There was a time when Democrats wanted this campaign to be a referendum on George W. Bush, and Republicans wanted this campaign to be a referendum on Barack Obama.
I guess you could say the Republicans got what they wanted.
Now that McCain’s vice-presidential nominee has accused Obama of “palling around with terrorists,” this election is only about one thing: whether or not Barack Obama is a terrorist sympathizer. When Palin launched that line of attack, she created a media monster that will completely dominate the campaign from now until election day.
Let me give you an example: No matter what, this “palling around with terrorists” line will utterly consume coverage of the third and final presidential debate.
This is true for two reasons: First, when McCain failed to raise this “issue” during the second debate Tuesday night, the Senator was slammed by many on the right for not doing so. I’ll steal an example from Lee’s blog below quoting right-winger Andy McCarthy:
Memo to McCain Campaign: Someone is either a terrorist sympathizer or he isn’t; someone is either disqualified as a terrorist sympathizer or he’s qualified for public office. You helped portray Obama as a clealy qualified presidential candidate who would fight terrorists.
If that’s what the public thinks, good luck trying to win this thing.
McCarthy is right: When Palin accused Obama of “palling around with terrorists,” she effectively accused him of being the moral equivalent of a child molester — and you can’t publicly call a man a child molester and then completely ignore the issue during a debate. (For one thing, it makes you look like you’re happy to debate a child molester, which raises questions about you.) Setting aside the child molester metaphor, McCain’s unwillingness to address the issue during a debate gives the impression that either (a) McCain doesn’t really think Obama is a terrorist sympathizer, but is only saying that to get elected, or (b) McCain does really think Obama is a terrorist sympathizer, but doesn’t have the guts to say it to Obama’s face.
Which brings us to the second reason why the “palling around with terrorists” issue will dominate media coverage and analysis of the third debate: Barack Obama has now gone on national television and questioned why McCain wouldn’t speak these “over-the-top” attacks “to my face.” And Biden has practically dared McCain to do so, saying that “in my neighborhood, when you’ve got something to say to somebody, you look him in the eyes when you say it.”
And the right-wing whackos are desperate to hear their candidate give a Senator’s voice to their hysterical pananoia. Check out this recent report from a McCain rally, as conveyed by Politico:
Working to dampen the angry crowd meme, McCain tells his Minnesota rally to take it easy, Amie Parnes reports:
At a town hall in Minnesota, McCain tried to tone down a week of raucus, angry crowds after one man stood up and said: “We want you to fight.”
“The people here in Minnesota want to see a real fight. We want a strong president to lead us through the next four years.”
“I think I got my marching orders,” McCain said. But then he shifted tones.
“I am enthusiastic and encouraged by the enthusiasm and I think it’s really good,” McCain said. “We have to fight and i will fight but we will be respectful. I admire Sen. Obama and his accomplishments and I want to be respectful.
“I dont mean that you have to lose your ferocity. I just mean you have to be respectful.”
A moment later, another woman stood up and urged McCain to speak up so voters “really have an understanding of who the candidates are.”
“There’s a difference between rhetoric and record,” McCain said, adding that Obama voted to raise taxes 94 times. “He has the most liberal voting record in the United States Senate, even more liberal than Bernie Sanders.”
Once again, McCain repeated, “I want all of you to tell your neighbors about the difference between rhetoric and record, but let’s do it respectfully.”
Later in the event, man in the audience stood up and told McCain he’s “scared” of an Obama presidency and who he’d select for the Supreme Court.
“I have to tell you. Sen. Obama is a decent person and a person you don’t have to be scared of as president of the United States,” McCain said as the crowd booed and shouted “Come on, John!”
“If I didn’t think I’d be a heck of a lot better, I wouldn’t be running for President of the United States.”
If it’s not the Times editorial board jeering him, it’s his own crowd.
It is no longer acceptable in Republican politics to say Obama is a decent man that “you don’t have to be scared of.”
So this is High Noon time. This is the sort of pissing contest that cable network news execs salivate over. In the second debate, McCain launched a bold new plan to have the federal government buy hundreds of billions of mortgages as a big loss — but nobody cares, because Palin’s “palling around with terrorists” line is just so much easier to understand and exciting to think about. The big soap opera question now on the minds of all Americans who look to politics for high drama is this: Will McCain take-the-bait/have-the-guts/be-stupid-enough to raise the question of Obama’s association with former Weatherman Bill Ayers during the third debate?
If McCain does indeed raise the issue and Obama responds, all media coverage will focus on that exchange almost exclusively for at least several days and probably longer. In that case, the exchange will be so dramatic, so exciting, that the decision over whether to obsess over it will be a no-brainer for TV execs looking to draw an audience.
If McCain doesn’t raise the issue, then McCain’s critics on the right and Obama’s allies on the left (strange bedfellows) will spend the next three days asking the same question: Why? Why would Senator John “Straight Talk” McCain’s campaign throw out the highly inflammatory suggestion that Obama likes “palling around with terrorists” — which sounds highly dangerous and treasonous — and then muffle it?
Is it because McCain was scared of Obama? Is it because McCain doesn’t really think Obama is a terrorist sympathizer? Either way, McCain is either a sleaze-ball or a coward, or both. (Bingo!)
And then, from then until election day, coverage and analysis on the left and the right will continue to focus on the same questions: Will McCain continue to push the terrorist sympathizer charge? Or will McCain try to dial it back? And as answers to these questions present themselves, analysts on both sides will speculate about why.
Americans already trust Obama to handle our economy, our foreign policy, and just about everything else better than McCain. They’ve seen McCain pick a vice-presidential candidate who makes a fool of herself on television, pretend to suspend a campaign only to sheepishly return to it, and say the “fundamentals of our economy are strong” a few hours before the biggest economic crisis this country has faced since the depression.
The American people are ready to pick Obama to be the next president.
There’s only one question left on their minds. Is McCain right? Is Sarah Palin right? Is Obama the sort of guy who “palls around” with people who like to bomb government buildings? Is Obama the sort of guy who identifies with terrorists?
I guess we’ll find out what the American people think on Election Day.