First, what’s really going on here with the McCain campaign’s relentless pursuit of Obama’s association with Bill Ayers?  What do Obama’s associations actually reveal about him?   Republicans, as they are apt to do during election cycles, are re-litigating the culture wars of the 1960s.  From a culture-war perspective, Obama’s associations tell us that he cut his political teeth in liberal, Chicago circles.  The truth is Obama infrequently interacted with someone who adopted illegitimate means of fighting the establishment (Bill Ayers) and someone who had and has legitimate gripes against the establishment (Rev. Wright).  This tells us that Obama may be liberal.  Does this information tell us he’s untrustworthy?  No.  Do these associations reveal poor judgment?  That depends on your own ideological perspective.  Do they expose a traitor?  Absolutely not!!  This is where the McCain campaign shifts from rough, but fair, politics to reckless partisanship. Republicans always lose me when they make liberalism foreign and un-American.  However, it’s hard to make liberalism un-American when a Republican administration is nationalizing key sectors of the economy (attendees of McCain-Palin rallies should be afraid of the socialists already in the White House).  Their tactics become dangerous when they purposefully draw upon bigotry and xenophobia to paint a family-man, father of two daughters, who has lived the American dream as an American nightmare.  But this is all they have. We’re not in the middle of a culture war; we’re in the middle of an economic catastrophe.  A frontal assault on liberalism will fail: Reaganomics is in its last throes.  So, unable to beat up on liberalism, they besmirch the good name of a good man.  

What do McCain’s associations tells us about McCain?  From the culture-war perspective, he cut his political teeth in the establishment.   He befriended members of the establishment who terrorized American democracy (G. Gordon Liddy), brave individuals who defended the establishment (Bud Day), and corrupt individuals who defended the establishment (John Singlaub).  But his associations also expose a man who would betray his principles for political expediency.   McCain associated with Marylin Shannon, a delegate to the Republican National Convention, who is violently anti-gay and who defended an anti-abortion terrorist. He associated with Charles H. Keating (taking campaign donations from him, flying on his corporate plain, and vacationing at this housing in the Bahamas) whose corruption led to thousands of families losing their life savings.  He mended fences with the “agents of intolerance” and expanded his list of bigoted religious associates to include Pastor Hagee and Rod Parsley.  Finally, he pals around with Palin, who cavorted with crazed, Alaskan separatists and attended a church that allies itself with Jews for Jesus and anti-gay movements. These people are not his ideological or spiritual allies.  I actually believe, in his heart of hearts, McCain disdains them.  There’s something about Shannon, Keating, Hagee, and even Palin that must offend McCain’s ideological sensibilities. He’s not one of them: he has never been.  Nevertheless, he associated with them to achieve political power, which doesn’t say much about his character or judgment.   

Again, we’re not in a culture war.  McCain’s pro-establishment credentials are not assets in this environment. His new relationships with the religious right and Sarah Palin may excite the base of his party but they scare the vital center.  We’re in serious times. Unfortunately for McCain, we’re in a moment that requires liberalism and political leadership that puts principle over politics, country above contempt and contention.

There’s nothing noble about McCain’s decision to suspend his campaign.  It is practical: you suspend things that aren’t working.  McCain’s campaign woke up this morning to a report in the New York Times that contradicted his campaign’s statements about Rick Davis’ lobbying ties to Fannie Mae.  This bold move will successfully distract the public away from the Davis scandal (which is less about the actual lobbying than it is about the McCain campaign’s duplicity).  The last couple of days also revealed that McCain is losing substantial ground in national and state polls, including key battle ground states that he shouldn’t be defending (Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida).  Moreover, the polls reveal that Americans prefer Obama’s leadership on economic issues, which are, by the way, their main concern.  Indeed, Obama, who is twenty-five years younger than the senior senator from Arizona, has been the grownup this week. His calm and, from my perspective, prudence contrasts drastically with McCain’s bombastic statements and erratic behavior.  So now McCain is trying to play the bigger man, matching Obama’s wise call for a joint policy statement with a dramatic, unilateral move to cancel Friday’s debate and campaigning.  Again, canceling the debate and the campaign is practical politics: 1) this debate on foreign affairs, McCain’s strong suit, will only be background noise during this financial crisis--McCain will lose a chip in this debate game; 2) the suspension gives the McCain campaign time and space to retool and think of other ways to distract the public; and 3) It would possibly cause the VP debate to be postponed, which would give Sarah Palin more time to meet people and learn things.  All of this fine practical politics, even if it is cynical.  But McCain is not putting country first by taking his campaign of mass distraction into tense negotiations over the Wall Street bailout package.  I would prefer he sit out the debate in one of his homes and wait for congressional leaders to call him when he’s needed.  Playing politics is fine.  Playing with our money isn’t.