Random Political Musings

Lots of politics in the news these days. So here goes, in no particular order.

McCain is in Phase Two of the textbook Presidential Candidate's Strategy, which is to hang out in the center through the primaries, then run to the extreme - in his case, the right - when you've got the nomination sewn up.

During primary season, he touted his ability to cross the aisle. Now, in an effort to shore up support from his party's base, he's announced an economic plan that would go well beyond just extending the Bush tax cuts. That will have broad appeal with the Republican base, but it won't excite Independents much, and it'll definitely turn off liberals. Tax cuts in general are a good thing, but may not be the best thing right now.

McCain has also announced that he won't entertain a VP candidate who's pro-choice. That rules out Rudy Giuliani, and in the eyes of some, it also rules out winning California. But a certain Ronald Reagan carried the Golden State, and he was pro-life. Of course, he was also from California.

Some observers have started to harp on McCain's age, trying to raise concerns as to whether he can handle the job of Commander-in-Chief at his ripe old age.

For one thing, this guy has survived stuff that you and I probably couldn't even imagine in our worst nightmares. And second, as his defenders have pointed out, he's handled the rigors of a Presidential campaign - a pretty exhausting undertaking - rather well.

In fact, he's fared better than at least one of his opponents: he hasn't gotten so tired that he "mis-spoke," or broke down in tears.

Speaking of Hillary, she's really trying to get maximum mileage out of Obama's gaffe about Pennsylvanians. She's released a series of ads talking about how we cling to our religion all the time, not just in times of trouble.

That sounds great, but I saw her interviewed last weekend at a Jewish college, and someone asked her what her favorite Bible passage was. She rambled on at length about Esther - what a great book it was, how she asked her mother to read it to her every night, how many great stories were in it, what a role model Esther was, how much she'd like to learn even more about Esther than just what's in the Bible. But she couldn't cite a single verse. She probably forgot the ones she knew when she was dodging bullets in Bosnia.

As for Obama, his explanation of his comments was pretty lame. He said in last night's debate that this wasn't the first time one of his statements "got mangled up." That sounds to me like a classic responsibility dodge: he didn't say, "I mangled my statement," he said it "got mangled." That implies to me that he's blaming the media.

His initial response was to stand by his statements, until somebody pointed out to him, "Uhh, Barack, some people in Pennsylvania are a bit peeved at you." So then he began to back-pedal. He did the same thing after the Rev. Wright debacle.

The more somebody has to explain their comments, the more weight I tend to place on the original comments as being indicative of their true character and convictions, and the less credence I lend to the explanations. Explanations benefit from the time to reflect, gauge reaction to the initial comments, and be coached by one's handlers. Increasingly, this guy is showing more audacity than hope.

Meanwhile, the Democratic leadership is stepping up its calls for the super-delegates to make a choice in early June. Hillary doesn't like that, of course; she'd rather seal a GOP victory and take another shot in four years than concede before the convention. Meanwhile, it's "pass the popcorn" time for the Republicans.