About a month ago, lobbyist Charlie Black, John McCain’s senior campaign advisor, said the McCain campaign would not go after the Democratic candidates on the basis of guilt by association. The Dems might try it with McCain, Black said, but that’s just not the way McCain operates.
“What Senator McCain has said repeatedly is that these candidates cannot be held accountable for all the views of people who endorse them or people who befriend them,” Black told a national television audience, adding, “John McCain believes is that Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton should be held accountable for their public policy views, the things we’ve described before, big government versus smaller government.”
Like far too many McCain commitments, apparently, the Republican campaign didn’t mean a word of it. There was this in the morning…
“The reason for Hamas’ praise of Senator Obama’s foreign policy is his commitment to meet unconditionally with Iran — a nation whose president denies the Holocaust, threatens to wipe Israel off the map, funds terrorists and sends weapons to Iraq to kill American soldiers…. It is not only responsible to raise these critical issues in this election, but it would be the height of irresponsibility not to have this discussion with the American people,” said McCain spokesman Brian Rogers.
…and this in the afternoon.
McCain also used the conference call to go after Obama for his past association with former Weatherman and current University of Illinois professor Bill Ayers. “Not only repudiation,” McCain said, “but an apology for ever having anything to do with an unrepentant terrorist is due to the American people.”
Ben Smith, noting yesterday’s attacks, said McCain “must be smelling blood.” Perhaps, though I tend to think it smells more like desperation.
The McCain campaign had just finished saying it wouldn’t go after Obama (or Clinton) based on who supports him or who his friends are. So, what does McCain do immediately afterwards? He goes after Obama based on who supports him and whom he casually knows.
The only reason a candidate goes down this road is if he or she believes cheap campaign ploys are the only way to get ahead. It’s almost kind of sad to see McCain get this pathetic, this early on in the process. Is this what he meant when he vowed publicly to run a “respectful” campaign?
For what it’s worth, the Obama campaign responded to the substance (or the lack thereof) of McCain’s weak attacks. First on the Hamas “endorsement”…
“John McCain knows that Barack Obama has said repeatedly that Hamas is a terrorist organization dedicated to Israel’s destruction, and his attempt to score political points is exactly the kind of divisive gutter politics that he gave his word that he’d avoid. What John McCain should explain is his support for a war that has cost us thousands of lives, made us less safe, and done more to strengthen Iran and Sunni extremists like Hamas than any American policy in a generation.”
…and then on the Ayers connection.
“Senator Obama was eight years old in the 1960s and had nothing to do with any events back then. He abhors and renounces violent political tactics on the left and right — whether they happened in the 1960s or occur now and Senator McCain knows it. Senator McCain’s continued insistence on throwing out these disingenuous charges, not only seriously undermine his credibility when he says he wants to run a ‘respectful’ campaign, but also his ability to deliver the change that the American people are looking for.”
As for more independent sources, the Obama campaign also compiled some media analyses of the senator’s connection to Ayers and found quite a few reports (from the Washington Post, the Chicago Sun Times, and The New Republic) that showed the relationship between the two barely exists.
Ideally, that McCain has already stooped this kind of campaigning should send a signal to reporters that their Republican Golden Boy isn’t nearly as honorable as they’d like to believe.