I actually had to get some work done today, so light political reading …
Not much in Palin news, except for Fox News coming to its senses and realizing it would be kind of embarrassing to actually report on conservatives dissing Gov. Sarah, so trying to take down that particular news story. Too bad once it’s on the Internet, it’s in the wild …
Most of the McCain news has to do with the bail-out debacle. As everyone knows now, the Republicans balked at the bailout (the most coherent justification seeming to be that the Democrats made them feel sad). And yet, mere hours before they did so, there was John McCain on his white horse, leading the charge, and with all of his flacks and handlers proclaiming proudly how he brought the deal together and personally saved the country.
Oops. (John, there’s this old saying, “Don’t count your chickens before they’re hatched” — that seems to be twice you’ve blown that one n the last week or so.)
Perhaps he’d really been as involved as he claimed he was he might have had more success.
The only other McCain news verges on the kind of sleazy rumor-mongering that I tend to eschew. I mean, there’s usually more than enough fodder for why we shouldn’t vote for someone solely based on their statements and record, without getting into personality flaws. But the McCain-as-crazy-gambler rumor has been steadily bubbling along, and a bit more second-hand information came out today.
I will say only (a) it is in keeping with the mercurial and risk-taking personality that McCain seems to embody, and (b) it’s something that could be easily laid to rest if the campaign wanted to. Plus, (c) if true, it’s yet another reason why we shouldn’t vote for him.
In non-economic-collapse-McCain news we have the old earmark problem. Earmarks, to the extent that they are identified with “pork-barrel,” are an easy target, and McCain has flogged this horse long and hard (he has an admirable reputation in Arizona, though his running mate much less so). But the impact of earmark spending is trivial, which even McCain seemed to acknowledge during the debate. And, of course, one man’s wasteful earmark is another man’s critically necessary federal support for worthy effort. In short, earmarks make an easy target, but they are largely a trivial one, save for the people who actually depend on one.
And while one can argue, as McCain does, that it represents a moral failing and a climate of corruption, to also claim that it will help balance the budget or pay for massive tax cuts seems, um, disingenuous.
And, meanwhile, in the non-McCain GOP melt-down, we have a primer on “How to Lose Two Voting Blocs with One Statement“. Don’t try this at home kids — these are professionals.
And so it goes.