Today the St. Petersburg Times here in my hometown has absolutely blasted John McCain for running a campaign that appears to be based on nothing more than blatant lies and baseless smears. As you can see from the headline of the paper's editorial, "From 'Straight Talk' to Smear Campaign," the Times pulls no punches in calling out McCain for getting as far away from his so-called "straight talk" as he can get.
The editorial lays it all out there right from the opening paragraph:
The Straight Talk Express has taken a nasty turn into the gutter. Sen. John McCain has resorted to lies and distortions in what sounds like an increasingly desperate attempt to slow down Sen. Barack Obama by raising questions about his patriotism. Instead of taking the Democrat down a few notches, these baseless attacks are raising more questions about the Republican's campaign and his ability to control his temper.
The Times proceeds to eviscerate McCain for his "offensive" remark that Obama "would rather lose a war in order to win a political campaign."
That is one of the more outrageous statements by a major political party candidate seeking the presidency. The looming choices about the long-festering war in Iraq are not between winning and losing but about how quickly or slowly the United States can reduce its military forces without jeopardizing recent security gains. Even McCain acknowledges that, and insulting Obama in such a reckless way is not presidential.
Ouch. The newspaper's editorial board also sets the record straight on McCain's lying ad about Obama's cancelled troop visit in Germany, calling the ad "below the belt." And they take McCain to task for trying to suggest that Obama is a socialist.
This is a classic smear campaign. As the Times' PolitiFact notes, the National Journal rated Obama the most liberal senator by analyzing just 99 of 442 votes last year. He did not finish near the top in two previous years, and other ranking services rate his record as significantly less liberal than Sanders'. But McCain was not troubled by the details. He mentioned Obama and socialist in the same sentence, and the seeds of doubt were planted.
The Times notes that McCain's lies and smears are part of the "darker tone enveloping the McCain campaign since several of Karl Rove's acolytes took the wheel." And as McCain turns himself over to the dark side of Rovian politics, the newspaper rightly notes that the "maverick" McCain of old is nowhere to be found these days:
The self-described "happy warrior" in the 2000 presidential campaign has turned sour in 2008, and the candor and straight talk that once made him such an attractive candidate are rapidly disappearing.
Rapidly disappearing? Well, that's my one quibble with the piece. McCain's "candor" and "straight talk," however much he had of it to begin with, has totally evaporated as far as I can see.
We all know that Florida is a swing state, so an editorial like this one of the state's major newspapers that exposes McCain's bull is significant indeed. Here's hoping this is a sign that the mainstream media is finally waking up about the true John McCain and will start doing its job. Hold the sprinkles.
UPDATE:
This is a bit off-topic, but for all you Tampa Bay kossacks out there, the Times reports today that Obama will hold a town hall-style meeting on the economy Friday at Gibbs High School in St. Petersburg:
Tickets will be available first-come, first-served from 5 to 7 p.m. today at the St. Petersburg campaign office, 2321 Central Ave. Adults will be allotted a maximum of two tickets each and children younger than 16 will be allotted one...
Obama's St. Petersburg event, the campaign said, will focus on his priorities for economic relief for Americans, including his support for a national catastrophic insurance fund and an additional round of rebate checks to help jump-start the economy.
UPDATE 2:
Several commenters have asked about the liberal vs. conservative slant of the St. Pete Times and its editorial pages. I'll give you my quick take on that. I've only lived in Tampa two years, and from what I can understand from folks who have lived here much longer, historically the Times has been said to have a liberal slant, although often that is said in comparison to the other local daily here, the Tampa Tribune (i.e., it's the more liberal/less conservative of the two). However, since I've been here I've had a hard time noticing much difference between the two papers. The Times political editor, Adam Smith, has been tough on Obama, so I certainly don't see the paper as being in the bag for Obama. The Times has the largest circulation of any daily in Florida, and it tends to be respected for its independent ownership structure, so I think it's an editorial worth noting.