Last debate of the presidential season this past week – #49, I believe – and it was kind of hideous, in my view. 
Someone in the McCain campaign must have given their man the word to look at Obama, not just once, but frequently. And for god’s sake, don’t look too angry… try to smile from time to time, even when you’re looking at the Muslimy Kenyan guy who hangs with terrorists. Well, McCain appeared to have taken all this advice a bit too literally. For long periods while Obama was speaking, the Republican nominee leered at his opponent with a strange, pasted-on smile, leaning back stiffly in his chair, his eyes glassy, almost zombie-like at times. I know I’ve commented on this before, but McCain looks for all the world like someone applying anger management techniques in the most exhausting way. He has that tendency to deliver a speech in that slow, sing-song fashion, like he’s talking to preschoolers just before nap time. It’s like somebody squeezed a wolverine into a rabbit suit – that’s the John McCain I saw Wednesday night.
Of course, a lot went unsaid and I don’t know why, except that maybe neither candidate feels all that strongly about any of it. Stuff like, well… Iraq, a war that’s still killing and maiming way too many people. (Don’t think so? Look at Juan Cole’s regular synopsis of news from the region.) I know this was a “domestic issues” debate, but really… it can go pretty much anywhere the candidates want it to go. Why didn’t Obama ask McCain if he opposes the draft “security pact” that calls for total withdrawal of U.S. forces by the end of 2011? (Can you say “timetable”?) Presumably McCain opposes that – let’s get him on the record, eh?
How about Social Security? Not much, if anything, said in these last three debates, though I’ve learned that “Joe the plant”… I mean, “Joe the (right-wing talk show regular) plumber” thinks it was a bad idea. This very useful information aside, voters have been provided with virtually no information about either candidates intentions regarding S.S., particularly McCain’s rehash of the perennial G.O.P. plan to save the program by bleeding it to death. McCain doesn’t believe current workers should pay into a fund that supports current retirees…. but that’s precisely how S.S. works. It isn’t designed to individual retirement accounts – it’s designed to be a guaranteed minimum supplementary pension for any worker and/or spouse who reaches retirement age, regardless of whether they’ve been lucky investors or not. (And, as such, it’s been an immensely successful program, keeping old folks out of abject poverty for more than sixty years.) Like all Republicans and many blue-dog Democrats, McCain hates the idea and would rather hand the trust fund money over to the Wall Street pirates he now excoriates on the campaign trail, so that if a worker nearing retirement encounters a downturn (like right now) or is just unlucky in health or fortune, s/he can go to the soup kitchen for his/her pension.
There’s a lot else that wasn’t discussed – missile defense, private military contractors, politicization of 
the Justice Department, domestic spying, arbitrary detention, pre-emptive war, etc. What did get discussed, aside from the opinions of “Joe the plant”, was McCain’s idea of what constitutes a threat to the very “fabric of our democracy” – i.e. a volunteer organization like ACORN – and the fact that the “woman’s health” exception in anti-abortion legislation is some kind of extremist pro-abortion dodge. Sweet guy.
Oh yes… and Bill Ayres is a “terrorist”. Like McCain friend G. Gordon Liddy. Like every Republican’s friend Luis Posada Carriles. Like McCain booster Oliver North. Like still-president George W. Bush.
luv u,
jp
Bill Ayres is not himself a significant national figure.
The accusations against Obama do not address the issues of the moment, but they do speak to the more lasting issue of Presidential character.
This is pretty thin gruel, though, Burr… you must admit. I would think the enthusiastic endorsement of McCain by Oliver North, himself a retired leader of a terror army, should be more troubling. If the question is one of “presidential character”, what does it say about McCain that he’s such an avid supporter of the Bush doctrine of pre-emptive war? Not much, in my view. Thanks for your comment.