Halperin's Plan Of Attack For John McCain

Mark Halperin of TIME suggests sixteen things "McCain Can Do to Try to Beat Obama That Clinton Cannot" yet misses a point that belongs in the top two.  David Brooks suggested it, Karl Rove echoed it, and I will summarize it as "When does Obama's bipartisanship begin?"  Here is Brooks:

If he values independent thinking, why is his the most predictable liberal vote in the Senate? A People for the American Way computer program would cast the same votes for cheaper.

...

How is a 47-year-old novice going to unify highly polarized 70-something committee chairs? What will happen if the nation’s 261,000 lobbyists don’t see the light, even after the laying on of hands? Does The Changemaker have the guts to take on the special interests in his own party — the trial lawyers, the teachers’ unions, the AARP?

The Gang of 14 created bipartisan unity on judges, but Obama sat it out. Kennedy and McCain created a bipartisan deal on immigration. Obama opted out of the parts that displeased the unions. Sixty-eight senators supported a bipartisan deal on FISA. Obama voted no.

As to being the most predictable liberal vote, views differ, but Obama's voting record puts him to the left of the median Democratic Senator.

Here is Rove's take on the same argument:

Mr. McCain can now question Mr. Obama's promise to change Washington by working across party lines. Mr. Obama hasn't worked across party lines since coming to town. Was he a member of the "Gang of 14" that tried to find common ground between the parties on judicial nominations? Was Mr. Obama part of the bipartisan leadership that tackled other thorny issues like energy, immigration or terrorist surveillance legislation? No. Mr. Obama has been one of the most dependably partisan votes in the Senate.

...

The truth is that Mr. Obama is unwilling to challenge special interests if they represent the financial and political muscle of the Democratic left. He says yes to the lobbyists of the AFL-CIO when they demand card-check legislation to take away the right of workers to have a secret ballot in unionization efforts, or when they oppose trade deals. He won't break with trial lawyers, even when they demand the ability to sue telecom companies that make it possible for intelligence agencies to intercept communications between terrorists abroad. And he is now going out of his way to proclaim fidelity to the educational unions. This is a disappointment since he'd earlier indicated an openness to education reform. Mr. Obama backs their agenda down the line, even calling for an end to testing, which is the only way parents can know with confidence whether their children are learning and their schools working.

These stands represent not just policy vulnerabilities, but also a real danger to Mr. Obama's credibility and authenticity. He cannot proclaim his goal is the end of influence for lobbies if the only influences he seeks to end are lobbies of the center and the right.

In John McCain, Obama has an opponent who has walked the bipartisan walk for years and paid a political price within his own party for doing so; FWIW, Brooks could have added carbon dioxide regulation (or here) to McCain's list of initiatives that set teeth on edge in his own party.

Why hasn't Obama been bringing "change" to Washington in his four years there?  When, if ever, has Obama actually engaged in the wonderful bipartisanship about which he speaks so movingly?   At the Harvard Law Review?  Jiminy, if he touts his ability to unite the disparate views of a bunch of young would-be lawyers during a televised debate, that will make for Must-See TV.

Now, this is a tricky line for McCain to take, since as he burnishes his appeal to centrists he will also be reminding righties why we have problems with him.  Also, some of his views have evolved (we hope!), as on immigration.  However, if voters want a guy who can talk about change, Obama is a great choice; if they want a guy who has actually reached across the aisle, brought change, and shown the willingness to pay the price, they want McCain.

NOTE:  If Halperin did not completely miss this point, he disguised it here:

14. Link biography (experience/courage) and leadership (straight talk) to a vision animated by detail – accentuating Obama’s relative lack of specificity.

Comments

[Rick Ballard]

Dunno why McCain couldn't offer a co-sponsorship to BHO on something to do with their day jobs. Maybe a nice redo on immigration with a strong "secure the border first" proviso?

Or just pick something out of BHO's own HOPE and CHANGE list and start offering to co-sponsor. Surely, with four months to go before America can sleep more easily because Congress has left town, McCain and his team can figure out a few nice legislative tactics which might highlight the difference between BHO's talk and his votes.

[Bill in AZ]

I dunno about the secure the border idea, Rick. McCain would have to reach across the aisle (to the Republican side for a change) for that one.

[JM Hanes]

TM: I thought Halperin's list read like a parody!

[Elliott]

Good call, JMH.

[Rick Ballard]

Sincerity and the utility were excellently matched by Halperin.

Bill,

I suppose I should check out BHO's website and see what McCain's most entertaining choice for the offer might be. You never know - McCain might be willing to reach out to Republicans as well.

[clarice]

What about getting him(O) to release his hold on FEC appointments so the law designed to keep elections "clean" can have some effect?

[RichatUF]

Sorry to go OT here but saw this item via Drudge-

Hide the Silverware

graf-

Indeed, her advisers said Monday that she planned to hit this theme during the candidates’ Tuesday debate, though they said she would try to avoid making harsh personal attacks on Mr. Obama, particularly since Mrs. Clinton drew widespread attention and praise at the debate last week for saying she was “honored” to be on the same stage with him.

When all else fails-the Clinton Dirt card...

[clarice]

O is to young to have been in the secreted FBI files and Pellicano's in jail so what is she going to hit him with--soiling his pants in nursery school? To date her "attacks" have been laughable.

[Rick Ballard]

Rich,

Sounds like tomorrow night it's going to be the Frau Blucher/Nurse Ratched persona.

Or maybe - Maleficent - LIVE.

Time for another donation to the Blind Newt Foundation.

[Ann]

What would be the downside of Obama loosing his voice tomorrow?
It surely would frost the Red Witch. And if she went after him for not debating, it would make her look even colder...just thinking.

I bet Hit would be proud of my cynicism. :)

[Bill in AZ]

McCain could prolly sell Obama on some good sound conservative 2nd amendment legislation - like ban all weapons except old rusty bolt action rifles for us few remaining 2nd amendment hunters. Now there would be a differentiator that would set the race on end. Obama's end.

[Foo Bar]

Rove claims Obama "won't break with the trial lawyers". Actually, he was one of 18 Democrats to join with Republicans in February '05 for a bill opposed by the trial bar that made it harder to get class action suits certified.

[Foo Bar]

Rove claims Obama hasn't worked across party lines since coming to town. Actually, he was one of 9 Democrats who voted with Republicans in support of the amendment of Jim DeMint (R-SC) that contained a much stronger version of earmark disclosure than Harry Reid wanted. He also worked with Tom Coburn to sponsor the Federal Funding Accountability Act of 2006, which required the creation of a searchable database fully disclosing all organizations receiving federal funds. Two notorious kings of pork, Ted Stevens and Robert Byrd, tried to hold up the bill with secret holds but were ultimately unsuccessful.

[Foo Bar]

Rove claims Obama backs the teachers unions down the line. If he has some evidence that Obama has recanted his support for merit pay, which he declared right in front of the NEA, he should have included it in his column. The National Journal had this to say in a piece appearing today:

Both candidates support charter schools, a stance that does not endear either to the politically powerful teachers unions -- although it was Obama who raised eyebrows at last July's National Education Association conference by declaring that teachers whose students excel should be paid more.

[kim]

McCain will see the light about carbon dioxide as the paradigm shatters. Fred Thompson understood the fraud and was right about Libby, too. Where did his advisers go?
=======================

[kim]

The business about charter schools illustrates a couple of fault lines. They've been pretty successful as an alternate way of doing things, particularly in inner cities where traditional public education has failed most miserably.
===================

[syn]

I cannot help but wonder why black and African- Americans would support the Senator who votes to continue Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger's "Negro Project".

[Jane]

Capt ed has got a pretty explosive Obama/Saddam/Rezco story.

Link under my name.

[Jane]

"Rezko" Sheesh

[GMax]

Well I have to admit it, Foo has sure convinced me. The guy, Obama, is a slobbering centrist or maybe even a closet conservative. That National Journal rag, nobody gives them credibility like the New Republic or the NYT, so it does not matter one whit that they somehow found him to be the most liberal member of the Senate. Heck he probably just voted No when he meant Yes and vice versa. You cant expect a busy Senator to understand the difference can you? And what a ridiculous idea to look at his voting record to figure out where he comes down on issues!

No foo you nailed it. Nothing but net.

[MayBee]

Foo Bar- from your National Journal link:

But he was quick to distance himself from the idea of tying higher pay to "some arbitrary test score" -- a nonstarter with the teachers unions, whose organizing muscle is crucial to Democratic get-out-the-vote efforts -- and to proclaim his support for collective bargaining. Instead, his "Career Ladder" initiative would use a variety of assessments, including higher degrees or mentoring other teachers, to identify successful teachers.

Perhaps that is what Rove was referring to.

[MikeS]

I have no doubt that, the aptly named, FooBar is correct when he claims that Obama has done a couple of things right during his career.

I would be more comfortable if Obama would pledge to change personally, from the hyper-partisan liberal that he has been since he entered politics.

In his stump speech, Obama claims that as President he will behave the way John McCain has behaved for the last couple decades.

I support Barack in his quest for self improvement. I would even say that, if Obama behaves like John McCain for 2 decades, he might make a good president.

[Ranger]

Well, after a little research I have managed to restore my faith in my memory. I'm 99% sure it was Obama who said that voting to filibuster Alito was "a dumb idea, but I'm going to do it for party unity."

The closet I've been able to come to finding the actual quote is from a news story at the time that said:

"Despite his criticism, Obama announced his intention to support the maneuver designed to block - or delay - Alito’s confirmation this week."

Looks like even back then the press was looking out for him by avoiding direct quotes when he says something "dumb".

So, how he Obama going to bring us together when he has already proven he will vote against his own feelings in the name of party unity?

[GMax]

BTW this fun fact has not been widely played about the Rezko land deal with Obama courtesy of the Times of London.

Did you know from any discussion so far that the "garden land Plot" that Rezko's wife bought the same day that Obama bought his house at an almost 20% discount off list price, was ONLY accessible from Obama's property. That right it was apparently landlocked. Obama claims to have never used the land, but did have his gardener mow it.

As a guy who has bought and resold hundreds if not thousands of acres of land over the years, I can say with utter confidence that plots of land with Helicopter only access have little value to anyone except the guy who controls the access. Some states have laws that allow you to force access if you are truly landlocked, but I am guessing that Illinois is not one of them. Without access, you can never enjoy the land, use the land or do anything except pay taxes on the land. And its rare your neighbor is so "kind" as to relieve you of the cost and burden of keeping it mowed.

This nails it for me, he accepted a bribe, well disguised, but the substance is still that.

[MarkJ]

I'm patiently waiting for this headline:

"HILLARY DROPS OUT OF RACE. THROWS SUPPORT TO McCAIN."

As the famed Roman emperor Clintonius Bodacious Maximus once said, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."

[kim]

Has Rezko declared the value of the mowing as income? This is probably de minimus, but still.
===================

[RichatUF]

Jane-

Great story from across the pond-but I'm curious how the needle will get threaded on all this.

More here re: Rezko's business practices. Did Rick ever figure out which US Congressional Districts BHO's former Il state senate seat overlap? Did Scary Larry stay up last night working on this?

[Ranger]

GMax,

It wasn't all that well disguised. The person selling the property is on record as saying their justification for giving the Obama's the discount on the house was that the adjoining plot (which the Rezkos purchased the same day) sold at full asking price. So, there is a direct connection between the Rezko deal and the reduced price for Obama.

[RichatUF]

GMax-

This nails it for me, he accepted a bribe, well disguised, but the substance is still that.

I'm confused by it all-why couldn't he have been like Cold Cash and just got it in an icebox?

[Ranger]

My bad.... I mis-read the article the first time. It says the sellers deny they gave the Obama's a $300,000 price cut because the adjoining plot sold at full price. That does seem hard to believe. Why sell two plots on the same day under such different terms? It seems hard to believe that the sellers didn't take into account that Obama was the new Senator from their state when they negotiated the deal.

On the up side, politicians seem to be getting more exspensive to buy. Back in the old days it only cost $100,000 in laundered cattle futures to buy a state governor. Now, considering the price reduction on the house and savings in interest payments on the loan, they had to give Obama around $500,000.

[Jane]

I'm curious how the needle will get threaded on all this.

It won't get threaded at all, except as the Messiah as a victim. Old media will sit on its hands.

It certainly explains to me why Obama opposed the Iraq war. He's not quite as Godlike as he would have us believe.

[centralcal]

Okay, I'm at work and not following the comment thread that closely, so forgive if this is OLD news:

Fitz is on the Rezko case. Ha Ha! (saw it over at NRO)

[Jane]

Rick Moran has a lot more on Auchi, as does the link under my name.

[RichatUF]

Jane-

It certainly explains to me why Obama opposed the Iraq war. He's not quite as Godlike as he would have us believe.

The article says that the house and the garden plot were bought in June 2005. Now I'm curious if IL has a set of securities laws similiar to NY and if BHO might have had some sort of committee assignment touching on the CBOT and CME? Too much-I'm drinking from the paranoid style...

[Jane]

I don't have any confidence at all that Fitz is an equal opportunity prosecutor. I hope he proves me wrong.

[Ranger]

After a more detailed re-read I think this Rezko thing could really hurt Obama because it will alienate middle class homeowners a lot. Obama wanted to buy a nice house when got the promotion from State to US Senator. The house he wanted was part of a package deal of two plots of land with an asking price of around $2.6 mil. Obama couldn't afford that, so he called his good buddy, Tony Rezko, who worked it out so that Obama got the house he wanted for $1.65 mil.

How many Americans had to pass on their "dream house" because they couldn't afford the payments?

[GMax]

You dont expect a Princeton and Harvard educated lawyer spouse to be able to understand real estate law do you? And the Senator was busy, heck he got confused.

Since the seller ( grantor ) created the problem by separating the tracts I think its likely in most states that a court would find the Ms Rezko stepped into the shoes of the grantor and thus has no prescriptive rights to fix the land being without access to a road, by use of a easement of necessity.

The reality is that lack of access would be pointed out on a survey and on a title policy which I am sure Mrs. Rezko got for a $600,000 land parcel.

The Obamas got a big discount and use of an adjacent tract for the cost of their mowing contract. That is most likely a very large sum of money, even in the world shady Chicago political deals.

[glasater]

There was a mole in the Chicago commercial real estate investigation out of--it sounds like--SDNY.
Fitz at work perhaps?

"And in an unusual move, prosecutors asked for a court order allowing Mr. Thomas to commit crimes during the investigation, a tell-tale sign that Mr. Thomas was part of an undercover “sting operation.” The court granted the request."

[GMax]

Why would a billionaire who is not allowed to travel to the USA want to buy a Chicago politician? Unless he thought it was likely that Obama would run for President.

Some smoke, look for the fire.

[RichatUF]

Jane-

Dots...

[anduril]

Here's an article, Michelle Obama and the Rage of a Privileged Class, that places the Rezko deal in a larger context--one that speaks volumes about the Obamas. It's amusing to see these crusaders for "change" (who rub elbows with the liberal elite at the home of Ayers and Dohrn) doing things the old fashioned Chicago way. Plus ça change...

The entire article is worth a read, but I'll paste in a small portion. We've all read about Michelle's adventures at Princeton. I'll first paste in the author's reason's for believing Michelle's views on race are important, then commence with her experience at Harvard:

Mrs. Obama's attitudes about race are significant for multiple reasons.

First, Mr. Obama says she's important to him. Newsweek's gushing 2/25/08 cover story on Michelle, Barack's Rock by Richard Wolffe, reports:

"Onstage, Obama has introduced Michelle as 'my rock'—the person who keeps him focused and grounded. In her words, she is just making sure he is 'keeping it real.'"

Second, because Michelle Obama lacks her husband's remarkable verbal facility, she provides a keyhole into how the stealth candidate actually thinks and feels on those rare occasions when he can be himself. She's more of a regular person with a normal human desire to be understood.

Third, she's a classic example of what affirmative action, which her husband promises to give us more of, does both for and to blacks.

She is a hard worker and is of above-average intelligence, but racial preferences have repeatedly lifted her out of her intellectual league, with traumatic psychological consequences. All the breaks she received from white people merely stoked what Ellis Cose of Time calls The Rage of a Privileged Class.

OK, on to Harvard:

Predictably, the same feelings of personal and thus racial inadequacy manifested themselves when she got into ultra-competitive Harvard Law School on another quota. The Newsweek reporter explains:

"At Harvard, she felt the same racial divide. … 'She recognized that she had been privileged by affirmative action and she was very comfortable with that,' [friend Verna] Williams recalls. Michelle recalls things differently. … Her aides say Michelle earned her way into Harvard on merit by distinguishing herself at Princeton."

When she graduated from HLS in 1988, she was hired by the high-paying Chicago corporate law firm Sidley Austin (which, perhaps not coincidentally, posts a 2,000-word statement describing their "Commitment to Diversity" on their website).

One problem remained: the Illinois bar exam. It appears that in 1988 she either failed it or was unready even to try it. She eventually passed and was admitted to the bar in May 1989, almost a year after graduation. (In contrast, her husband was admitted only a half year after graduating from Harvard Law School three years later).

There's nothing shameful about failing the bar exam. Hillary Clinton, for example, failed the Washington D.C. bar exam. According to blogger Half Sigma, 19 percent of applicants failed the July 1988 Illinois test. But, whiffing even once is not the kind of thing that is supposed to happen to Harvard Law School students. (Similarly, Hillary only told her Yale friends that she passed the Arkansas bar exam; she kept covered up until 2003 that she had failed the D.C. exam.)

Being admitted to the bar is public, so word of Michelle's no-show on the list of new lawyers likely spread among her old Harvard classmates in late 1988, leaving another wound upon her pride. If, however, she'd gone to the kind of law school where graduates frequently take a few tries to pass, she would have felt better about herself and less bitter at the white race. [Comment: Sailer is wrong about this--I didn't go to HLS but I passed the first time, as did well over 90% of my classmates. Less elite schools typically have higher first time pass rates because their grads are smart enough or realistic enough to take bar review courses. They do not say, Word is that my school teaches to the exam, so I can save a few bucks by skipping the bar review course.]

After a few years at Sidley Austin, she let her law license lapse [Comment: This is remarkable, since she could have maintained her license for about $100 per year. It is a strong indication that she neither demonstrated nor developed any legal skills at Sidley and Austin but was simply an AA hire.] and began working as go-between for Mayor Daley's Machine. She enjoyed the kind of vague but well-paid career made possible by affirmative action. The description on the candidate's website of what exactly she's been doing for the U. of Chicago Medical Center is eye-glazing but ultimately revealing: she's in the diversity racket.

"She also managed the business diversity program. Michelle has fostered the University of Chicago's relationship with the surrounding community and developed the diversity program, making them both integral parts of the Medical Center's mission."

With great power comes great rewards. A couple of months after her husband was sworn in as U.S. Senator, Michelle's salary at the Medical Center was raised from $121,910 to $316,962.

A cynic might say that this rather resembles a $195,000 annual … uh, investment by a large private medical institution in the good will of a U.S. Senator and potential President who may well play the crucial role in deciding whether or not there will continue to be large private medical institutions.

Another way of looking at is that Michelle's value on the influence market went up $200,000 when her husband moved up, so the Medical Center had to ante up or lose her to somebody else who would pay the going rate for the wife of a political superstar.

Still, to say that would be to suggest that Michelle Obama on her own isn't worth $316,962, which, like any and all skepticism about the Obamas, would be racist. So, almost nobody in America is saying it.

The Daily Mail of London has taken a more jaundiced view:

"An acquaintance of Obama's family compares her with another political wife, another lawyer as it happens, with a keen interest in making money. "Michelle is very much like Cherie Blair [wife of former Prime Minister Tony Blair]. She is a middle-class girl who has discovered that money is nice and doesn't see that as a contradiction with having radical beliefs," he said.

Chicago's veteran political consultant and pundit Joe Novak agrees, saying: "She [Michelle] is now motivated more by personal gain than by social consciousness. She saw her opportunities, and she took them." …

I suspect, on no particular evidence, that Michelle's desire for a stately home pushed the normally ascetic Barack into involving in his 2005 purchase of an expensive mansion the notorious white collar crook and slumlord Tony Rezko, a Levantine Christian immigrant who goes on trial March 3rd.

Obama and Rezko had been doing each other Chicago-style favors for years. Yet, surely by 2005, Obama must have known that it was time to shed his more unseemly associates if he wanted to move to the really big house in Washington.

Follow the link to the main article for the many links that the article contains to other documentation.

[MayBee]

Rezko was just helping people that- through no fault of their own- could not afford to pay the mortgage on the house they wanted.

I think we will see this work its way into Obama's economic plan. Defaulting on your mortgage? No problem. The government will buy a portion of your yard for you. Rezko will be the HUD director overseeing the program. It's all good.

[JJ]

Appears to me that Obama is not interested in crossing party lines but going around them -- around to the Brave New World that he sees beyond the current mess.

Justification for the sweet land deal is that it was done in a positive manner, by someone who truly understands positive. Which is why Hillary's picking on him is starting to sound pleasant. Open the clouds, let that sun shine, sister.

[Jane]

Anduril,

That's all pretty amazing.

[clarice]

Good wrok, anduril--She bombed at Sidley Austin obviously..I've known for a while that she's holding a ridiculously oversompensated make work job to subsidize the family coffers.

[GMax]

Mrs Rezko who bought the land for $625,000? She has an on the record deposition that she had $35,000 annual income and about $25,000 in assets. How did she buy the land? Well sometimes this is referred to as a strawman purchaser. Follow the money, as I am sure the prosecutor is doing right now.

[anduril]

I'm sure the Obamas are by far not the only couple to profit from the race hustling/diversity business, nor is Chicago the only place where it's practiced. It does say a lot about what's happened to the American ideal--not that we were ever ideal, but that we can so cynically take this (and, yes, the whole lobbying business) for granted.

Overall, I prefer to contemplate this Dynamic Duo.

[GMax]

Back to McCain's strategy for Obama. Why not do what Harry Reid did, reach into his wallet, unfold a little piece of paper and read a quote, only this one from one Ralph Nader. Ralph when asked about Barack Obama:

“His record in the Senate is pretty mediocre,” Nader said. “His most distinctive characteristic is the extent to which he censors himself."

Get that, its a two fer. Ralph calls him mediocre and then Mr. Green Party says he has been hiding his true beliefs in the Senate by censoring himself. So he is even more liberal than the National Journal says, but works not to show it. Are you kidding me?

Slowly fold up paper and put it back in wallet. "Any other questions?"

[Ranger]

Yes, Fitz is in a very dificult position here. It would appear that his only chance of keeping his job is a D win in November. But, this investigation gives him an option. If the polls are going against Obama, but close, he could drop an indictment on the Obama land deal in October and become the hero for McCain and save his job in the next administration. And, of course, it would be fun to see all those people on the left who worship Fitz turn on him overnight.

[MayBee]

I think talking about Michelle Obama being an Affirmative Action education beneficiary/hire is not productive. Many people say the same about Clarence Thomas.
The truth is, AA has been the policy of the country and people who benefit do so through no choice of their own.
It is perfectly acceptable to talk about whether her job is basically a payment to Obama, IMHO. The AA stuff should just be left out.