lull
I'm going away for the weekend so posting will resume on Monday. We await the arrival of Senator Obama on our shores with baited breath. Let's hope he brings some sunshine with him.
I'm going away for the weekend so posting will resume on Monday. We await the arrival of Senator Obama on our shores with baited breath. Let's hope he brings some sunshine with him.
Politico's Ben Smith has a story up about John McCain's dubious taste in jokes. It includes an unhilarious one about rape - though Smith admits the sourcing is thin for that one. This one from 1998, however, is definitely a Senator McCain special:
Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?" he asked guests at a Senate Republican fundraiser. "Because her father is Janet Reno."
Chelsea Clinton was 18 at the time.
Liberal commentator Jonathan Chait explains why, despite everything, he still has a soft spot for McCain.
Yet, somehow, I still feel some pangs of affinity for the old codger.
Where Bush is peevish, entitled, and insecure, McCain's charming,
ironic, and self-deprecating. Bush's path to public life was trading on
his father's name to run a series of business ventures into the ground
before being handed a baseball team. McCain's was an episode of
awe-inspiring perseverance.
A piece in the New York Post co-authored by former Clinton strategist Dick Morris (who famously believes that men are from Mars, and women are from Yellow Pages) suggests an interesting line of attack for McCain on the issue of Iraq.
In a nutshell, the argument is this: by pulling out of Iraq precipitously, Obama will allow Al Qaeda and Iran to move into the vacuum and use it as a base of terror against the US. Not only that, but by destabilising the fragile peace established by the surge, his actions will instigate a new war in the region. McCain, by promising to keep troops there as long as it takes to establish a stable Iraqi state, is the true candidate of peace.
I'm sure that McCain will try something like this, and it's probably his best shot at persuading voters that Obama isn't up to the job of Commander-In-Chief.
Obama's first comeback might be to point out that Al Qaeda and Iran wouldn't be in Iraq in the first place if it weren't for Bush/McCain's war. But that's a bit backward-looking. He needs to persuade Americans that a pullout of our troops won't lead to a breakdown of order in the region. That relies on things continuing to stabilise in the next few months.
So now we're in a weird situation where it's not clear how what happens in Iraq affects the election. Is stability good for McCain (it has been so far) because it allows him to point to the success of the surge that he supported and Obama opposed? Or is it good for Obama because it reassures Americans that it's OK to leave now?
Maybe the optimum situation for McCain - in pure and cynical political terms - is for things to remain stable right up until October.
Watching Romney do this interview, you can see what McCain means. He is fluent, poised, and sharp on the attack.
Note in particular Romney's characterisation of Obama as a "charming fellow" who has good intentions. Nothing Romney says is off-the-cuff. I think this might be a sign that the McCain campaign, after labelling Obama a dangerous liberal and unscrupulous card, have settled on a strategy: patronise him. Treat him as a likeable, talented guy who just isn't remotely experienced enough for the job. As Romney puts it, "This is not the time for an amateur."
Bill Clinton is due to make a major announcement concerning his foundation tomorrow. If it involves its headquarters relocating to Kampala and Bill's consequent emigration to Africa, then we'll know that Hillary and Obama have finally arrived at a deal to give her the VP slot.
In a post that is on fire, Gawker dissects all the nonsense spouted over the New Yorker cover in the last couple of days, then burns it alive.