July 11, 2008

7/11: McCain's Rough Week (Or Not?)

We had never seen liberal bloggers attack John McCain quite so forcefully -- and on so many different topics -- as they did this week. From his questionable pledge to balance the budget by 2013, to his joke about killing Iranians with cigarettes, to his controversial remarks about Social Security, to Phil Gramm's comments about "a nation of whiners," McCain certainly gave his critics plenty of ammo. And the netroots took advantage of it, describing this as "the week that should have effectively ended [McCain's campaign]" while complaining (once again) that the press isn't being sufficiently critical of the GOP nominee.

And in case you wanted more evidence of our previous claim that bloggers and pundits appear to be watching two different campaigns, note that Time's Mark Halperin -- arguably the leading purveyor of conventional wisdom -- has concluded that it was McCain who "won the week". Who woulda thunk it?

MCCAIN: Worst Week Ever?

Contrary to the views of prominent political commentators such as Halperin, liberal bloggers believe that McCain had a terrible week:

• The Huffington Post's Max Bergmann: "This is the week that should have effectively ended John McCain's efforts to become the next president of the United States. But you wouldn't know it if you watched any of the mainstream media outlets or followed political reporting in the major newspapers. During this past week: McCain called the most important entitlement program in the U.S. a disgrace, his top economic adviser called the American people whiners, McCain released an economic plan that no one thought was serious, he flip flopped on Iraq, joked about the deaths of Iranian citizens, and denied making comments that he clearly made -- TWICE. All this and it is not even Friday! Yet watching and reading the mainstream press you would think McCain was having a pretty decent political week, I mean at least Jesse Jackson didn't say anything about him."
• Digby: "McCain has had a very bad week. [...] His fans in the media seem to be treating this gaffe-fest as if it's their avuncular old neighbor just popping off after having a few too many brewskis, but I would think the voters might become alarmed if this continues. (His comment about social security should be a deal breaker among the senior citizens, many of whom are already skeptical of his abilities and I hope the Democrats play it incessantly during the campaign.)"
• Mark Kleiman: "Not a good week for McCain. [...] How long do you think McCain's base in the press corps will keep covering up for him?"
• AMERICAblog's Joe Sudbay: "McCain's campaign is out-of-control. If McCain didn't have so many friends in the media protecting him, this thing would be over. It's a joke, albeit a joke with a lot of money. With McCain's campaign spiraling, expect the GOP attacks on [Barack] Obama to get uglier and nastier. That's their only option. And, the Repubs will have the money to do it."

On the right side of the blogosphere, The Weekly Standard's Dean Barnett agrees that McCain had a rough week: "That sound you've been hearing all day is me hitting my head in Boston with a baseball bat, trying to forget all the silly things the McCain campaign has done this week. First, McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina engaged in some freelance idiocy as she riffed on abortion. Next the candidate himself made some intemperate remarks about social security and killing Iranians. The former will almost surely come back in the form of an Obama advertisement in the fall, and may even surpass '100 years' as McCain's biggest misstatement of 2008. Now, ranking McCain economic advisor Phil Gramm has told America to stop whining about the economy while pronouncing the country in the throes of a 'mental recession.' Brilliant."

MCCAIN II: Quit Yer Bellyachin'!

Liberal bloggers are slamming McCain's chief economic adviser -- ex-TX Sen./UBS Vice Chairman Phil Gramm -- for claiming that the nation's economic downturn is mostly psychological and that the U.S. has become "a nation of whiners":

"'You've heard of mental depression; this is a mental recession,' he said [...] 'We may have a recession; we haven't had one yet.'

'We have sort of become a nation of whiners,' he said. 'You just hear this constant whining, complaining about a loss of competitiveness, America in decline' despite a major export boom that is the primary reason that growth continues in the economy, he said. [...]

'Misery sells newspapers,' Mr. Gramm said. 'Thank God the economy is not as bad as you read in the newspaper every day.'"

• Ezra Klein: "Hear that America? That job you lost? That house that got foreclosed? It's all in your head..."
• Firedoglake's Christy Hardin Smith: "Yep, those high gas prices, increased energy costs, skyrocketing food prices and shortages worldwide, and all the resulting belt-tightening? It's just mental according to Foreclosure Phil, because of that whopping 1 percent jiggered, anemic growth rate he touts. Oh, boo yah, what...a...success. [...] Having trouble making ends meet, even when you and your spouse are working two jobs each? You are just a whiner. Isn't that nice to know? Thanks, Phil!"
• Daily Kos' SusanG: "Clearly, the problem here is not that record numbers of people are losing their homes or the stock market's tanking. It's that Reuters and other news outlets, traders in misery, have the audacity to inform people about it. And if you don't like your Republican economy and say so, America, well...you're just a nation of ungrateful complainers! Or so says the man who's mentioned as McCain's pick for treasury secretary, and who's a former lobbyist suspiciously neck deep in the mortgage meltdown. Suck it up, shut up and carry on. Ya whiners. It's the Republican way."
• MyDD's Todd Beeton: "Well, so much for Steve Schmidt bringing some much needed discipline to team McCain, eh? First came John McCain's comments on Social Security (which, credit where credit is due, was some actual straight talk, which is why he's now, like clockwork, 'seeking to clarify' his comments.) Now, there's these mind-numbingly out of touch and condescending comments from top McCain economic advisor, Phil Gramm about how the economic downturn is all in our heads. [...] Now, Gramm is not saying anything that John McCain himself hasn't said before but that was back in April before the candidate was most likely reprimanded by his handlers for saying what he actually thinks because for McCain, the truth is politically toxic."
• Crooks and Liars' SilentPatriot: "So after eight years of disastrous Republican policies, all the McCain campaign has to offer is a blame-the-victim, suck-it-up attack on average Americans. I'm sure a continuation of George Bush's tax cuts -- ya know, the ones that used to offend McCain's conscience -- will get us back on the right track. Then we can all stop 'whining' about losing our homes and altering our lifestyles."
• The Carpetbagger Report's Steve Benen: "Sometimes, the McCain campaign seems anxious to make the Dems' campaign efforts easier. I wonder what the reaction will be when Dems go to, say, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, and tell them, 'John McCain's top economic advisor thinks people who are concerned about the economy are "whiners," and that the economic downturn is all in our heads.'"
• Sadly, No!'s Brad: "Oh, Phil Gramm. Whatever will Ma'n'Pa America think when they turn on their teevee at night and find out that you've just called them 'whiners'?"

MCCAIN III: His Chief Economic Adviser Doesn't Speak For Him On Economic Matters?

Liberal bloggers aren't satisfied by McCain's efforts to distance himself from Gramm's comments:

• Beeton: "So he's distancing himself from comments about the economy made by his own economic advisor? If you can't take Gramm's comments as a reflection of McCain's economic policy, then whose can you take? Isn't that what a top economic advisor's job is?"
• Benen: "While one assumes that McCain will continue to insist that he appreciates just how much working families are struggling, and doesn't agree with Gramm's remarks at all, there's McCain's own record of rhetoric to deal with. In January, McCain said the problems with the economy are in our heads: 'A lot of this is psychological. A lot of it's psychological. Because I agree the fundamentals of our economy is still strong.' And in April, McCain said, '[A] lot of our problems today are psychological.' He said he intended to give voters 'a little psychological boost,' in lieu of a meaningful policy. And in June, McCain said he's still focused on the 'psychological impact' of various policies. For that matter, let's not forget that McCain's policy record reflects this elitist thinking. Because McCain believes our systemic economic problems are psychological, it leads him to oppose minimum-wage increases, and support hundreds of billions of dollars in tax cuts for the very wealthy."
• Daily Kos' Markos Moulitsas: "Poor Gramm. His good friend McCain has turned on him, and for saying the very same things that McCain himself had said! [...] All Phil Gramm did wrong was follow the lead set by John McCain."

Several liberal bloggers disputed McCain's claim that Gramm "does not speak for me" by observing that Gramm did, in fact, speak for McCain at a meeting with the Wall Street Journal editorial board yesterday:

• The Atlantic's Matthew Yglesias: "McCain says today that Phil Gramm doesn't speak for him when he calls the United States a 'nation of whiners' suffering from a 'mental recession' but today is also the day that McCain sent Phil Gramm to speak for him to the Wall Street Journal editorial board. There whole question of whether or not the current economic downturn is real or else some kind of mass hallucination doesn't strike me as a minor economic policy issue -- if McCain doesn't agree with his top economics surrogates about it, he probably needs a new team."
• TPM's Greg Sargent: "It might be a good idea for McCain to get himself a top economic adviser who does represent his views in situations such as meetings with the edit boards of powerful newspapers."

Obsidian Wings' hilzoy: "Gramm is one of McCain's most important economic advisors. There are already more than enough reasons why he's unsuited for that job, ranging from his role in the Enron, S&L, and subprime crises to his employment by, and lobbying for, a company presently under criminal investigation. What he said today pales in comparison to other things he's done. If we're very, very lucky, he might have just taken himself out of contention for Treasury Secretary. But he should never have been there to begin with."

MCCAIN IV: Fine, Punish Him For Telling The Truth

Most conservative bloggers believe that Gramm was telling the truth when he said that the nation's economic downturn is mostly psychological:

• Glenn Reynolds: "Phil Gramm tells the truth, with predictable consequences."
• AmSpec Blog's Quin Hillyer: "I've been saying for several years the same thing Gramm said. Granted, the economy was far better two years ago than it is now, but even now, it is far better than it has during all of the 1970s and even much of the 1980s and 1990s. At the beginning of this year, in a blog entry, I even matched Gramm's tone: He called Americans 'whiners,' while I called them 'spoiled'. I still say I was right."
• Hot Air's Ed Morrissey: "Democrats call Gramm out of touch for calling the US a 'nation of whiners'. It may be politically inapt in an election year, but the description isn't far wrong. [...] Growth remains positive and unemployment remains in the range of historical average of 5.5%. Contrast that to the economy of Jimmy Carter, when unemployment, inflation, and interest rates all went out of control -- and even that was nothing next to the Depression. Whiners? You bet. [...] I'd say that Gramm diagnoses the problem with accuracy, and that the Democrats should own up to their affliction."

Barnett was one of the few conservative bloggers to dispute Gramm's contention: "Contra Gramm, there are fundamental problems with the economy that have given the American people a serious case of agita. [...] The causes of the insecurity are real, and the diminishment of the typical American's economic situation is equally real. What makes the McCain camp's antics this week all the more mysterious is there's no reason why McCain has to reflexively defend the status quo. What's more, doing so goes against all of his principles. Remember back in the primary season when McCain commented that some people on Wall Street had to go to jail and demonized the pharmaceuticals? That's the real McCain, and while not a particularly attractive McCain to these eyes, it's also likely to be a more successful McCain."

MCCAIN V: Not Smart, Phil

While most conservative bloggers believe that Gramm's basic point was correct, they also believe that his remarks were politically foolish:

• AmSpec Blog's James Antle: "I like Phil Gramm and would certainly prefer a Gramm for president campaign to, uh, our current situation. I think Gramm as treasury secretary is one of the strongest pro-McCain arguments. I even agree with what I take to be Gramm's point: some of our economic woes are exaggerated and the very economic dynamism that creates financial instability also makes us better off overall. But it's politically boneheaded to tell middle- and working-class families whose income growth has stagnated -- the very people whose votes McCain needs to win if he is to have a prayer in this election -- to stop their whining. That's fine for columnists, but not a very smart move for someone associated with a presidential campaign that already fails to connect with people's economic concerns."
• Townhall's Matt Lewis: "Of course, every economic downturn has a psychological component attached to it, but this is, at the very least, bad politics. [...] McCain would understandably be upset by this gaffe, as it serves to take the focus away from the Jesse Jackson story. It also takes the focus off of the recent news that McCain's fundraising is doing well. What is more, it hurts McCain on the economy -- an issue he can ill afford to take a hit on."

AmSpec Blog's J.P. Freire thinks McCain should have handled the controversy differently: "If there's one example of how the McCain campaign has no capability of controlling a news cycle, it's this one. McCain's response to the outrage shouldn't have been throwing Gramm aside, but instead coopting his message into a 'straight talk' moment. Knowing that everyone's favorite meme is 'his campaign is out of control,' how could McCain give the press another opportunity to talk about it? Instead, if he jumps on the opportunity to talk about the economy and show his chops, he could have had the media cycle focusing on his economic plan."

MCCAIN VI: Are You Listening, Seniors?

Liberal bloggers continue to criticize McCain for his controversial remarks about Social Security, and they are not satisfied by McCain's defense of his comments:

• TPM's Josh Marshall: "I can see the McCain campaign is cleverly trying to bury the furor over the candidate's Social Security 'disgrace' comments by having Phil Gramm claim that we're in the midst of a psychosomatic recession. But I'm not so easily thrown off the scent. [...] What McCain believes is no different from what President Bush and others did and do believe when they wanted to phase out Social Security and replace it with a system of private investment accounts. He's just been a bit clumsier about hiding what he's pushing for. The debate about Social Security is the same as it was in 2005 and in most respects the same as it was in 1965. You have one group who believe in the current system -- which is an intergenerational bargain, insuring a baseline level of retirement security as well as insurance against premature, disability and for dependent children. The other side -- McCain's side -- thinks this is just wrong, morally and economically. And in its place they want to create a system of individual private investment accounts -- similar to a lifetime 401k. That's the essence of the debate. And no one should be deceived by McCain's own efforts to twist and spin his own words retrospectively."
• Benen: "McCain was describing a pay-as-you-go system as an 'absolute disgrace.' The words are clear, plain, and unambiguous. And lest anyone think McCain just got confused on Monday, the next day he appeared on CNN and reiterated the exact same sentiment. [...] As far as I can tell, reporters seem to think, 'Well, we knew what he meant, so this isn't a huge deal.' This is crazy. For one thing, it's not reporters' job to reinterpret what a candidates says in order to make the comments less controversial. For another, reporters knew what Wesley Clark meant -- as well as what Obama meant when he said he'd continue to 'refine' his Iraq policies -- but that didn't stop them from manufacturing a media frenzy for no reason. Look, Social Security matters. It's arguably the most popular and successful government program in American history. John McCain a) wants to privatize it; b) doesn't understand how it works; and c) can't talk about it without contradicting himself. I'm probably being overly optimistic, but I still think this matters, and may very well have an effect on Election Day."
• hilzoy: "It was one thing when George W. Bush didn't know the names of various foreign leaders in 2000. It would, of course, have been better if he had, but he had, after all, been a governor, not a diplomat, and it's easy to see how someone who hadn't had to deal with foreign affairs day in and day out might not recall the name of the President of Chechnya off the top of his head, even if he had been trying hard to learn such things. This is different. [...McCain] is a Senator. It's his job to know about things like Social Security."

MCCAIN VII: Tuzla-Gate, Meet NFL-Gate

Liberal bloggers are criticizing McCain for telling a new version of his P.O.W. story in which he substituted one NFL team for another. McCain has previously said that he named the Green Bay Packers' offensive line when his Vietnamese interrogators ordered him to name his squadron mates. Yesterday, however, McCain told a Pittsburgh audience that he named the Pittsburgh Steelers' defensive line, not the Packers' O-line. ABC's Jake Tapper reports:

"Yesterday in Pittsburgh, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., professed his love for the Steelers to KDKA-TV. [...He] told a rather moving story about his time as a P.O.W. 'When I was first interrogated and really had to give some information because of the pressures, physical pressures on me, I named the starting lineup, defensive line of the Pittsburgh Steelers as my squadron mates.'

'Did you really?' asked the reporter.

'Yes,' McCain said. [...]

'Could you do it today?' asked the reporter.

'No, unfortunately,' McCain said.

Here's one reason he likely couldn't do it today -- the Steelers aren't the team whose defensive line McCain named for his Vietnamese tormentors. The Green Bay Packers are. At least according to every previous time McCain has told this story. And the McCain campaign just told ABC News that the senator made a mistake -- it was, indeed, the Packers."

• Open Left's Chris Bowers: "There really should be a special place reserved in political candidate purgatory for politicians who lie about supporting the local sports team in order to curry favor. [...] Not only is McCain talking about a subject about which he clearly doesn't know much, and not only is he clearly using his time in a P.O.W. camp as a way to win votes, but he is blatantly pandering to people on an issue that, for many voters, has real emotional intensity behind it. Hopefully, more than just Jake Tapper will call McCain for pandering to 'the sports.' Many fans, especially those of teams who have struggled for a long time, can really grow angry at fair-weather pandering of this sort."
• Sudbay: "Does anyone else find this incident in Pittsburgh disturbing? Before anyone rushes to defend McCain's heroism, this isn't about McCain the P.O.W. This is about McCain the candidate in 2008. McCain has every right to tell the story of his P.O.W. experience on the campaign trail. But, it's another thing when he changes the story to adapt to the particular battleground state where he's telling the story."
• Digby: "Recall that Hillary Clinton was excoriated mercilessly for many years for allegedly lying when she said she'd been both a Cubs fan and a Yankees fan. This was shown to be accurate and provable, but it didn't matter. All politicians are held to an entirely different standard than those who were held in Vietnamese prison camps. They are allowed to just make stuff up whenever they choose. It's a sign of their good character and patriotism. And imagine if Obama were caught in a pander this crude? (Or a memory gap this huge.) The man can't even ask for a glass of orange juice in Pennsylvania without it being considered a sign of his 'inauthenticity.' If he made a mistake like thisMorning Joe and Tweety would be drooling and speaking in tongues about what a disgusting flip-flopping kiss ass he was."

MCCAIN VIII: Awwwkward...

ThinkProgress' Matt Corley reports:

"Earlier this week, one of Sen. John McCain's (R-AZ) top advisers, Carly Fiorina, argued for McCain's free-market approach to health care by noting that 'there are many health insurance plans that will cover Viagra but won't cover birth-control medication' and that many 'women would like a choice.' But, as ThinkProgress noted, Fiorina's argument was undermined by McCain's 2003 vote against legislation that would have required insurance coverage of prescription birth control. When asked about the disconnect on his campaign bus today, McCain nervously replied, 'I certainly do not want to discuss that issue'."

A video of McCain's stumbling answer was shown on yesterday's episode of MSNBC's Morning Joe, and it's quickly making it's way around the liberal blogosphere:

• SilentPatriot: "After being asked a question on the 'Suck Up Express' yesterday about his position on insurance companies covering Viagra but not birth control, McCain became visibly uncomfortable and was unable to reconcile his past vote against requiring the coverage of birth control with a statement one of his top advisers made just earlier this week. [...] Imagine if Barack Obama had been stumped like this. It would have been the story of the day, with the blaring headline: Obama Stumbles On Key Women's Issue; Will He Lose Their Support? Then talking head after talking head would be paraded on television to lecture seriously about Obama's 'women problem' and whether or not this will doom his chances at winning them over."
• The Huffington Post's Nico Pitney: "How damaging is this video, now spreading around the web, showing John McCain squirming, stumbling, and then claiming ignorance about his position on providing women with birth control? Apparently, very damaging. A Democratic Party strategist familiar with internal polling said McCain's two votes against requiring insurance companies to cover prescription birth control have been polled in battleground states and had tremendous resonance with women, including independents and Republicans."
• TAPPED's Paul Waldman: "What's notable is that it isn't just that McCain doesn't have a well thought-out policy, but that he can't even seem to figure out what he thinks."

OBAMA: The Arrogance!

Conservative bloggers continue to blast Obama for his comments about bilingualism:

• NRO's John Derbyshire: "Obama's idiotic suggestion that all our kids should learn Spanish is, amongst other things (this is multi-dimensional stupidity) an illustration of educational romanticism run amok. [...] Obama suffers from the fallacy -- extremely common among high-IQ lefties -- that everyone else is just as smart as he is, or could easily be made so with a few educational reforms. In fact, below some cutoff point, which I'd guess at around minus one standard deviation in IQ (that would encompass sixteen percent of the population), education beyond the three R's is a waste of time, and foreign-language instruction a total waste of time."
• NRO's Roger Clegg: "Obama does not deny that immigrants should learn English, but he's clearly dismissive of those who think it's a big deal or even merits any attention as a public policy matter, and suggests that the bigger deal is that more Americans don't learn Spanish, and other foreign languages. Now, not only is his manner the predictably effete 'Can-you-believe-these-yahoos who-can't-speak-French-and-who-think-people-should-speak-English?,' but his point is ludicrous and dangerous. If a fat, rich American goes to Paris and can't speak French, that's too bad but it is no tragedy. When a child growing up in America, or anyone who wants to live here and get ahead, doesn't learn English, that IS a tragedy."
• Townhall's Carol Platt Liebau: "It's not just that Barack is telling us to 'make sure your child can speak Spanish'. He's also been expressing embarrassment that Americans can't speak French when they go to Europe. When it comes to the latter, set aside the obvious elitism in his assumption that regular Americans have lots of either the time or money requried to do the transcontinental travel that he, apparently, is so familiar with. Listen instead to the audience in the background -- the laughter as Barack critiques Americans' linguistic shortcomings. [...It] is derisive...a frequent default posture of the left, enjoying a contemptuous laugh at the expense of the hicks and the rubes who 'embarrass' sophisticates with their monolingualism, their proud pro-Americanism, their religiosity, their lapel flags and the like. It's remarkable to me that anyone can find anything 'unifying' about this kind of discourse."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: How McCain Can Right The Ship

Dem consultant Jeremy Rosner analyzes McCain's campaign problems (via Daniel Strauss):

"I think John McCain faces a deeper problem than staff shakeups which is that he hasn't figured out a political strategy. [...] A lot of people have noted he's just very incoherently between the right and the center, between offshore drilling and $300 million prizes for new electric batteries. [...] He just hasn't figured out a strategy for being a presidential candidate. My advice is that he needs to sort of place a clear bet on whether he's trying to do another Karl Rove base consolidation strategy or whether he's truly trying to gun for the middle and change the Republican party -- he just hasn't figured that out. Until he does that he's not going to solve the sense of inauthenticity that he's suddenly stumbled into, he's not going to solve the staff shakeups and everything else."

LEST WE FORGET: Probably Not The Answer She Was Expecting...

From Overheard in the Office:

Shoe store girl #1: You look tired all the time.
Shoe store girl #2: Well, I think it's my allergies. I'm allergic to cats and I like to rub mine on my face all the time.
Shoe store girl #1: Oh.

Posted by Ian Faerstein at July 11, 2008 01:12 PM