"Has Bush earned the right to name his successor?"
One short question is all it takes to turn this campaign into a referendum on Bush's performance.
To establish the meme that McCain is running to serve out Bush's third term.
To hint at Bush's extraconstitutional assertion of executive authority.
To call to mind the Embrace and the Endorsement.
To play the guilt-by-association game one last time -- but this time, with substance.
Ask it in debates and at press conferences.
Put it in commercials.
Turn it into McCain's $400 haircut, sniper fire and Rev. Wright rolled into one.
Make it the main discussion point of pundits on Bush's night during this summer's GOP Convention.
In another year, it probably wouldn't be a fair question.
But we have a White House endorsement from an imperial president whose dirty trickster is scheming and spinning for his chosen successor. That endorsement is based on the successor's promise to continue practices and policies that are grounded in impeachable offenses.
"Has Bush earned the right to name his successor?"
Answering this question won't be easy for McCain. He could say, "No president gets to name his successor; voters do." But the easy followup is "Bush has named his choice of successor. What should voters make of the fact that he named you?" (The more snarky followup is "Have you checked Bush's signing statements lately?")
But asking this question is simple enough, even for our braindead media. Particularly if enough people out there are asking it.
Let's get it out there.