The McCain campaign has a new ad out there called "Praising McCain" (the title is a play on words for the new McCain campaign song, "Raisin' McCain", which is available free for download from the country singer/songwriter's website, http://johnrich.com). Independent Democrat Joe Lieberman, Al Gore's running mate, who has worked with John McCain on climate change and Senate ethics, has already endorsed McCain. But the past clips of other prominent Democrats (taken, of course, before he cinched the GOP nomination), which are complimentary of John, are notable: DNC chair Howard Dean (whom admires John's direct, blunt style, i.e., "Straight Talk"), John Kerry, Russ Feingold (McCain's co-sponsor of campaign reform legislation), Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, (hmmm) Barack Obama, and former Majority Leader Tom Daschle.
Another interesting tidbit (not in the clip) was a rejected amendment to the 2007 Senate Lobbying and Ethics Reform bill which would have created an independent Office of Public Integrity, which was sponsored by Joe Lieberman, Susan Collins (R-ME), John McCain, and (hmmm) Barack Obama.
The McCain campaign during the primaries ran a related spot featuring Democrats admitting that McCain was the one Republican candidate they didn't want to face.
Obviously, the Democrats have had to come up with some pretext to explain why they are opposing someone whom has consistently reached across the aisle. John Kerry, who is widely rumored to have approached McCain for the VP spot on his 2004 ticket, claims McCain has "changed" since 2004 on tax cuts, torture, and immigration, has basically sold out to Bush to win the nomination, and flipped on promises of running an honorable campaign against Obama; Howard Dean alleges that the John McCain of 2000 would not recognize or vote for today's John McCain.
Tax Cuts
I really should do a post just on tax cuts, including McCain's infamous votes against the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. A number of so-called "fact check" organizations have disputed McCain's explanations of his votes then, speaking of spending constraints; they point at populist-style arguments on the floor of the tax cuts weighted towards the well-to-do and the matching spending cuts rationale (on the 2001 cut) was not raised on the floor. In fact, one of the political fact check groups point that McCain proposed a substitute basket of tax cuts, so spending couldn't have been a rationale since they would have been at issue for his own proposed tax cuts as well.
There are a number of issues with how the John McCain tax votes are being perceived by all of the critics (conservatives, liberals, and political fact checks). I will argue you need to look at his 26-year career of votes and positions on tax cuts (including as a "foot soldier in the Reagan Revolution" and votes against the Bush and Clinton tax hikes of the 1990's), spending, and earmarks. For a political fact check organization to dispute McCain's explanation for the 2001 tax cut because he simply didn't repeat in his speech his consistent career-long aim of balancing the federal budget is highly questionable and arbitrary. Similarly, for conservative critics to simply focus on the end result of the 2001 and 2003 votes and not the process; the fact is that McCain was not arguing AGAINST a tax cut, but the NATURE or distribution of the tax cut. The question of why he voted for and against similar-sized tax packages in 2001 is more difficult to explain; I believe that McCain could argue that tax cuts weighed towards lower/middle-income taxpayers would be more stimulative, especially given the gimmicky nature of the tax cuts, which were temporary vs. permanent. In fact, earlier experience with tax rebates showed that higher-income people tended to save vs. spend rebates.
I believe that McCain's 2001 and 2003 tax cut were primarily protest votes; if you look at votes prior to the final ones, he voted for tax cuts--it's just the amounts and/or distributions of the tax cut were different.
So now when you move to the later vote to make the tax cuts permanent (vs. expire in 2010), McCain's so-called flip-flop in voting in 2006 to make the Bush tax cuts permanent is actually consistent with his amendment standards in 2001 and 2003: he did vote to cut the high-end rates (just not as much as the final bills), but if the tax cuts expire, it would be a de facto tax increase under a tough economy. McCain had a record of opposing tax increases. Even if he disagreed with how many percentage points the higher-income taxpayers tax rates were reduced, an expiration of the tax cuts would have brought the high-end tax rates over those set in his amendments/proposals.
Thus, I don't accept Kerry's charge that McCain flip-flopped between his earlier votes and the 2006 vote. It would be a flip-flop if McCain refused to consider tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 and insisted in keeping the rates the same. In fact, there was a consensus in favor of tax cuts in 2001 in the aftermath of the 2000 Nasdaq stock meltdown and a tough economy. Instead, McCain was facing the fait accompli of the 2001/2003 tax cuts in 2006, and his tax cut alternatives weren't significantly different (at least for 2001). Not only that but the NATURE of the tax cuts were changing; many economists believe that behavior is different based on whether a tax cut is perceived as temporary (which some would consider a gimmick) or permanent. Voting for a TEMPORARY tax cut (the 2001/2003 tax rates were due to revert without explicit Congressional extention) is not as virtuous as voting for a PERMANENT tax cut, which was the 2006 vote.
Torture
This alleged flip-flop involves the fact that for military vs. other (i.e., intelligence) purposes, the original bill specifically enumerated 19 lawful techniques for prisoners and prohibited techniques such as waterboarding. However, there is also a McCain amendment with a general prohibition of cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment against all prisoners, including CIA prisoners, in the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005. Democrats later wanted to codify the military techniques and prohibitions for the CIA as well, even though the CIA had already said waterboarding (in particular) was not in practice. McCain and others are concerned that codifying and publishing techniques enables the enemy to prepare for and foil interrogation of high-risk targets and is redundant and unnecessary given existing law. It's not a "flip-flop" but a concern about the bureaucracy involved in getting timely approval for new unlisted techniques which do not violate international torture standards.
Immigration
McCain has agreed that a major problem with the 1986 immigration reform legislation is that we did not first implement effective border control before and after the law was signed. McCain has not abandoned immigration reform and in fact has an Hispanic voter outreach program in his campaign.
Identification with Bush
Kerry and others suggests that McCain voting record has become tied with Bush's preferences over the last couple of years--even more than other Republicans (but it should be noted that most Republican senators failed to back immigration). However, Bush's firing of Rumsfeld and the surge strategy had followed McCain's repeated call for these steps. McCain has also opposed Bush on climate change, torture, Medicare drug benefits, energy legislation and the infamous tax cuts. I've already put out a post on the alleged Bush "third term" allegation.
As for Kerry's claims of a negative campaign, Obama's own ads are not themselves matching his post-partisan rhetoric, and Obama's limited background, voting record, statements and numerous flip-flops on issues are legitimate issues.
