I offer this to the Sen. from Arizona, John Sidney McCain III, in hopes that you can regain what I and others once so admired in you, your honor and integrity.
Recently, you finally had to defend Obama as a decent man in the face of the misinformation, fear, mistrust, and possibly hatred you and your campaign have been stoking for political gain. The man who once decried agents of intolerance has now sadly become one himself.
Senator, in less than one week either you or Senator Obama will be chosen as our next President. The next President will inherit difficult situations, on many fronts, and will need the confidence of the American people to move us in the right direction.
If you lose, your party will throw you to the wolves, blaming you for the loss instead of looking in the mirror. This has already begun. If you continue on, you and Joe will be a party of two.
Being bipartisan is more than just passing legislation, its creating a climate of respect and decency between the parties and in the country. By this standard, you campaign has been very partisan.
Senator, reclaim your honor and decency and finish this campaign with integrity and decency, or reclaim it soon after. Your country will need McCain 2000 (and Lieberman 2000) in the Senate in the days to come.
I want my McCain 2000 back! The man who once likened himself to Luke Skywalker battling the forces of evil has now been turned to the dark side.
How so? In two very important areas Sen. McCain, you have left us, and the core principles of McCain 2000 behind in your ambitious quest to become President: the Palin pick and the conduct of the campaign.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Picking Palin
The man who once decried certain religious extremists as agents of intolerance has now bent knee to this part of his party and tapped a true believer, the global warming denying, real vs. non-real America, science demeaning, manifestly unprepared Sarah Palin as his running mate.
So much for putting country first, Senator.
And all this in a transparent attempt to woo the disaffected Hillary supporters to a woman who is rabidly anti-choice and under whom, Wasilla charged rape victims $1,000 for their test kits.
If you were going to try to appeal to PUMA's to try to win the election, there were many more sensible options who have the knowledge and skills to lead: Sen. Olympia Snow (Maine), Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (Texas), Meg Whitman, Tom Ridge, Joe Lieberman. But all of these folks, while qualified, don't meet the wingnut litmus test = a rabid anti-abortion stance.
So you had to bend knee and pick a wingnut, but being a wingnut, she doesn't believe in science or any of that crap, isn't terribly fond of learning, or intellectually curious, and therefore not terribly knowledgeable about much of anything.
---------------------------------------------------------------
II. The Campaign: Spreading Lies, Fear, and Intolerance
But it's not just the pick that was such a departure from the McCain I once respected, but the tone, tenor, and truth averse nature of the campaign you have chosen that is so worrisome.
Gov. Palin runs around the country asserting that Sen. Obama "palls around with terrorists." Referring to Bill Ayers. Never mind that no one other than Ayers is ever mentioned. Why the plural? Never mind that Republican's in Illinois call the guilt by association ploy "ridiculous" and even the lead prosecutor in the Weather Undergound case was "amazed and outraged" by the attacks.
Recent GOP rallies have showcased the results of implying Obama is "palling around" with terrorists and that he is somehow foreign and dangerous. Coupled with the persistent ignorance of many Americans about Obama's religious beliefs (they think he's a Muslim), its not hard to guess where the GOP masses would end up: Obama = Terrorist. One has only had to listen in at the rallies to be proven correct.
And its not only wingnuts in the crowd, speakers on stage now often refer to Obama by his middle name (Hussein) in the hopes it will spread the lie that he is a Muslim. Or dangerous and different. Or dangerous because he is different.
Later that week, a preacher claimed an Obama victory would please people who prayed to other Gods (like "Buddha and Hindu") and it would prove that their Gods were greater than the Christian God. Again, aside from the obviously stupid nature of the comments (Buddha and Hindu aren't Gods, but a prophet and the names of the religions), the idea again is that Obama is not Christian. And different. And/or dangerous.
Your own brother called the Obama supporting sections of Virginia "communist country."
Earlier in the campaign, you disavowed similar comments from conservative talk show host Bill Cunningham at a rally in Cincinnati.
Recently, you had to defend Obama as a decent family man and someone who needn't be feared, and not a Arab, and say that the campaign was about issues. And you got booed by your own wingnut, misinformed, intolerant supporters as a result of your return to the principled, decent McCain of 2000.
Senator, you claim that you disavow all such incendiary an inappropriate comments, but that is just not true. The sheriff, the preacher, and your own brother haven't been reprimanded like the "Arab" lady, or Mr. Cunningham. Meanwhile, Gov. Palin has now been gallivanting around saying Sen. Obama is a socialist.
Never mind that the graduated income tax (in some form) was supported by none other than the two greatest Republican Presidents in history, Lincoln (at least temporarily to pay for the Civil War) and Teddy Roosevelt.
Never mind that a tax has nothing to do with the government owning the means of production (classic definition of socialism). Never mind that a tax (more or less) isn't really redistributive at all. It involves a taking of income, the only question is how much the government takes (more or less than they currently are).
Never mind that your man-crush idol Ronald Reagan started an ACTUAL redistributive program, the Earned Income Tax Credit, which can actually give a check to low income tax payers. Never mind that President Bush just gave out a tax rebate this year (again, actual redistribution). Never mind that YOU just voted to partially nationalize the banking industry.
Even YOU had to admit, on Larry King, that Obama isn't a socialist. But just his policies are? Whatever.
In my opinion, you have long since abandoned the positions and ethical and moral standards that made your 2000 campaign, and you yourself, so appealing. Or was that just packaging you thought could help you get to the White House?
You have flip-flopped and a startling number of issues, among them: drilling, torture, taxes, immigration (you are now against your own bill), Iraq war (presence of troops), tolerance. Most are listed here, and the troop presence one here.
You picked an obviously unqualified VP that you had met all of twice. You go around the country asking "Who is Barck Obama?" You didn't seem to mind that you had no idea who Sarah Palin was when you picked her for VP.
The hypocrisy of claiming you are a regulator when you tout your record of deregulation. The hypocrisy of criticizing Obama for phoning it in during the financial crisis when your own aides admit you did as well. And finally your pathetic linking of Obama to terrorism and socialism via the Ayers and tax cut remarks detailed above.
Look, I realize this is beginning to be a long list. And my intention here is not to hit you with every single flip-flop or hypocritical "those in glass houses should not throw stones" comment or accusation your campaign has made (frankly, I don't have the time, and the list would be too long to read).
-----------------------------------------------------------------
III. For the Good of the Nation: Come back to us, and yourself
Instead, my intention is to try to hold up a mirror so you can see what you have become. Obviously, you can't bring yourself to do it. You've surrounded yourself with the same Atwater-Rovian disciples (Schmidt) that mauled you in South Carolina. You've become what you used to righteously and rightly rail against, and using the same methods (like robocalls).
Nor is my call to return to your senses and to your former self a call from someone who is bemoaning a hero or idol who has lost their way. I'm a progressive, and as such you were never any hero or idol of mine.
However, I did respect your positions and the way your campaign was run in 2000. You could have had a shot at my vote. I respected your positions on intolerance and negative campaigning because I, like you did at the time, believe that they are a corrosive, toxic influence on our democracy and in our nation.
Spewing hatred, intolerance, and misinformation into the electorate just leads to decisions being made on bad information and a country too divided to accomplish anything major. Right now, we need to come together to get big things done. Health care, the financial crisis, climate change, sustainability issues, and the war on terror are just a few examples. You are poisoning in the body politic in hopes it will land you at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. This is disgusting.
But is also bad for our nation. Now, I have no illusions you will suddenly see the light with less than a week to go and turn Putting Country First into more that a political slogan, even though our nation sorely needs to elevate its political discourse out of the mud. So I'll take a different tact.
--------------------------------------------------------
IV. For your own sake: Come back to us, and to your former self
Do it for your own reputation and future. This seems to be your primary motivation anyway, at least according to your biography. Just like you, your Republican colleagues show no signs of being able to look in the mirror.
They'll never admit that the reason they are getting trounced is because the Reagan economic philosophy (trickle down, supply side, $$ for the rich first) is bankrupt. They will not admit that the investing class does better by nearly 6-1 under Democratic administrations, as this study proves (and that's throwing out 4 years of Hoover, if included, its nearly 30-1).
Nor will they admit to the changing demographics that will virtually doom the "he isn't one of us" type of campaign to extinction in the very near future, if it isn't there already. The majority of America will NOT look like you, or me by 2042, and it is already of such a significant proportion that making someone an "other" and ticking off all the "others" out there just doesn't work on the national level.
Furthermore, with blacks voting for democrats at a 85-15 rate (or better) and Hispanics breaking at 60-40 (or better), once this cow is out of the barn, its hard to see how it ever comes back. Four states are currently majority minority: California (blue), Hawaii (blue), New Mexico (becoming blue), Texas (trending blue). If Texas (and/or Florida) go blue, there is just no electoral path for the GOP in the foreseeable future. But the GOP won't want to look that far ahead (its too scary), they'll want to blame someone, or go into denial.
Some, like me, may even say that if you'd stuck to McCain 2000 you'd have had a better shot. But most of these types (Powell, Eisenhower, Goldwater, Weld, McClellan) are moderates who have already gone over to the Dems and might not be IN your party after November.
No. Most will (at least initially) be in denial and try to deflect blame altogether, saying it was the financial crisis (as if Reagan economic policies didn't cause it). You were ahead until it hit (albeit right after the convention and at the height of Palin's popularity). But eventually, the scapegoating GOP will come looking for someone to blame. It won't be Reagan, nor changing demographics, nor the adorable (to them) but vacuous Sarah Palin. It will be you.
If you lose on Tuesday (as now seems likely), you'll be persona non grata in the GOP. You're erratic campaign, poor planning, poor leadership, poor ground game, poor organization, and poor leadership will all be hammered from inside the GOP. The intellectual wing of the party (Will, Buckley) and a lot of the strategists have already begun.
The Evangelicals never liked you much, and will all either go over to Palin, or back Huckabee. They'll say if you'd have went at Obama harder, you'd have won. The neocon's and Atwater disciples will echo this sentiment.
The financial wing of the party (Romeny, Wall Street) was never your playground either. Mittens is already running for 2012. He'll say they party would have done better if he was the VP, or the nominee. And many will be eager to believe him.
The foreign policy wing (Powell, Lugar, Hagel) has always been lukewarm to you (because you are a hot-head) and is somewhat moderate, and thus don't like the rightward drift and may not be around after November. Or if they are, they'll be diminished in power.
In short, Senator, soon George Bush will have more GOP friends than you will. After, you lose, you should realize the very people whose support has caused you to abandon your principles, and your honor, will blame you for the defeat of the ticket, and the party, rather than their own parties ideology and tactics. You'll be thrown to the wolves by these very same people.
So I implore you, for the good of the country and for your own reputation, return to the man who captivated millions and likened himself to Luke Skywalker battling through the Death Star. Can you not see you are literally employing the agents and tactics of Darth Vadar yourself?
Your country and the Democrats will be needing an extra vote or two on many issues in the upcoming Senate. In 2010 Dems will likely get to 60 without Joe, and you'll become irrelevant, at least until 2012. For the short time you have left in the Senate, you can still be an important voice, and could even return to being a leader of sorts. But that chance will be gone if/when Dems get to 60.
I know it will take some time to get over the loss, and being thrown to the wolves, but come back to us (and even bring Joe with you), your vote will matter for 2 years. Make a difference for your country, the one you love and profess to put first. Prove it over next two years even if you can't bring yourself to do it over the next week.
P.S. Sorry for the length.
P.P.S. And for those that get the obscure musical reference, fantastic. For those who don't, some good tunes still await (though the referenced one IS not one of the best).