part. There’s no need to make threats about it, because McCain wouldn’t pick Romney anyway. In some ways, Romney would be a smart choice. He does shore up a McCain weakness as far as knowing something about the economy, so it does make sense in these economic times to take that aspect into consideration. He would certainly be a desirable choice over Governor Crist, Governor Pawlenty, and McCain’s BFF Lindsey Graham. Any of these guys more closely mirror McCain’s positions on the issues than Romney does. But as much as I think Romney would make a fine VP, and even President someday, now is not the time, and McCain has some better choices if he really cares what social conservatives want (that’s doubtful).
There are many other ways for Romney to raise his 2012 or 2016 profile without tying himself to a possible McCain presidency. Of course, McCain’s VP may be the Republicans’ 2012 nominee, but I think Romney would be a strong contender without that built-in advantage. He will have 4 to 8 years after the 2008 election to build up his conservative credentials. I know that there are fellow Mitt fans out there who have complete faith in the guy, and who may find it unfair that he still has to prove himself to social conservatives, but we have to acknowledge that there are misconceptions out there that cause people not to trust him. He has the ability to change this. He just needs time. Being McCain’s VP isn’t the right move for Mitt Romney, and with the other options McCain has, it’s not the right move for McCain either.