Her favorite spot

A guy you could play pickup with

When Obama was visiting the troops during his foreign policy tour this week, he stopped by a basketball court and this is what happened.



The first time I watched the video, I thought, "Wow, that must drive Republicans crazy." It's not enough that he goes over and sits down with foreign leaders who endorse his plans. It's not enough that he speaks to a crowd of 200,000 about restoring America's image abroad. On top of all that, he gets to look cool, too.

This is not a perfect comparison, but the coolness factor Obama has in contrast to his opponent reminds me a little of all that nonsense in 2004 when voters said they'd rather have a beer with Bush than Kerry. That rightfully drove Democrats crazy. I imagine that is kind of how McCain supporters feel when Obama spots up from behind the arc.

Proof is in the pudding

McCain sees things where no one else does. He looks at the map to the left and sees a serious problem with the Iraq-Pakistan border. What, you don't see it? That's because you don't have the foreign policy experience McCain does.

Foreign policy experience

This is going to seem petty, but I can't avoid it. John McCain thinks this country on the left exists. In fact, it hasn't since 1992. McCain, whose main argument for his candidacy rests on his brilliant mind concerning foreign policy issues, during a press event yesterday, said, "I was concerned about a couple of steps that the Russian government took in the last several days. One was reducing the energy supplies to Czechoslovakia."

Today, a.k.a. one day later, he said it AGAIN; for the second time!

Not the biggest deal, I understand, and precisely the kind of silly slip up the media overblows, but it is a pretty silly mistake for someone who has made foreign policy his crowning achievement.

Two parents

I have not heard a lot about this from the mainstream media, but in an interview with The New York Times, John McCain said the he doesn't "believe in gay adoption." Actually, what he said, when asked if he agreed with Bush's belief "that gay couples should not be permitted to adopt children," he answered, "we’ve proven that both parents are important in the success of a family so, no I don’t believe in gay adoption."

As a relative of two wonderfully loving gay parents to two adopted children, I'm not going to cite anything other than my personal experience to refute McCain's nonsense. I will, though, note that despite a blog post by the gossiper Perez Hilton, McCain's quote has gotten zero notice.

Satire

While spending the last few weeks on the sidelines, I wondered what it would take for me to be moved to write again. Unfortunately, it was a tie.

First, this cover. I'm baffled by all the attention this is receiving. The coverage, so far as I can tell, is being driven by the Obama campaign, which is rightfully sensitive to such images. The campaign lashed out, calling the cover "tasteless and offensive." But Obama's underlings are barking up the wrong tree this time.

It's stating the obvious to say the cover is satire. But that comment is not only obvious, it's an understatement -- it's smart satire.

Imagine a different scenario. Imagine that Frank Rich had written a column about the smears and rumors repeated about the Obamas. I'm not Frank Rich, but I would not be surprised to see him write something like this,

"This election, if the John McCains and Karl Roves have their way, will center on the image of Barack Obama standing in the Oval Office in traditional Muslim garb. But it won't be just about religion. The Republicans will portray him as having a portrait of Osama bin Laden (his namesake) resting above a fire fueled by a burning American flag.

But the image won't just be of the Senator from Illinois. The McCains and Roves will have Michelle there, too. She's the foot soldier, ready for battle. She'll hold an AK-47, boast a giant afro, huge lips and give a secret hand signal to her presidential hubby."

I doubt anyone would call those two paragraphs "tasteless and offensive." No one would think twice about seeing those paragraphs in the Sunday Times.

The cover is drawing the ire of the Obama campaign because it is exactly what is happening. It is great satire for the same reason.

Time off

It's been a long time since I've posted. I'm dealing with a busy personal schedule, but more importantly as far as the blog is concerned, I'm struggling with the letdown of the changing political season. The contrasts between the general election candidates is so vast that I find the topics of discussion to be obvious to anyone who follows politics. Indeed, the differences now are ones of policy, not politics. I will adjust, of course, and intend to continue posting as frequently as before. My apologies for the lull.

First cut

2004 is not 2008

The media continues to talk about the electoral map as though it's 2004. We hear that Obama is in trouble because he's behind in some polls in Florida or Ohio or Pennsylvania. That's like analyzing the Lakers-Celtics series as though Magic and Larry were still playing. It's a whole new ball game now. To put it even more in perspective, here are some of the other things that were true in 2004.

• Freddy Adu was the man.
  

• No one knew who Barack Obama was.
  

• Kobe Bryant was charged with rape.

• The war was just a year old.
  

"You can't have him"

Sorry about the light posting; my other life has me distracted. I've been meaning to write about the MoveOn ad since I first saw it on Tuesday. In case you haven't seen it, here it is:



I sat in silence for a few moments after watching this initially. The ad is nothing if not powerful. But is it fair? And if it is, is it smart politics? My answer to both questions, after two days of thought, is yes. That probably isn't surprising given my past writings on McCain's "100 years" and "not too important" comments.

The ad is personal, and given the response from others that watched the ad in my presence, it is too personal for some. The idea of a webcam video, filmed in a new mother's bedroom makes it even more effective. The tone, though, is what makes the ad really work. The mother is joyful about her son, not angry at McCain. She is confident, not defensive. She is saying enough is enough.

Those who think McCain's comments have been taken out of context will surely cry foul at the ad, but they will be wrong. MoveOn has used the exact context of McCain's quotes and pushed back. He said that it doesn't matter if troops are in Iraq, so long as they aren't being killed. This ad shows that it clearly does matter; it clearly is "important."

My thoughts on the ad aren't surprising, but I would love to hear other people's views. To me, the ad goes to the heart of what this short general election has been about. It highlights the flawed McCain foreign policy strategy. And it's sure to pull at people's emotions. So, take a minute and give your thoughts. Does the ad work, and if so, why?