Bill Manzi.com

It appears that Barack Obama has agreed to the three debates sponsored by the Presidential Debate Commission but no more. The NY Times is reporting that Obama appears to have rejected the joint town hall appearances suggested by the McCain campaign, although the Obama camp blamed McCain. McCains campaign pounced, ridiculing Obama as an international celebrity who would feel it beneath himself to make such joint appearances. Obama is apparently going to play it safe. I do not believe Obama should shy away from more debate, as McCain,in my opinion,is more likely to make a mistake. But fear of error should never guide these decisions,

Senator Barack Obama, in a nod to some political realities, agreed that where a good energy compromise bill could be negotiated he could support some additional offshore drilling. From the New York Times:

“If we come up with a genuine bipartisan compromise, where I have to accept some things that I don’t like in order to get energy independence, that’s something I will have to consider,” Mr. Obama said

Still, he cautioned that he is not yet “ready to sign off on any approach.”

Faced with a barrage of negative ads from John McCain blaming off shore drilling prohibitions for the price of gas Obama and the Democrats have been in full retreat, with growing majorities in both houses of Congress seemingly ready to modify these past prohibitions. And with Congress having left without any action on energy their is rightful criticism by the public on this lack of action. Obama is correct here. If the Democrats can get some real positives from an energy bill that is not perfect then it should be explored, even if it means some additional drilling. Obama, contrary to the political attacks launched on him, has shown again a very pragmatic side. Will he take criticism from the left for that pragmatism? Good call, and especially if a compromise bill emerges.

With the two posts on campaign ads bringing some comments about effectiveness a story in todays Washington Post highlights some of my criticism of McCain’s political strategy. Essentially saying that McCain refuses to stay on message the story highlights McCains undisciplined campaign style, which has endeared him to many but drives political pros crazy. It also results in a muddled media message, and a lack of focus in the campaign. As a Democrat I hope McCain keeps it up, because the lack of focus is ceding Obama a lot of ground. From the Washington Post:

For weeks, McCain’s staff has been criticized for running a campaign that has no clear message. The decision by the senator from Arizona to have former Bush strategist Steve Schmidt run daily operations was described as a way to get control of the message. But some Republicans outside the campaign believe that not much has changed since then.

“It’s the candidate,” said one GOP strategist with close ties to the campaign, who added that efforts to identify a theme for each week quickly unravel as McCain veers off message in his public comments.

At a town hall meeting in Pennsylvania last week, McCain stood before a banner that proclaimed “Energy Solutions” and “The Lexington Project” — the moniker his campaign coined for an energy proposal featuring a combination of conservation efforts, expanded offshore drilling and nuclear power.

McCain rambled quickly through the details and showed little appreciation for the art of “branding.”

“I call it the Lexington Project, my friends, but you can call it anything you want,” he said.

Even trying to win over conservatives has been a problem for McCain some days, as his tendency to ramble a little takes him into difficult waters.

At a town hall meeting Tuesday, a GOP voter posed a question McCain has heard everywhere from Sparks, Nev., to Dayton, Ohio: Why should Republicans support him?

“I think I speak for a lot of conservatives when I say I’m not very excited about this election,” the questioner said, noting that he differs with McCain on issues including “amnesty” for illegal immigrants and the senator’s support for “the global warming crowd’s agenda.”

But rather than rattle off his most conservative positions — his opposition to abortion and support for the war — he launched into a long explanation of his role in a compromise on judges, something that conservatives often criticize him for.

He sparked applause from the Republican audience by mentioning his support for conservative Supreme Court Justices John G. Roberts Jr. and Samuel A. Alito Jr., but he then noted that he had backed liberal Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer as well.

McCain finished off what was supposed to be an explanation of why conservatives should back him with a pledge to push for a cleaner planet.

McCain has seriously veered off message with comments that “everything is on the table” with regards to a social security fix, including higher taxes on top earners. That drew a sharp rebuke from the Wall Street Journal editorial page. He has also muddled his message on the “timetable” issue in Iraq, saying that Obama’s sixteen month timetable for withdrawal was “pretty good”.
I guess that political pros notwithstanding McCain is going to be McCain. Read the Washington Post article here.

And after yesterdays post lets look at the Obama response. Effective? From Obama’s perspective I like the photo of Bush and McCain together, feeding into the “McSame” theme. Alternative energy proposals? Good visuals for Obama. Taking on big oil? A no brainer. Overall I give it a b+. I give McCain a c-.

The McCain campaign continues to struggle with the Obama factor in this race. They have criticized the media for slanted coverage, and ridiculed his overseas trip, referred to him as “the chosen one”, and now they have taken the drastic step of comparing him to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. Now that is some plain out dirty campaigning! But with the levity aside it shows me that the McCain folks still don’t have a consistent message to try to tear Obama down. I may be wrong, but I see this ad as a waste of McCain money. What do you think? Is it in any way effective?

More news from the land of fiscal responsibility. From the Washington Post:

The federal budget deficit will surge to nearly $490 billion next fiscal year, a record dollar amount, driven by continuing war costs and an economic slowdown that is not likely to turn around fast, according to the Office of Management and Budget. After three successive years of decline, this year’s deficit will jump dramatically as well. That is likely to scramble the plans of the next president, regardless of which candidate prevails. Either Republican John McCain or Democrat Barack Obama will enter the White House in a tide of red ink.

With the Presidential campaign in full swing you might think that deficit reduction would be high on the list of topics, but it really has just been ignored.

Neither McCain nor Obama have been particularly mindful of the budget deficit. McCain has proposed to extend all of Bush’s first-term tax cuts, which expire in 2011, and add hundreds of billions of additional tax cuts, mostly for business. Obama would allow only the tax cuts for most affluent to expire, leaving the lion’s share in place and adding additional tax cuts for the working poor and middle class, plus hundreds of billions in more spending on health care, energy and education.

The Post story had economist Martin Feldstein poo-pooing the deficit numbers.

McCain economic advisers this morning shrugged off the new deficit figures. Harvard University economist Martin Feldstein said the surge of red ink is tied to cyclical developments — the economic stimulus checks and the slowing economy — not permanent changes.

“So I don’t think it has implications going forward,” he said.

Neither campaign seems to want to deal with this issue, or make hard choices on finances. Is it just accepted at this point that Dick Cheney was right when he said “deficits don’t matter”. Republican Senator Tom Coburn, featured in my next post, does not agree.