The way McCain refused to look Obama in the face during the debate, much less make actual eye contact, has been discussed, but I found a letter online that suggests the resentment McCain feels is actually older, and deeper, than I had known.
It might go back to February 2006.
And S. 2180, the Honest Leadership act.
What an evocative name.
What a telling exchange.
Excerpts on the flip:
A thank you to the commenter at Balloon Juice who pointed this out.
I felt McCain was definitely being rude, but I didn't know there was a personal vendetta going on. And to me, he's definitely the type to hold a grudge, as long as he doesn't have a personal ambition to set aside such considerations.
Such as going to Bush for the nomination and accepting the same campaign staffer who made the attack ads against him in 2000.
So is McCain the kind of man who will let his emotions get the best of him? I found this exchange of letters to be most interesting.
From Obama, February 2, 2006:
Dear John:
Thank you for inviting me to participate in the meeting yesterday to discuss lobbying and ethics reform proposals currently before the Senate. I appreciate your willingness to reach out to me and several other Senate Democrats to discuss what should be done to restore public confidence in the way that Congress conducts its business. The discussion clearly underscored the difficult challenge facing Congress.
Yup, this is a "Dear John" letter, because later on, it says:
I know you have expressed an interest in creating a task force to further study and discuss these matters, but I and others in the Democratic Caucus believe the more effective and timely course is to allow the committees of jurisdiction to roll up their sleeves and get to work on writing ethics and lobbying reform legislation that a majority of the Senate can support.
Hmm, I'm seeing a pattern. McCain wants a task force. Obama wants legislation. Which one will actually get results, faster? And it did result in the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007, a response to the Abramoff scandal.
How did McCain respond?
Dear Senator Obama:
I would like to apologize to you for assuming that your private assurances to me regarding your desire to cooperate in our efforts to negotiate bipartisan lobbying reform legislation were sincere.
Ouch! Passive aggressive much, Senator McCain?
You commented in your letter about my "interest in creating a task force to further study" this issue, as if to suggest I support delaying the consideration of much-needed reforms rather than allowing the committees of jurisdiction to hold hearings on the matter. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Well, I don't know about that. I think the fact that he's alluding to what he hasn't been accused of is telling.
Since you are new to the Senate, you may not be aware of the fact that I have always supported fully the regular committee and legislative process in the Senate, and routinely urge Committee Chairmen to hold hearings on important issues.
"New to the Senate." Subtle. And a tried and true tactic he's still using, as we saw on Friday's debate.
Senator Lieberman and I, and many other members of this body, hope to exceed the public's low expectations. We view this as an opportunity to bring transparency and accountability to the Congress, and, most importantly, to show the public that both parties will work together to address our failings.
I would guess so, since it was an exclusively Republican scandal. And there's Joe Lieberman again! Do they sit together at lunch, I wonder?
Per Wikipedia:
Both 2008 presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain introduced and sponsored amendments to the act, although neither were official cosponsors of the final act. The uncontroversial bill passed easily by an 83-14 margin, with Obama voting for and McCain voting against. The Vote
So if it's not his ball, he won't play?
Obama even writes, back, with a "Dear John":
I confess that I have no idea what has prompted your response. But let me assure you that I am not interested in typical partisan rhetoric or posturing. The fact that you have now questioned my sincerity and my desire to put aside politics for the public interest is regrettable but does not in any way diminish my deep respect for you nor my willingness to find a bipartisan solution to this problem.
It seems the die was set long before last Friday.