Can you imagine McCain at the UN?

He can't keep track of who's at his own rallies: what's the name of this mayor, where's Joe the Plumber?



I just picture President McCain at the G7 wondering who "that guy in the suit over there" is. The man seems tired, and addled, even though he's not keeping up with Obama's pace of events. If he's this forgetful and confused at 72 after mailing it in as a Senator for a coupla years, how's he gonna be after 2 years in the presidency?

Redistribution, or as I call it, civilization

McCain's pretend presidential campaign has settled on its newest attempted slur: "redistributor". Apparently "terrorist" and "socialist" weren't moving the polls, so instead we get a snappy five-syllable jab. To listen to McCain and his allies, the worst thing possible is to "share the wealth", to "take your money and give it to someone else."

Some Democrats have accused McCain of yearning for a "free market fundamentalism", but the consequences of his positions are far more reaching than that. Exacting taxes to pay for a military is a form of redistribution. Why should I fork over some hard-earned cash just so somebody can have fun running around and firing guns? For that matter, why should my work translate to pay for anyone else -- cops, border guards, domestic spies -- anyone?

Redistribution is the foundation of civilization. It's the recognition that our physical, cultural, and economic security is more assured when people work in groups, and those groups need funding. You can't expect to fund it on goodwill -- you need to exact a price for belonging to civilization. People give up a portion of their income toward people who provide security. My money is being "redistributed" to our soldiers and to cops on the streets. I don't have a problem with that. The alternative is not conservatism, because conservatism enforces redistribution as much as anyone else. Bush, for example, wanted redistribution to friendly corporations such as Enron and Halliburton. McCain probably does, too. At least, I hope that's what he means. Because if you take him at his word, McCain wants anarchy in this country -- no redistribution, everyone for himself.

Of course, McCain's problem is that Obama only wants to redistribute income to those who need it. Today, McCain attacked Biden for pegging the maximum annual income for the title "middle class" as those earning $150,000 per year. Seriously, McCain wants to run as the defender of the four percent earning $150,000 or more.

Anarchists, and the rich. At the end of the campaign, McCain comes back to his base.

Do you trust the RNC with your budget?

Here's the funny part. I don't much care if the Republican National Committee wants to blow $150,000 on a wardrobe for the Palin family, as if the governor of Alaska couldn't possibly own a decent set of clothing. I don't really care that the highest paid advisor on the campaign doesn't do foreign affairs or media handling, but makeup. I still maintain that making Sarah Palin look good couldn't be that hard. It's like making Michael Phelps a good swimmer.

In some ways, I'm glad that they're blowing money they don't have on frivolities. But...the people who want to run the country are blowing money they really need on frivolities. Let's be clear: from the beginning, it was obvious that Obama was going to outraise and outspend McCain. It was obvious that a campaign which accepted spending limits was going to need every dime it could keep when going up against a historically unprecedented fundraising operation.

So the Republicans went and blew a huge chunk of their dwindling cash -- several field offices' worth, several polls' worth -- on clothing, hair, and makeup. When the people running the McCain/Republican campaigns had a direct, personal interest in managing their budget smartly, they couldn't do it.

Yet these millionaires want me to trust them with my money. They couldn't manage money when doing so meant access to power and wealth but they want to be trusted with money that isn't even theirs?

Irish punter: McCain and Hillary almost even chance to win on Nov. 4

Once in a while, I like to look at how professional gamblers handicap the race. Not InTrade, but people who've been taking bets on politics for decades. So I slipped over to the Irish punter Ladbrokes.

Ladbrokes is offering odds on John McCain winning the presidency that are far below those of Obama -- and only slightly better than those for Hillary Clinton.

Obama: 4:5 ... 80%
McCain: 12:1 ... 8.33%
Hillary: 16:1 ... 6.25%

McCain's odds are 667% higher than Obama's.
Hillary Clinton's odds are 133% higher that McCain's.

(You can also take flyers for Al Gore at 33:1, Brian Schweitzer at 66:1, or Ron Paul at 100:1).

The Ballad of Joe the Plumber

Sung in the tune of "angry", preferably in an ill-fitting suit and black tie.

REFRAIN
O, Joe is a cracking plumber,
The bestest that could ever be
And Joe is an Ohio plumber,
I just wish he'd vote for me.


Verse I
I'll cut Joe's taxes, cut them deep,
I'll give him his guv'mint for free
I'll slash Joe's taxes, slash them deep,
'Specially if he's as rich as me!
(refrain)


Verse II
I'll defend Joe from that one's terr'rist pals,
The ones in those scary ads on teevee
I'll protect Joe from Barry's terr'rist pals,
That's all my campaign's got left, you see
(refrain)


Verse III
I'll help Joe's health with my super plan,
My tax credit or that one's giant fee
I'll heal Joe's health with my awesome plan,
Wait, his fee is zero? Big news to me!
(refrain)


Verse IV
I'll stop abortions Joe, I'll stop 'em all right now,
It's a hot button issue shucks golly gee
I'll halt abortions Joe, stop 'em all right now,
(Psst, centrists, don't listen now, I plea.)
(refrain)


BIG FINISH
I'm a maverick, Joe, a rebel, the man you loved!
It's my time, my turn, my chance, me, me, ME!
I'm your maverick Joe, who you once loved...
Can't you see me here on my knee?
I put my country first, you've seen my ads, Joe!
I've fought dirty Joe then, dirtier -- oh, my how!
What happened -- you used to love me Joe!
My Joe, my plumber! Mav'rick Johnny here -- don't leave me now!

McCain: Arab or family man. But not both.

The most notorious moment of the McCain campaign this month comes from a McCain rally, as he has to correct a supporter:



Supporter/ Bigot: I can't trust Obama. He's a...he's a Arab.
(McCain takes mic away from her.)
McCain: No ma'am. No ma'am. He's a...he's a decent family man, citizen, that I just happen to have disagreements with.

So McCain is going through the motions of denying the lies he helped spread. And the media is giving him plaudits for the equivalent of giving up on beating his wife. True, though, that at a time when the line between Palin rally and lynch mob keeps narrowing, this is probably a good thing. But what isn't a good thing is McCain's reaction.

McCain doesn't tell the lady that no, Obama isn't an Arab but an American with African and European heritage. He doesn't tell her that Obama can't be an Arab because McCain knows his background. The way that McCain can tell Obama isn't an Arab, apparently, is that Obama is a "decent family man".

To McCain, Obama can't be an Arab because he's a decent family man. And apparently, McCain can assure us, Arab-Americans -- the 3.5 million in this country -- simply aren't decent family people. I guess McCain saw how Obama loves his kids, loves his wife, and tries to do the right thing, and thought "there's no way somebody like that is an Arab." How sad that this represent progress for McCain and his supporters.

What's left?

I knew the 1992 election was over when President Bush got up there and said of Clinton and Gore "look at these guys...they're a coupla bozos!" It was an attack so disconnected from any larger narrative, any important issue, anything that the voter remotely cared about, you could tell it was garbage time. There were questions (I suppose) about Clinton's judgment, experience, priorities, dedication, morality, sincerity, perspective -- but nobody could question the man's intelligence. I didn't understand the psychology of it in technical terms, but at 14 years old, I could tell Bush was not just out of ideas, but out of motivation to find them. He was done. When you saw Bush using a taunt a 9-year old would find passé, you saw raw frustration. Desperation is trying to start a conflagration from the dying embers of dark suspicions...frustration is fire-starting with a lighter and cup of water just to have a flame to wave around.

There are many, many reservations about Obama -- not too dissimilar from Clinton back then, I guess. But "bozos" is grandma-talk compared to what we're seeing. A campaign staffer wrote an op-ed, something to be published, that reads as a white guy trying to update Parliament Funkadelic's Chocolate City> Sample line: Obama's administration would divert more foreign aid to Africa so 'the Obama family there can skim enough to allow them to free their goats and live the American Dream.' " Our would-be vice president says that Obama pals around with terrorists! She is suggesting that Obama likes to hang out with somebody at least two people who actively try to change political discourse through violence and spreading fear. Her crowds have picked up the message, too: slandering African-Americans, while McCain smilingly presided over a supporter labeling Obama a terrorist. His brother tagged northern Virginia as "communist".

Hunter Thompson wrote that McGovern's team knew he was going to lose one month out. Hillary Clinton knew she was going to lose a coupla weeks out from the final primary. They finished with style and dignity. Here, it's October 7th, We've four weeks to go. For McCain and Palin, that's four weeks to kill.

But we have seen little to think that McCain will show the dignity and grace of Thompson or Clinton. Even the comparative restraint of Bush. But if you're already calling your opponent a terrorist with 4 weeks to go, doesn't that imply that you're still "saving up" some blockbusters in the final moments? That's the way campaigns usually work, but ya gotta wonder what names are still left after you've spent "communist" or "terrorist", the dirtiest terms in contemporary American discourse. We're past desperation, and into frustration -- can McCain and Palin survive the next 4 weeks without grevously wounding the Republicans?

What angles are available to a once-promising Republican now drowning in the Titanic's backwash, who looms larger in the history of Saturday Night Live than American history?

What rhetorical attacks remain for an angry man who will die without clawing his way into the White House?

What's left?

PS: For my friends in the Republican Party:

It'll be Colorado

Wherein I lay out my forecast for the denouement of this marathon process to replace President Bush. Many of us have put more work into influencing the presidential election than Bush has apparently put into being president.

I think Stuart Rothenberg is right...mainly because we agree. So I'm willing to put down my prediction right now. I think the fulcrum state of 2008 will be Colorado.

I can't imagine Obama losing the Kerry states. Even the ones on the edge -- Wisconsin and New Hampshire -- have shown small but consistent leads for Obama. Ditto Pennsylvania and Michigan.
Among Bush states, Obama's got so Iowa well wrapped up that it's not really a swing state anymore, and is narrowly ahead in Minnesota.
That makes it 259-252 Obama.

Leaving Virginia, Ohio, Colorado, New Mexico, and maaaaybe Nevada up for grabs. As in undecided territory.

As time goes on, I find myself more firmly believing that the final disposition of a swing state is strongly wrapped up in the instincts of its last-minute voters. And the more I contact these people, the more I read about them, the more convinced I am that undecided voters are basically morons. McCain and Obama have been running for president for 18 months, and they have very different visions of the future. Yet somehow these people haven't yet made a choice. This isn't a decision between Coke and Pepsi, it's a decision between Poland Springs and Wild Turkey.

If at this point a voter finds them of equal value, that's probably because they don't know much, or care much. The ones who don't care that much, don't vote -- so we're left with the ones who don't know that much. Christopher Hayes writes one of the best profiles of the undecided voter I've ever read...here's a snippet:

Perhaps the greatest myth about undecided voters is that they are undecided because of the "issues."...The majority of undecided voters I spoke to couldn't name a single issue that was important to them...the very concept of the issue seemed to be almost completely alien to most of the undecided voters I spoke to...As far as I could tell, the problem wasn't the word "issue"; it was a fundamental lack of understanding of what constituted the broad category of the "political."

The whole thing is worth the read, and it makes anyone who believes in a rationalist approach to politics and campaign agog. I submit that without any grounding in political reality, these last minute "decision makers" go back to instincts, gut level. I believe Bush got close enough to win thanks to undecideds in Florida and Ohio feeling that they knew someone like Bush and were comfortable with him. Whether they agreed on the issues wasn't as important -- better to avoid Kerry or Gore, who were nearly identical in broadcasting waves of privilege and remove from the working people of America.

In 2008, then, I feel compelled to look at "instinct" of undecided voters in the swing states. And the simple breakdown for me is this:

• If any of those 5 states is unlikely to vote for an African-American for the color of his skin, it's Virginia. I think this reason alone makes the pursuit of Virginia a waste of time for Obama.
• Ohio's an interesting case -- a hard-scrabble state built to compete in the 20th century. Which doesn't work out too well in the 21st century. Which candidate does that describe?
• Nevada...I don't get Nevada. But I do understand we've been teased by Nevada repeatedly, and it's a very chaotic state. Their caucuses were a disaster, they have Harry Reid and nobody else as high-profile Democrats, and the mayor of their largest city seems insane. I wouldn't want to rely on the Silver State for anything.
  
• My best hopes are New Mexico and Colorado. These are states where the future hasn't past them by, but is now arriving. These are states where the culture is one of excitement and crescendo. More people, different people, are moving into those states, with a good amount of money not far behind. The future looks better than the past, and any time spent in those places makes it easy to read the air of vibrancy. If there's one region of America for whom the future is most promising, it's the American Southwest. And at the end of the day, that's the attitude and the approach of Senator Obama.

While we have to run through the motions, I expect that by mid-October we'll be seeing lots of time spent in Colorado. Ohio will receive visits because it's so big and close, and the third state will be either New Mexico or Virginia -- whichever's closer. However, I still expect the first to go for Obama, the latter to finish for McCain.

I would also point out that moving to a Colorado and New Mexico approach and forgoing Ohio is a great way to focus money and manpower, more bang for the buck. Hopefully, Obama will stay in the game in Ohio and Florida, but but their best people out west. This lose-Ohio-win-Colorado scenario is also given heavy play on the fivethirtyeight.com which runs all manner of simulations -- it comes up about half the time.

Now the bad news. The bad news is named Mike Coffman. Coffman may well end up the third of an unholy trifecta that runs Harris...Blackwell...Coffman. Mr. Coffman is presently the Secretary of State for Colorado and is responsible for supervising its election, but is seeking a promotion -- he'd like to be a Congressman. The ad on his campaign website ominously declares him to be a "proven conservative leader". In other words, he's probably a Republican on the make who will be supervising the election in Colorado in a certain direction. Coffman shares the trademark Republican contempt for ethics, using state time on his Congressional campaign. He seems to play fast and loose with contracts for election machinery, though he has mandated the use of paper ballots in 2008. He's pretty dang favored to win the Congressional seat, but he may have much greater impact on the next four years in his "old" job. There's some minor hope that he'll follow the example of Washington's Secretary of State, Sam Reed, who supervised the fair resolution of 2004's razor-thin gubernatorial election despite the wishes of the state's Republican Party. Moral courage is in short supply in the GOP, however, so I remain skeptical.

As goes Colorado...

Hail Comrade Bush

The workers salute you! Removing means of housing production from bourgeois and bringing to people is great work! Down with stockbuyers, power to government! Long may proletariat sing praises of American National Housing Authority, drown out whining money-holders. Taking land of labor is dog-system, much to be fought! The rich man's banks surpress the people, and must become the People's Banks! Controlling of land away from bourgeois is key to the Revolution and our Glorious Future, and taking of land from rich to all leads to tomorrow -- glory to "sound fundamentals" of McCain's glorious new system of the people! Hail to Bush and partners Cheney McCain for fight against evil capitalist system. Hail to American National Housing Authority, down with capitalist system.

Hail to Bush, McCain, and the People's Revolution! Down with Obama and Capitalism!

Okay, fun time's over...back to McCain

It takes a deal of discipline to push away from the astounding reality that is VP Candidate Sarah Palin. It seems every day offers up one or two more illustrations of her dishonesty and incompetence, the latest being her lie about selling the governor's place on Ebay, and McCain's people hustling her away from anyone who might ask her questions. It's reminiscent of a movie where the heroes discover a cavern full of treasure, wandering wide-eyed through a room of progressively more opulent goods. Though it isn't easy to tear away from this trove of mendacious mediocracy, it's time to re-focus on the true prize.

Governor Palin isn't running for president, isn't in the presidential debates, and probably won't really influence too many votes (you didn't actually believe those "Americans" who live to tell women how to behave would sit out this election, did you?). Instead, this election is about McCain and Obama. So while it may be fun to pump out posts about Sarah Palin (4 of today's 7 front-paged on DKos, and half of the current recommended reader diaries on TPM), this in the end is just static.

Better to keep our eye on the ball, as does Senator Biden:



PS: Hot on the heels of McCain's speech about bringing change to Washington and pretending the Republicans don't control the government, Republicans are trying to win control of the Senate by bullying Joe Lieberman into their caucus. That's McCain's brand of change -- reaching out to Washington insiders.

PPS: My number one man, Mark Begich, has a real race on his hands for US Senator for Alaska in the wake of Palin's inclusion into the ticket. Help him out, wouldja?

McCain's "speech"

I can't help feeling bad for him. Senator McCain has dreamed of this moment for decades...has been planning this speech longer than I've been alive.

His team didn't screen for protesters, and he was interrupted three times, much to his evident discomfort. Obama's team connected with a crowd of 85,000 better than McCain did with a captive convention.

He couldn't read the teleprompter, and stumbled on many lines, including one about teaching illiterate adults to read.

He reminded everyone that Pearl Harbor is a personal memory for him.

He asked Democrats and other Americans to "fight with him". Done.

He delivered applause lines, mumbled over the applause, repeated himself, then grimaced/smiled at the end. Repeatedly.

Give him a mic, and 40 minutes. Don't put him on a glossy, phallus-shaped stage with a shaky speech.

In related news, this just arrived in my inbox:

Let's play What Would You Do?

You are John McCain. Somehow, the world has come to believe that Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is your pick for Vice President. She is a loyal conservative who has sated most social conservatives wary of your supposed open-mindedness. There are some reasons (here are 15) that indicate that she may not be a good choice.

The nice lady on CNN just said "the last couple of days have been pretty rough" for Palin. The AP is calling the first day of the convention a "Day of Stunning Palin Disclosures". You're not the story. She is the story, for all the wrong reasons. You apparently did a crap job vetting Palin, and the crap that you didn't uncover keeps comin'.

Do you ditch her?

There's already plenty out there to indicate that you didn't really want her for VP anyway. You have two pissed-off Republican giants waiting in the wings. And they're pissed.

You went out of your way to pick a woman. You passed over a range of Republican women to find one that would make social conservatives happy. Potential winners Jodi Rell, Linda Lingle, Elizabeth Dole, Carly Fiorina. You obviously have a lot of loose ends with Palin, and she just hired a lawyer to cover her corrupt butt (which you've been caught admiring on tv while fidgeting with your wedding ring...smooth!).

Do you ditch her? Do you pull a Harriet Miers and have her withdraw tearfully? In order to replace her with...another super-rich billionaire people can't connect with? Some guy? Do you dig up another Republican woman willing to sacrifice her career, or just go with a man and hope for partial credit?

You can hope to weather the storm. The family values hypocrites will swallow the teen pregnancy to put McCain in the White House. When Obama-McCain-Obama-McCain gets going, maybe people will forget about Sarah Palin in the wake of your convention and the debates. As long as she finds the debate hall, the media wil ldeclare that she topped expectations against Biden. Maybe the troopergate thing won't blow up, and maybe there won't be any more unpleasant surprises. Do you ditch her?

Or you can hope to get the storm behind you. Pull a switcheroo. Hope to get credit for picking a woman, even though it didn't work out. Pick someone predictable and grit through, or try to find another woman. People will crow and laugh, just like they did with Miers. But Samuel Alito has been forgotten, and is a loyal soldier for the wackjob cause. In the long run, one could expect that Romney or Pawlenty will be better in the long run -- they've been vetted appropriately (or could be this time), they'd hold their own against Biden in the debate, they come across as ready in case you don't survive until January 2013. They do have a "rich white Republican man" problem, though...

You're John McCain. Do you ditch her?

Update: The question got a whole lot easier to answer.

Palin: Well, she's a woman, so vote McCain

She thought it was a joke when someone called her at 6 a.m. to tell her the news. 'She's not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president?'

A typical reaction to the news that Alaska's Governor Sarah Palin, still with that new-governor smell, is McCain's pick for vice president. Shock was the universal reaction amongst political junkies. "Whozzat? Is Brady playing tonight?" the universal reaction among everyone else. The above quote, however, is slightly atypical is that this is the reaction of the Republican state senator who represents Palin's hometown. How, um, neighborly.

The Republican Speaker of the House in Alaska checked in with his own ringing endorsement: "'She's old enough,' Harris said. 'She's a U.S. citizen.'" (Thanks to pablo for the spot.) So with disbelief and curtness, Palin is given a rude shove-off by her own Alaska Republican colleagues. What a start.

But understandable, because the Palin choice is underwhelming in almost every metric. Underwhelming as a candidate, as a possible president, as a person of judgment, even as a Republican woman. Palin's got less than two years as Alaska's governor under her belt, she's under investigation for abusing her powers, and other than that is best known for being part-time mayor of a tiny town in the Frontier State (and not a particularly good one, at that).

But what really grinds my gears is the obvious thinking behind this ploy -- that any old set of ovaries will entice Democrats and Independents who sided with Hillary Clinton to check off McCain's name on the ballot. Palin directly invoked her campaign today when speaking in Ohio, and punditry is focused on the idea that this is some sort of olive branch for women voters. An olive branch studded with thorns: Palin wants to take away women's control over their own reproductive health care, keep the door open for private exploitation of our health, and loves the Iraq war. It is impossible to get Palin's own ideas on the issues, as her campaign site has been taken down and redirects to McCain's site (same happens, with Biden in fairness). Apparently merely scrubbing her piece where she is chumming with indicted Senator Ted Stevens wasn't enough...letting Palin speak for herself on anything has been deemed too risky.

So here we have a woman who is pretty much against anything Hillary Clinton is for, who is already being silenced by McCain, and offers nothing to people who backed Clinton beyond a second X chromosome from a swing state.

If the only requirement to be McCain's VP is to be a woman, it really is stunning how deep McCain had to dig to find a Republican woman to run with him. There are five woman Republican Senators, including swing state specials such as Elizabeth Dole and Susan Collins. They didn't make the cut, or didn't want to. Same with three more experienced Republican governors, including Jodi Rell and Linda Lingle, two moderate Republicans with real future potential. Even Republican businesswomen such as Carly Fiorina weren't picked.

Instead we get somebody so far down the depth chart that she's pretty much AA-league material. So apparently, those of us who backed Hillary Clinton are expected to be grateful for any woman -- anywhere on the ticket. Even an inexperienced, reactionary Republican woman. Even a second-tier inexperienced, reactionary Republican woman. Maybe the first tier was too uppity for McCain's liking, maybe they were smart enough to say no.

This is the crassest tokenism...one can't even make the argument that Palin has the most to offer from the small group of prominent Republican women! Do they think that this will actually work?

PS: I will say that I think this does pretty much put Alaska in McCain's column. Alaska was always a long shot, though, and what the three he gains there, are more than balanced by the four he's going to lose in New Hampshire for picking such a reactionary unknown.

McCain's Houses: Age or Riches?

Interesting phrasing in Obama's tv ad reacting to McCain's admission that he didn't know how many houses he owns:



Around the 17 second mark, the narrator says "then again, that same day when asked how many houses he owns, McCain lost track. He couldn't remember."

Does that strike you as saying "McCain has so many houses he can't keep track" or "McCain is so old he can't keep track"?

Oh, the suspense is boring me

So Obama is going to let the world know his vice presidential pick soon. A week later, McCain will do the same.

And then those persons will make a bunch of largely underreported speeches in the less important campaign areas, participate in a forgettable debate, then one of them will be elected vice president. S/he will then enter a job whose main duty is to wake up, say "is the president alive? Great, now what?"

And for every Cheney who muscled his way into being in charge, you have...well, nearly everybody else. Truman, who didn't know about the atom bomb until FDR's widow told him. Or this guy, a man so underwhelming that he managed to make Lincoln's Vice President into a role negligible to American history. Let's face it, Vice President Gore could have been kidnapped for months before the general public noticed.

Sure, there's an outside chance s/he may end up as president, either upon untimely death -- though one could debate if McCain's passing at 73 would be "untimely" -- or springboard to a future campaign. But let's be honest with ourselves; much of this discussion is just to fill time and space until something interesting happens.

Maybe McCain could roll out his top five right now, and eliminate one every other day -- let's go whole-hog on the showbiz aspect of this race for second place.

Just kidding -- it's really me. Just trying to lower expectations.

Stupid Like a Fox: McCain on Social Security

Much fun is being had around the Interwebs with McCain's latest gem:

"Americans have got to understand that we are paying present-day retirees with the taxes paid by young workers in America today. And that's a disgrace. It's an absolute disgrace, and it's got to be fixed."

Well, duh, sez MyDD: "This could ruin him. As most everyone who earns a paycheck knows, young workers pay into the program, and retirees collect the benefit." No kiddin', chimes in DailyKos: "Every time McCain opens his mouth these days, he seems to be expressing either ignorance or disdain." At TPM, they just say "nonsense".

And they're right. From when Social Security was set up, the plan was for workers to pay the costs of those retired, and yes the program is functioning according to plan. If you have an understanding of the history of Social Security, his statement is foolish. Now, how many people in that large segment called voters-who-don't-blog have an understanding of the history of Social Security? The plan does sound weird...were such a program run by a private enterprise, it could be viewed as a Ponzi scheme. Would you enroll in this program were it described suchly by a salesman who came to your door?

But I'm not convinced this was a "gaffe" by McCain. As annoying as many things are that come out of politicians' mouths, I believe it is overlooked just how much cleverness and smarts it takes to get far in the field. Frankly, I don't think one tenth of political bloggers could keep it on the level so constantly as the professionals. (I particularly think of their glee when a politician on either side is caught doing a crossword puzzle or napping at some pointless policy hearing that would put any beating heart into a coma.) I'm inclined to believe that at least half the mistakes candidates make are on purpose, and I think this "slip" by McCain is one of them.

One of the sad truths about last-minute voters, who often make the difference in elections, is that they are incredibly, well, uninformed. (Christopher Hayes' article is a great read on that point.) And whether it be Obama-as-Muslim, Obama-not-sayin'-the-Pledge, or this, the Republicans are doing a great job targeting that uninformed voter. While policy wonks may get tickled at McCain's ignorance, I'd guess that twice, three times as many others are thinking "he's right, that don't make no sense." How many people are ignorant of the original setup of Social Security works? Bloggers and policy wonks are not McCain's constituency, and while he may actually be talking under our heads, he may be hitting his target audience square on.

Lousy cables

There is serial hand-wringing about how and how much to question McCain's suitability for President based on his age. I'm of the feeling that McCain's age isn't fair game -- we don't get to say that at X years, you're no longer capable of certain jobs. Bush was elected at 54 years old, and was disastrous from day one, pretty much. On the other hand, you have Warren Buffett, who is eight years older than McCain but still a man I'd trust to run this country.

But McCain's mental faculties and "connectedness" to the world are an appropriate thing to question. I don't care whether it's due to age, fatigue, or control from pod people, the fact that he can't keep straight Somalia and the Sudan -- repeatedly -- makes me wonder. It's not just a lack of knowledge, but also the ability to hold his own with other world leaders. You have leaders of Malaysia and Iran blogging, a hyper-awareness on technology from the leaders of Germany, Britain, and Japan, and we elect...a man afraid of his own computer? It is indubitably fair to question any candidate's understanding of the world around him. A technophobe who confuses disparate African countries, and can't keep Sunni and Shia straight, shouldn't be president whether he's 35 or twice that.

If a 40 year old candidate groused about "the cables" like this, I'd worry...

A pro-immigrant president in 2009

One thing that's likeable about McCain is that he's pro-immigrant, no matter what mouth-breathing Republicans think. Here's something he said last December that is, well, eminently reasonable:

"It’s the influx of illegals into places where they’ve never seen a Hispanic influence before," McCain told me. "You probably see more emotion in Iowa than you do in Arizona on this issue. I was in a town in Iowa, and twenty years ago there were no Hispanics in the town. Then a meatpacking facility was opened up. Now twenty per cent of their population is Hispanic. There were senior citizens there who were—‘concerned’ is not the word. They see this as an assault on their culture, what they view as an impact on what have been their traditions in Iowa, in the small towns in Iowa. So you get questions like 'Why do I have to punch 1 for English?' 'Why can’t they speak English?' It’s become larger than just the fact that we need to enforce our borders."

Common sense. Uncommon for a Republican.


While I think McCain is far from honest, he's been pro-diversity long enough that I don't think this is insincere, not least of all because this was the exact moment that such an argument would be most damaging to a speaker -- in the heat of the Republican primary. It seems that no matter how things fall, our next president will be anti-torture and pro-immigrant.

It ain't much, but it's something, I guess...