John McCain's youngest son

...gets a New York Times bio:

By enlisting in the Marines, Jimmy seemed to be giving up his birthright. The Navy is, by reputation, the most aristocratic of the armed forces, the McCains among its most storied families. Now he would hold the lowest rank in a branch known for its grittiness. “The first time I heard he was going to be in the company, I couldn’t believe it,” said First Lt. Sam Bowlby, one of Lance Corporal McCain’s officers in Iraq.

The article also notes Senator McCain's reluctance to discuss his son's military career:

Mr. McCain did not speak publicly about whatever anxiety he may have felt about his son’s deployment

And Lance Corporal McCain's humility

Just before Jimmy’s departure, Mrs. McCain decided she had to see him one final time, according to Lieutenant Bowlby. With a few well-placed phone calls, she won permission to visit the Air Force base from which his unit would depart. When Lance Corporal McCain found out, he protested. No special favors, he said. Mrs. McCain stayed away.

You have to admire Lance Corporal McCain's willingness to serve his country, particularly in the toughest branch of service, especially given his family's background. Likewise, John McCain's reluctance to exploit his son's military career for political gain is equally deserving of respect and admiration.

The Hanoi Hilton

From John McCain's campaign website, video of the torture and solitary confinement he suffered as a Prisoner of War during Vietnam.



Regardless of what you think of his politics, it's powerful stuff.

Don't Screw Up Before the First Primary

Former Senator John Edwards is having a hard time not violating one of the cardinal rules of the race for President.

He doesn't necessarily need to dazzle, awe, or inspire all that much. He really just needs to raise money and stick to the talking points. But just don't screw up.

First, it was the radically venomous, hateful bloggers he hired, then it was his $400 haircut, then he denied that we are fighting a war on terror, and now...

Edwards Recants Iraq Report Remark

Former Senator John Edwards, a Democratic presidential candidate, told an interviewer on Wednesday that he had read the classified October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate before voting to authorize force in Iraq, even though he had previously maintained that he had not read the report and had only been briefed on it.

Foot in mouth syndrome.

I see Edwards as the John McCain of the Democrats... wacky, oddball, and crazier than the last time he ran for president.

McCain the weak and inarticulate

This Daily Show segment exemplifies why John McCain will not be elected president. If he cannot hold up in a debate with Jon Stewart, how will he fare against a Democratic candidate?

Stewart: Here's the thing that I'm trying to say. When they attack people who disagree with their policy, they attack them in that they don't understand that there's a real threat out there. I'm saying to you, the American people... they know there's a real threat out there, they felt like Iraq lessened our ability to lessen that threat... they're trying to follow us home anyway!

McCain: The war was terribly mismanaged. Look, we are where we are now. Can we give this strategy a chance?

How utterly weak, McCain's retort. For one, he seems to agree with Stewart, blames the administration, and then blithely says "we are where we are now," (which he will repeat MANY times throughout the interview).

Stewart: If the architects that built the house without any doors or windows don't admit that that's the house they built, can continue to say that 'no, it's your fault for not being able to see into it...'

McCain: I was the most severe critic of that architect.

Again, essentially vindicating Stewart's argument, but supplying no serious rebuttal or intellectual alternative argument. How about: President Bush has admitted the mistakes the administratin made, he had a press conference with Tony Blair in fact. That's just one possible reply, but there are many others.

Stewart: They say that asking for a timetable or criticizing the president is not supporting the troops - explain to me why that is supporting the troops less than extending their tours of duty from 12 to 15 months, putting them in stop loss, and not having Walter Reed up to snuff.

McCain: All I can say is that if you talk to these young men and women who are fighting, they'll tell you they think it's a worthwhile cause, and that they're fighting for freedom (boos)

That's all he can say? How about: 1) Who is 'they?' 2) The criticism among the right is not nearly as much about how Democrats are not supporting the troops. The criticism of the timetable is two fold - Firstly, that it will signal to the enemy our intent to leave, and when we plan to leave. Secondly, there is virtually no precedent for the Congress to attempt to manage a war itself, overruling the Generals, and the President (Commander in Chief).

Stewart: What's less supportive to the good people who believe they're fighting a great cause, is to not give them a strategy that makes their success possible. Adding 10,000 people to quell Baghdad - adding 350,000, and maybe you'll have a shot.

McCain: (Once again) We are where we are.

Here, McCain does not even point out Stewart's inaccurate description of the troop surge as '10,000.' The surge will eventually yield two to three times that number. Furthermore, McCain did not even call out Stewart on the fact that of course Stewart and the Democrats would not support 350,000 troops, nor would it be logical. Is Stewart a General? How does he know the number of troops it will take to quell the violence?

If John McCain somehow manages to win the Republican nomination, it will not be due to his efforts. If he wins the nomination, he will be carried by the weakness of his opponents, by the idea of John McCain, and by his biography. But he won't win the nomination.

Reid the Irresponsible and McCain the Reckless

"I believe ... that this war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week"

Harry Reid's comments were simply one of the most shameful, irresponsible, and ridiculous words I've heard from a politician in quite some time. Worse than Nancy Pelosi's comments about wanting to meet with Ahmadinejad in Iran. Worse than Bush's "Bring it on." Worse than Gingrich's claim that his infidelity while in office was somehow less bad than Clinton's.

Unbelievably, there were TWO such comments today... John McCain, earlier today:

At the campaign rally, McCain was asked if an attack on Iran is in the works, the GEORGETOWN TIMES reports. McCain began his answer by changing the words to a popular BEACH BOYS song.“Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran,” he sang to the tune of Barbara Ann.

These are our politicians. Our "first citizens." Our [maybe, I hope not] future presidents.

sigh

We cannot run the country like this, not with these words. We can't come to the table as credible partners when we joke about bombing another country. We can't hope to discourage Islamic terrorists to stop the violence when we announce that more violence is what they need to get us out of Iraq more quickly.

McCain's Flip-Flop on Bloggers

McCain Panders To Bloggers After Previously Calling Them ‘Infatuated With Self-Expression’

Yesterday in a conference call with conservative bloggers, McCain attempted to pander to the blogosphere by ensuring them that they would be tapped in to his administration, if he becomes president.

But as a senator, McCain has hardly been a friend to bloggers. In May 2006, he said bloggers are “infatuated with self-expression” who believe themselves to be “so much more eloquent, well-informed, and wiser than anyone else.” In December, he introduced legislation that would treat blogs like Internet service providers and hold them responsible for all activity in the comments sections and user profiles, subjecting them to “even stiffer penalties” than ISPs.

The Politico on a Thompson Run

Insiders Map Plan for '08 Thompson Bid

Fred Dalton Thompson was bored in the U.S. Senate and has had more fun playing District Attorney Arthur Branch on NBC’s “Law and Order.” Now, he’s a step closer to the ultimate audition: running for president of the United States.

Thompson sees a potential opening in the unsettled field of Republican hopefuls as a no-nonsense, charismatic conservative who would offer reassurance at a time when voters are craving security, according to the friends.

About the only factor that makes his candidacy plausible at this late date would be his celebrity and the deep dismay that conservatives feel about the current field. Thompson also would have to answer questions about a notable embarrassment from his Senate career – a failed four-month series of hearings on the Democratic campaign finance scandals that he conducted in 1997 as chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee.

One drawback? Like some other Republican candidates (Giuliani & McCain), Thompson is on his second marriage. So far Romney is the only prominent candidate in the field who has only been married to one woman.

McCain is not just losing points in the polls

RADAR:

McCain Staffers Bail Off the Crazy Train

John McCain's Obama-esque remarks about our "wasted" resources in Iraq weren't the only comments that landed him in hot water after a recent appearance on Late Night with David Letterman. Many of his staff were blindsided by his campaign announcement. And several aides were so outraged that they've quit, say Republican insiders.

"They're imploding—he had a game plan that had him announcing much later in the year," one top Republican aide tells Radar, adding that the campaign is "in serious trouble ... Romney's plan and Rudy's jump in the polls caused him to scrap his plans completely. When you do that, and you're not prepared for it, the staff goes crazy. Some of his coordinators in different states were pulling their hair out!"

Another insider, a guru to the conservative movement, says that McCain himself is growing increasingly desperate in the wake of his downward slide in the polls—a slip hastened by his steadfast support of the very man who savaged him and his family during the 2000 election, George W. Bush, and the president's unpopular plan for troop surge in Iraq. "One of the top aides to the Republican leadership told me that McCain has lost so much support, he's simply beside himself. He's wringing his hands. Things are sinking fast—in two or three weeks, we'll know if there is any recovery."

It didn't help any that McCain was the one leading Republican candidate who skipped last weekend's Conservative Political Action Conference. In CPAC's straw poll on Saturday, McCain came in fifth place—behind Sam Brownback. When the results were announced, attendees booed at the mention of his name.

Back in early February, I posted on McCain's worrisome stances on issues. His panderous behavior has caught up with him before the race has even begun.

McCain is done

Reuters:

Giuliani up 25 points over McCain: poll

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican presidential hopeful Rudolph Giuliani, virtually tied with John McCain in a January poll, held a 25-point lead over the Arizona senator in a Newsweek magazine survey released on Saturday.

Among registered Republicans, 59 percent said they backed the former New York City mayor and 34 percent said they favored McCain, who announced on Wednesday he would seek the presidency in 2008, Newsweek said.

Going down in blazing glory

McCain has done it again. Two years away from the actual election, and the Arizona Senator has stepped in it big: McCain apologises for 'wasted lives' Iraq slip.

Worse, still, he repeated the same mistake Obama did just weeks ago. How can this be? I've written here and here about McCain's flip-flop tendencies, his serial pandering to whichever audience he happens to be in front of. However, these latest comments about American lives "wasted" in Iraq take the cake.

Dick Morris and Eileen McGann wrote yesterday that McCain's Campaign Collapses, and with good reason.

Fundamentally, he failed to heed the Shakespeare's admonition "to thine own self be true." The John McCain of the 2000 campaign is nowhere in evidence in 2007.

Now he has been identified with two issues, neither popular in the Republican Party: The Iraqi troop surge and amnesty for illegal aliens.

Panderer:

Republican strategist and Reagan campaign manager Ed Rollins makes an interesting point about McCain: He has switched roles. He has gone from being the McCain of the 2000 race, challenging the party orthodoxy, offering new ideas, and demanding reforms and changes to the Bush of the 2000, toeing the party line and only timidly venturing different ideas if he advances them at all. And this is no way to win the presidency or even the Republican nomination. But where it has counted, on the two core issues that move Republican voters these days — tax cuts and immigration — McCain is badly out of step with the GOP base.

The Rudy Effect:

Rudy also surges at a time when the other candidates are disappearing from the Republican nominating process. In addition to McCain's swoon, the other possible top contender, Mitt Romney has stalled and is falling backwards. His flip-flop-flip from pro-life to pro-choice and back to pro-life again is not winning him any converts.

Hugh Hewitt also writes:

Rudy The Liberal Slayer: Will The Big Three Be The Big Two Soon?

So, you should be asking, if it is all about the war, why isn't John McCain surging in his GOP support given his very vocal commitment to the war for all these years?

The GOP base has a trust issue with McCain, one that flows from the 2000 campaign, McCain-Feingold, the Gang of 14, the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill, the September 2006 derailing of the Republican end-game strategy. McCain is fading, and not because of his age or energy level, but because the GOP electorate has to absolutely believe that the next president will be as committed to victory as Bush has been. Senator McCain's avoidance of new media has been reinforcing the impression that he is unwilling to provide the assurances he needs to in order to regain the trust he has repeatedly broken with the GOP electorate over the years. There is time to turn that around, but Senator McCain is not making the effort, an effort that would begin by a relentless courting of the base rather than the Hardball/Meet The Press audience. Every week that Senator McCain delays launching that effort is a week in which the mayor and the governor gather more pledges and momentum. The big three could be the big two by Memorial Day.

McCain's most obvious problem is his inability to stick to one story on an issue. Even or Iraq, which he has strongly supported, of which he's advocated repeatedly for adding more troops - how can he claim lives were wasted? Wouldn't he, then, also be wasting lives by voting for more troops? McCain simply can't have it both ways: Pro-Surge or "Wasted" lives, Pro-life or Pro-choice. The Senator once known for his bold stands on issues has now become a sad semblance of his former self.

Flippity Flop!

Washington Post August 24, 1999:

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) appeared to soften his position on making abortion illegal in separate interviews in recent days, drawing criticism from social conservatives and some of his opponents for the Republican presidential nomination.

"I'd love to see a point where it is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary," McCain told the Chronicle in an article published Friday.

Okay, well if that's how you feel...

"But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations."

Wait, -what? What does that even mean?

February 1, 2000:

On "Meet the Press" Sunday, McCain said he would support a constitutional amendment to ban abortion - an issue most of us are sick of debating. Yet here it is, again, election 2000, 27 years after Roe v. Wade.

Tim Russert: (You want) a constitutional amendment to ban all abortions?
McCain: Yes, sir.
Russert: You're for that?
McCain: Yes, sir.

I see, I see... again, Senator, you are entitled to your opinion...

Time Magazine, February 7, 2000:

A reporter aboard McCain's rolling political salon hit him with a tough "hypothetical": What would he do if his 15-year-old daughter were pregnant and wanted to get an abortion? He made the mistake of answering it, then flubbing it, saying first that his daughter would have the "final decision"--a suspiciously pro-choice position for a pro-life candidate--and then, in a clarification issued soon after, that it would be a "family decision." For pro-life activists, McCain's purity on the issue has been suspect since last summer, when he told the San Francisco Chronicle that he would not work to overturn Roe v. Wade. (He later rescinded the comment, or tried to.)

But wait, didn't you? I mean you just- didn't... you... the other day...

Fox News, February 19, 2007:

"I do not support Roe versus Wade. It should be overturned," the Arizona senator told about 800 people in South Carolina, one of the early voting states.

Arrggh! I'm so confused!!!

What is the difference so far?

The American public has come to expect a controversy or two during a Presidential cycle - during any election cycle.

Yet, without making a judgement call, I am struck at the difference in the controversies within the Presidential campaigns of Republicans and Democrats so far. Two years prior to the election, anything can happen. But there can be no doubt that many Democratic hopefuls are off to a bad start.

John Edwards' Bloggergate has hurt him, especially among Catholic Democrats.

And Barack Obama has had negative press twice:

- First, Obama and Australian Prime Minister John Howard get into a flap
(Granted, Howard started it).

- Second, Obama says troop deaths in Iraq were "wasted," then fails to apologize for it (He has
only said he "would" apologize if military families were offended). More from Jules Crittenden
here.

In contrast, Republican Presidential hopefuls have managed thus far to avoid much negative press, save for John McCain, who is drawing fire for these bizarre steps:

- First by choosing to be the Kenynote speaker at a Creationist advocacy group, and

- Second, by predicting a Tet Offensive by insurgents in Iraq.

Yet, Romney, Giuliani, Huckabee and others have managed to stay away from bad press - for now. Only two more years to go...

Which McCain?

From Think Progress:

McCain To Deliver Keynote Speech For Creationists

...on February 23, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) will be the keynote speaker for the most prominent creationism advocacy group in the country. The Discovery Institute, a religious right think-tank, is well-known for its strong opposition to evolutionary biology and its advocacy for “intelligent design.”

And from Yahoo News:

McCain fears 'Tet Offensive' in Iraq

RICHMOND, Va. - Republican presidential hopeful John McCain (news, bio, voting record) said Monday he fears an offensive by Iraqi insurgents similar to the Tet offensive by the Viet Cong that sent U.S. casualties soaring in Vietnam nearly 40 years ago.

It is unclear what McCain's strategy is thus far in the Presidential Election cycle... other than, perhaps, to piss off as many people on the left and right as possible. If he continues to pander to every possible constituency - the left on Iraq fears, and the right on social issues - he will find him self out of the race before it begins.

And The New York Times takes a bite:

McCain’s 3-Step With Romney

Get used to it. Where one top-tier candidate goes, another will surely follow, or lead, or just somehow find a way to pull the spotlight (and the television cameras) his or her way.

So, as former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney formally announces his presidential candidacy today in Dearborn, Mich., one of his premier rivals for the G.O.P. nomination, Senator John McCain, just happens to be the subject of a news conference by some of the state’s officials in Michigan, too. [This corrects an earlier version this morning that said Mr. McCain would be there, too. He’s not attending; only his supporters are.]

Not a flattering start for McCain's Presidential aspirations.