This is the severalth (second or third -- not looking it up) McCain ad in a row in which he's retreated from his recent blue-and-gold color scheme back to the black-and-gold of his early campaign. I appreciate the militaristic feel McCain is going for with Army black and gold -- blue and gold looks like a Milwaukee Brewers tribute -- but really, Jimmy Carter in 1980 was the last candidate to exclude both red and blue from his campaign ads. Why does John McCain hate the American flag so much?

I'm not convinced.  Maybe it's my low-fi laptop speakers denying me the full audio experience, but when I watched the ad my thought was, "This is  just an ad about gas prices and offshore drilling.  What's it got to do with contempt for 'The One?'"

Oh how they forget; McCain enjoyed the same adoring throngs and "save the country" mentality in 2000 that Obama now enjoys. Just because he spent the last seven years selling out to his former enemies and losing that luster, now he can pretend he was never once deemed the savior of America.

This is a stupid ad - McCain, who is running on experience, running against "Washington" - and of course, says nothing about the SUVs and the waste that have made America so dependent on foreign oil, or the reckless tax breaks that have made America so dependent on foreign Central banks, or the reckless policies that have driven down the value of the dollar and therefore the price of oil, or ... in all of which McCain was complicit.  

If the American people falls for this sort of campaign yet again, well, what can I say, you deserve to have McCain.

We are the ones we've been waiting for -- how could anyone accuse Obama of a messianic complex when he claims no more than to be a populist foot soldier?  

An ad written by Lymon and Tep, for anyone who wishes to run for President:

"I don't know what made me think I could run for President.  Or why.  After all, no change is possible and so I am not promising any.  And of course, no matter how qualified or experienced I am, I'm sure there is someone out there more intelligent, and more experienced, than I.  I would not want to be presumptuous enough to ask for your money - after all, I am not the best, nor the brightest, just a common folk like the rest of you.  I am not going to hold large rallies - even if there are thousands of you who, for some inexplicable reason, want to come listen to me - because that would give the impression that I like your adulation, that your presence is important to me, that having the masses all around me empowers me, and of course, in a democratic country, mass rallies are entirely unacceptable.

I had this pretty good speech written up, but then I realised that rhetoric, in its classical sense, is a dying art and, what's more, raises suspicions that all I have to offer are words and not action.  Yes, I realise that this is a campaign and therefore, by definition, we have only words to offer, but I hear the criticis that soaring words, perfect sentences and a strong vocabulary suggest that I am an elitist.  I'm going to mangle my syntax, add extra 'e's to words, grunt, sneer, snark, fart, burp, shrug my shoulder and be 'one of the guys' - because the American people want a Homer Simpson as President and not another Thomas Jefferson.  This is how best, in this day and age, I can demonstrate my commitment to the Constitution, to reasoned debate, to the vibrant democracy that we have become.

So, yeah, I don't think I'm better than Joe, the corner barber, in running the country; I won't hold rallies with more than twenty people in a church basement; I will forego writing and giving speeches; let's have a beer.

I'm Barack Obama and I approved this message."

I like that they managed to find a lone gas pump from the Ford administration.  Really makes the piece seem timely, and in touch with contemporary America.

My response to the McCain gas prices ad was similar to Jason's --that is, I think the "O-ba

And another aesthetic problem with McCain's logo. That's not a solid five-pointed star. A solid star is a national symbol, and on the flag stands for the union of the states (technically, a new constellation in the firmament). It's a faceted star, with shading and highlights. And faceted stars are typically used to illustrate flag rank in the military. In the case of the navy, a single faceted star would indicate the rank of rear admiral, lower half.

But John McCain left the navy without earning the rank of admiral. So in his campaign logo, he is implicitly claiming military honor he did not earn.

(No, I don't take this claim seriously. But if a retired Navy officer ran as a Democrat and used a little admiral's star as his campaign logo, you can be damn sure Republicans would jump all over him for dishonorably claiming rank he never earned, so I say we start a blog meme about McCain's attempt to promote himself.)

Isn't anyone who runs for president arrogant enough to presume he  is "blessed with such personal greatness that history has anointed [him] to save [his] country in its hour of need."

Rhubarbs: you may not be too far from the truth.  McCain's official story is that he was offered an admiralship but he turned it down and walked away.  But this is not borne out by what we know of his service record - only seventeen pages of which have been released anyway. (The other 615 or so pages have been held back, from what I understand, and they include the accounts of his numerous plane crashes, why he was never allowed near an F-4, his temperament BEFORE his fateful crash, the role of his dad in his appointment, etc.)

Mr. Crowley's portrait of Mark Salter was a bittersweet. It left me expecting that Mark Salter was capable of unleashing the angry John. Salter does combine the best qualities which include loyalty, admiration and a precious skill to project another person's image. But Salter is also petty and can appear envious of Obama, ridicules his past and makes the terrible mistake when he insists McCain's past entitles him to the position he seeks without making the case how his heroic status is relevant. The commercial cited is among the worst and I heard a few Republicans admit it lacked any credibility. The same Barack Obama who is an empty vessel with no experience and a blank political record is the very person who they chose to blame for $4 gasoline. [?]  Next it will be "Remember that bridge that collapsed in Minnesota? Yep, Obama's fault.  

McCain still has a chance to keep his dignity but he needs more than the slogan "I'd rather lose an election than lose a war."  I won't contend attack ads don't work and won't hazard to guess if the motivation is contempt, resentment or a host of reasons to shift responsibility from McCain. But McCain suffers from an increasing perception that he's failed to find a winning position on a single major issue the most powerful insults of Obama don't translate into confidence in McCain. Salter may be saddened to see his friend self-destruct but assigning the blame to Obama only draws attention to their desperation.

icarusr, maybe in place of purple heart band-aids, in Denver Democrats should hand out Snoopy pins. You have to shoot down five enemy planes to earn the title of "Fighter Ace," and McCain wrecked at least five American aircraft. Only a handful of enemy pilots have ever destroyed more American planes than John McCain managed to crash while in uniform.

icarusr, it's a pity you didn't get more of a rousing round of applause for your excellent post.

Tep and Lymon and people like them are too consumed by their detached contrarian tendencies to look at this campaign with any semblance of perspective.

The McCain camp just feels shitty because his supporters are less energized and enthusiastic about their candidate. God forbid people should be FOR their candidate, and not AGAINST the opponent.

Clearly, with this new web ad whining about the press coverage of Obama, the McCain campaign is eager

Heh! If I were Obama, I'd air an ad that reminds us of what Bush said during the 2000 election -- that the president should "jawbone" OPEC; which, of course, is something Bush certainly hasn't done. Also, why aren't Democrats taking more advantage of Big Oil not drilling in 75% of its leased properties?

Rhubs: but you see, it's perfectly alright for the Republicans to mock true war heroes because, after all, they are the Party of Muscular Masculine Militarism.  So what if they spit in the face of wounded soldiers and give them health care that a Cuban pig-farmer would reject as inadequate?  So what if they underfund the very military that they are so in favour of, fail to provide it with adequate armour, and ask no sacrifice - except giving up golf after your bum-knee prevents from you from playing it any longer - from the homefront?  So what if you send an understaffed army into a war zone you do not know, ask them to do the impossible, and send and resend them into combat until they come back in pieces - mentally or literally?  As the 3M Party, the Republicans can get away with purple heart band-aids.

The effete, arugula eating Democrats, however, have no right to criticise the record of John McCain, even if the criticism is entirely to the point, even when done by other authentic war heroes.  The Snoopy decal would be great, but you know that the Democrats would never get away with it, even if their basic decency permitted them to mock McCain so.

Now, a Walkers and Dentures pin would be great, if they could do it without raising the wrath of AARP.

thetraytiger: thanks.  I don't think either Tep or Lymon are contrarians on principle; they have legitimate concerns about Rhetoric and Rallies - as I do - as a substitute for Politics and Policies.  It is, however, possible to overdo the criticism and, as you have pointed out, lose perspective.  

In the United States, Presidential elections are often reduced to a binary choice, however the decision is made between the options, at the end of the day, you are either with the one or the other; and at some point, one has to decide and get comfortable with that decision.  Even in Canada, where we routinely have at least three and sometimes four viable candidates/parties in each riding, I have never voted without holding my nose, but even when complaining about "my" candidate, I have managed to put the race into perspective.  Lymon and Tep's analyses and comments lack this ingredient.  Well, that, and I think their comments to be misguided ;-).

The problem I see is that this ad should make a strong impression on the knuckle dragging, mouth breathers affectionately referred to as low information voters in polite political circles. The commercial uses a simple rationalization that does not require any of the higer brain functions prevalent among the intelligent, combined with strong imagery. Its the kind of commercial that leaves a solid negative impression on the psyche, but isn't worth remembering three months down the road; it could have significant long tem consequences if the Dems don't engage in an open discussion that educates Americans regarding the signficant differences between more land leases and actually drilling for oil, in order to counter the visceral disinformation presented.

"We are the ones we've been waiting for -- how could anyone accuse Obama of a messianic complex when he claims no more than to be a populist foot soldier?"

This sounds rather Obamaphilic. Are you feeling OK, lymon?

"Also, why aren't Democrats taking more advantage of Big Oil not drilling in 75% of its leased properties?"

Either they're a bunch of numb-nuts, or they're waiting for better timing. I hope to God they're waiting for better timing.

icarusr, contrarians on principle? I agree, of course not. A concern for policies as indications of future governing strategy is a legitimate concern.  But as you say, let's not get carried away and lose perspective on the political process.

Every successful campaign, Republican or Democratic, has elite elements for the opinion-makers (Norquist-fellating sessions and AFT-kowtowing conferences, example) and populist element for the, um, votes.

In that vein, I'll take "We are the ones we have been waiting for" populism over "Jesus Christ is my favorite political philosopher" any day.

I'm going to jump in on the tep analysis [don't know enough about lymon, except that it's the refreshing taste of Sprite], with this delight from Michael Chabon, who is not too cool to wear his heart on his sleeve:

**************

There are many reasons not to support Barack Obama's candidacy for president, but every one of them is bad for the same reason.

Because I have come out publicly for the senator from Illinois, I am often called upon to listen as people offer up -- with wistfulness and regret, or with a pundit's show of certainty, or with a well-earned but useless skepticism -- their bad reasons for not giving Obama their support. For a long time now, I have listened to these people with forbearance and with a sense of duty -- not to some principle of open debate or of the inherent merit in the free exchange of even meritless ideas, but rather out of obligation to the candidate whose cause I champion.

Because Obama appears to be a patient, forbearing man with a gift for listening, I figured I owed it to him to play the thing his way. So I have nodded and looked into their eyes and hummed sympathetically as people gave their reasons and made their excuses and generally offered up, as if they were golden ingots of profound wisdom, the handful of two-penny nails with which they plan to board up the windows of their hopes for themselves, their families, their country and the world.

***************

I immediately thought of tep!

whole thing:

www.washingtonpost.com/.../AR2008020302526_pf.html

"In that vein, I'll take "We are the ones we have been waiting for" populism over "Jesus Christ is my favorite political philosopher" any day."

Especially because Jesus Christ said, "render unto Caesar" and "let the dead bury the dead", great moral axioms but outright stupid as political philosophy.

I thought "render unto Caesar" was pro-separation-of-church-and-state. What is it, then?

psantillana: I am not a Biblical scholar, but there are, from why I can gather, different interpretations - Jews should submit to legal secular authority even as they refuse to accept the image of Caesar on coinage, Jews should separate their affairs from secular authority, Jews should withdraw from secular authority/worldly possessions ...

Variations of this thought have their roots in Persian/ Zoroastrian gnosticism that finds its way, through Babylon, to pre-Christina Palestine and, after Islam, gets a poetic reformulation in Sufism.

As moral axiom - resignation, withdrawal from worldly affairs - is sound; as political philosophy, at least to these Biblically ignorant eyes, it appears bunkum.

icarusr - brilliant Obama speech, you nailed it.

John McCain started off the week with a yawning imagery gap , lurching toward a strategy based on either