Quick Hits

1) So apparently Jim Webb has pulled his name out of the Veepstakes by refusing to participate in the vetting process. It could be some elaborate Kabuki dance, but I doubt it. It's probably safe to assume he's not going to be Obama's running mate, in which case I need a new top choice. Based on their recent performances as surrogates, I'd have to say I'm leaning toward Joe Biden. As I've said previously, I think one of the most important qualities a running mate can have is the ability to effectively serve as the most high profile surrogate for the nominee. As someone who regularly watches most of the Sunday talking head shows, I feel comfortable saying that Biden is a much more effective surrogate than most of the other people whose names have been trotted out as potential running mates (yes I'm talking about you Tom Daschle, Ed Rendell, Kathleen Sebelius, and Evan Bayh). I think Al Gore would also be a fine choice, but I can't imagine why he would accept the offer.

2) McCain has released his Underpants Gnomes plan for balancing the federal budget by the end of his first term:

Step 1: Wage war indefinitely and pass massive additional tax cuts

Step 2: ????????

Step 3: Balance budget by end of first term.

It's so simple it has to work. Seriously, though, would any Democrat be able to get away with this level of lunacy? Is this really what qualifies as "straight talk" these days?

For an actual analysis of McCain's fiscal idiocy, see this typically substantive post by Hilzoy.

3) I'm really starting to get annoyed by those AARP "Divided We Fail" ads that I keep seeing on TV. The premise of the ads is that both the Republican and Democratic parties keep promising to do something to "ensure affordable, quality health care and long-term financial security – for all of us" but--because of partisan gridlock--nothing ever gets done. The ad campaign encourages the public to hold these politicians accountable and press them to seek bi-partisan solutions to these problems. That's all fine and good except for the simple fact that the Republican party has zero interest in pursuing these goals. The primary obstacle to the implementation of policies that guarantee health care and financial security to all Americans is not "gridlock"; it's the fact that Republicans don't believe in these policies. This isn't exactly a secret. They're very proud of the fact that they don't support such policies.

The reality is that one party believes we should protect Social Security. The other party thinks Social Security is socialism and that we should privatize it or do away with it altogether. One party believes we should provide affordable health care to all Americans. The other thinks we should either do nothing or dramatically scale back existing government efforts to provide health care to people. In other words, if you really care about the stated goals of the "Divided We Fail" campaign, you should be doing everything you can to elect Democrats, not complaining about gridlock. If you elect more members of the party that shares your goals and less members of the party that opposes them, gridlock will cease to be a problem.

4) While Obama was announcing his plans to hold his nomination acceptance speech in a stadium filled with 75,000 people today, John McCain was continuing to take lessons on how to use a teleprompter. In his defense, McCain's chief of staff had this to say:

“John doesn’t ever want to be something that he is not,” Mr. Salter said, including trying to pass himself off as a larger-than-life figure on stage.

That's a good thing, because McCain seems to have a hard enough time passing himself off as alive. Sometimes I think that if McCain was replaced by an animatronic figure who said "my friends" every few seconds, no one would really notice.

5) Republican double-standard watch: Susan G reminds me of this John McCain quote from 2000:

"I hate the gooks," McCain said yesterday in response to a question from reporters aboard his campaign bus. "I will hate them as long as I live."

Is there any doubt that if a Democrat had ever said anything even remotely as offensive, he or she would have instantly ceased to be a viable national candidate? And why don't we see endless campaign speculation about McCain's "Asian problem"? Obama has done nothing but defend Israel and yet we are constantly treated to speculation about his supposed "Jewish problem," presumably because scurrilous emails have accused him of being a Muslim. By contrast, McCain has actually used this deeply offense ethnic slur numerous times over the years in conversations with reporters and I doubt most Asian Americans have ever even heard about it.