A number of people I've talked to haven't been able to understand Andrew Sullivan's fascination with all things Obama -- since I've come to believe Barack Obama is the best hope out of the current Democratic field, it's not really puzzling to me. What is perplexing to me is Sullivan's continued swoon over John McCain. I get that McCain is against torture, Sullivan's top issue these days. But you'd think that after initially being a big Bush supporter back in the day, Sullivan would be a bit more wary singing the praises of a candidate whose cantankerousness, unpredictability and convenient fibbing do not bode well for an actual term in the White House.
A couple of columns from yesterday point out the glaring weaknesses of McCain. Matt Welch at Reason pleads with the nation's editorial writers to check some facts before they claim McCain "would never mislead or dishonor" his country:
Never mislead? Does a "lie" count as misleading in South Carolina? Because that's what McCain repeatedly copped to, after flip-flopping in the Palmetto State during the 2000 campaign on the Confederate flag, calling it a "symbol of racism" one day and a "state's rights" issue the next. "The politician who promises to put patriotism before selfishness, who promises not to lie, and then reneges," he reflected in his 2002 political memoir Worth the Fighting For, "does more harm to the public trust than does the politician who makes no issues of his or her virtue."
Considering that McCain in New Hampshire this month railed against "negative ads" while running them, and then bragged in his victory speech that he "always told you the truth," it seems timelier than ever to double-check, rather than rubber-stamp, the new front-runner's honesty.
From a more progressive perspective, Matthew Yglesias pretty much sums up the McCain problem:
In other words, on eighty percent of issues McCain seems to me to be making it up as he goes along. At his best, he's cravenly flip-flopping according to the political headwinds. But other times, he just seems to be acting on whim or out of pique. Or he's coming to middle-ground positions that don't make sense, like "global warming is real and we should stop it, but only through measures that wouldn't actually stop it!"
I've eavesdropped on a handful of gay Republican cocktail party conversations, and I get the feeling that among gay conservatives there's a feeling that McCain is a principled man the gay community can deal with (and once Giuliani finishes imploding, he'll be all they're left with). They shouldn't get their hopes up, given that he supports "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," the one gay rights issue that a majority of the country actually supports us on.
I'm actually of a mind to agree with Yglesias, in that if the worst-case scenario of a Republican third term in the White House, Mitt Romney may be the most bearable of some very unbearable choices since he at least has some base executive competency that Bush has disastrously lacked. Plus, since Romney's a complete Decepticon, there's always a chance he'll transform again depending on the political winds. McCain, on the other hand, seems to transform on a random basis.
Again, this is all worst-case scenario, Duck and Cover stuff. Here's hoping the Dems don't screw it up.
Comments