McCain Derangement & The O Has the Mo

A couple of thoughts on the Presidential race after reviewing today’s referrer logs…

McCain Derangement Syndrome and the November Election.

I’ve been blasting McCain for years, starting with that abomination McCain-Feingold. Others are late to the game. We’ve all been diagnosed with “McCain Derangement Syndrome” by the likes of John Gibson and Michael Medved. Gibson in particular has been worrying for a couple of weeks that conservatives are “bloodying” McCain so badly that he won’t be able to win in November.

The bloodying is in two forms: conservatives complaining about McCain’s defections from conservative principles and conservatives complaining about McCain’s not so well hidden skeletons. What Gibson doesn’t get is this – liberals won’t care about McCain’s defections and liberals won’t ignore the skeletons when the time is right. It’s imperative, but unfortunately too late, to get the word out about McCain’s history of flirting with corruption precisely because it will come out in the general election anyway. The liberal media love McCain as a maverick Republican in the Senate or an underdog Republican Presidential hopeful. They will not love him as a Republican nominee for President and the pass they’ve given him on Bonanno, Keating and Peabody Coal will not survive the convention. Republicans giving McCain a pass on corruption in the primary won’t earn him a pass in the general. (Someone came to visit today looking for “Joseph Bonano and McCain” at Google. Lots of liberal reporters will be doing that kind of digging with much more than Google at there disposal.)

The O has the Mo

Super Tuesday may have looked like a near tie, but it looks to me like the O has the Mo. Obama has, by my count, a slight lead in actual delegates, though Hillary is still ahead if the superdelegates stated intentions are included. But those superdelegates can change their minds – they’re all technically uncommitted and quite a few haven’t said how they’re voting yet. (Ted Kennedy just declared last week, remember?)

I posted Obama’s New Hampshire primary speech in my political speeches archive here, because I think it is a great example of political oratory without regard to policy. Nine of the last twenty-five visitors to this site came from a major search engine searching for one of the lines from that speech. 36% of visitors. I’ve written about and posted speeches by Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, John F. Kennedy and Abraham Lincoln. None of them have accounted for 36% of visitors, but Barack Obama did.

It’s a good speech, by the way. Though it does make me worry about the future of the Republican Party, it makes me hopeful for the future of the country. Like the great speeches of Ronald Reagan, it focuses on what the American people can do, on what’s great about America, not what’s wrong. If that attitude catches on, it bodes well, policy aside, for a younger generation that thinks beyond all reason that they have it bad. If Obama and his supporters live up to his commitment to treat opponents as people who care about the nation, but disagree on policy, that will be a great change from the caricature of intellectual conservatives as warmongering exploiters of the working class. (Though I’ll miss the irony of rich liberal commenters calling me that as I scrape by.)

[tags]Obama,McCain,McCain Derangement,John Gibson,Michael Medved[/tags]

This entry was posted in Default.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: