SUNDAY,  AUGUST 17,  2008

THE BASIC ISSUE

Posted at 11:57 p.m. ET

The Politico notes the reemergence of the "security gap" between the two parties, something likely to help John McCain:

Less than two years after Democrats finally bridged the decades-long gap between the parties on national security issues, Republicans have opened it right back up...

Events overseas have a way of doing that.

The reemergence of the national security gap comes amid the first headline-grabbing world conflict of the 2008 campaign — the Russian invasion of Georgia that highlights the potential for a dramatic military event to upend the political landscape, and likely aid McCain.

July's NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll found that three in four Americans believe McCain can "handle" the role of commander in chief, while only 19 percent said he "cannot," compared to a 50 percent to 42 percent split for Obama.

When asked which party is more capable of "dealing with the war on terrorism," 40 percent of respondents to the latest NBC/WSJ poll said Republican while 29 percent said Democrat. The parties had been effectively tied as recently as January of this year, and the 11-percentage-point gap is the largest since 2004, the last year these numbers shifted so dramatically and, not coincidentally, the last presidential election year.

Good thinking by the public.  The American people generally exhibit good sense on critical issues.

When violence between Russia and Georgia escalated to war earlier this month, McCain’s first statement demanded that "Russia should immediately and unconditionally cease its military operations and withdraw all forces from sovereign Georgian territory."

Obama’s first statement, by contrast, delicately avoided the question of responsibility. "Now is the time for Georgia and Russia to show restraint, and to avoid an escalation to full-scale war," he said. Later that day, Obama blamed Russia for the invasion. By Saturday, the Democrat had moved still closer to McCain's position.

That's the difference between leader and follower.

Over the past week, McCain has has offered a Reaganesque tone, declaring that "we are all Georgians" and that "it's very clear that Russian ambitions are to restore the old Russian Empire."

Robert Kagan, a leading neoconservative analyst and an informal McCain foreign policy adviser, hesitates to speculate on what a national security crisis could do to upend the presidential race. But he believes that it's "incredibly obvious" that high-profile national security issues favor McCain, a veteran member of the Senate Armed Services Committee who first became a national figure during his more than half-decade as a prisoner of war in Vietnam.

And...

A Time magazine poll published this month showed that while Obama continues to lead McCain overall, 56 percent of the public had more confidence in McCain's capacity to manage the war, against 36 percent who preferred Obama. The poll also found McCain with a similar 56 percent to 29 percent lead on the question of which candidate the public trusted to manage the war on terrorism. Both margins had widened since June.

McCain's focus on national security comes in spite of some military struggles in the past eight years of Republican control of the White House, including a still-unpopular war in Iraq, the resurgence of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Iran's fast-developing nuclear program.

No.  His focus on national security is based on his honest belief in what's right for the country, and an understanding that national security is the basic issue for any nation.  If you don't secure the homeland, you have nothing.  Most Americans instinctively understand that.  Even moderate Democrats do.  It's the left fringe that doesn't, and many Americans fear that it's on the left where Obama's heart lies. 

August 17, 2008.      Permalink          

TRACKERS

Posted at 1:54 p.m. ET

Both our standard trackers are now out for Sunday, and the average between them shows no change from yesterday.  Rasmussen has Obama up two, as compared to a one-point lead yesterday.  Gallup has the race tied, as opposed to a one-point Obama lead yesterday.  The average is still one point.  That is Obama's lead a week before his convention.

I don't think there's any longer a question about the polling trend, at least among the trackers.  Obama has been gradually, but discernibly, losing strength.  That, of course, can be reversed.  And there may well be other polls that surface, just before the convention, that will give Obama a boost.

But right now there can be no joy in Demville.  The convention was supposed to be a coronation, the election in November a formality.  Now the king will have only a few minutes on the throne before the need to go out and fight for his kingdom. 

Not fair.  Not fair, this democracy business.  They don't do it this way in Chicago.

August 17, 2008.      Permalink          

THE BAD OLD DAYS

Posted at 8:35 a.m. ET

The Times of London reminds us this morning why our presidential election is so critical.  Russia is resurgent.  It is on the move.  Its tanks are rolling.  And apparently, its new dream of power and empire goes well beyond tanks:

Russia is considering arming its Baltic fleet with nuclear warheads for the first time since the cold war, senior military sources warned last night.

The move, in response to American plans for a missile defence shield in Europe, would heighten tensions raised by the advance of Russian forces to within 20 miles of Tbilisi, the Georgian capital, yesterday.

Under the Russian plans, nuclear warheads could be supplied to submarines, cruisers and fighter bombers of the Baltic fleet based in Kaliningrad, a Russian enclave between the European Union countries of Poland and Lithuania. A senior military source in Moscow said the fleet had suffered from underfunding since the collapse of communism. “That will change now,” said the source.

Not the change we've been waiting for.  Any comment, Senator Obama?  Will you blame us?  President Bush?

The Russian military also said it would ignore attempts to restrict the movement of its Black Sea fleet in and out of Sebastopol, in Ukraine. The Crimean port was emerging as a potential flashpoint in Russia’s efforts to prevent former Soviet countries on its borders from joining NATO.

And...

The Russians have already indicated that they may point nuclear missiles at western Europe from bases in Kaliningrad and Belarus. They are also said to be thinking of reviving a military presence in Cuba.

This, presumably, is all because Moscow opposes our missile-defense plans and our wish for more countries to join NATO.  The Russians may have some legitimate apprehensions, but our plans are defensive, not offensive.  We can work out differences without the threats of nuclear war.

I suspect the Russians sense Western weakness.  Look at our anemic response to Iran's continued defiance of demands that it stop enriching uranium.  Look at Senator Obama's insistence that the surge in Iraq was a mistake.  Historically, the Russians have tested new American presidents.  This time they didn't even wait for that.

Welcome to the past.

August 17, 2008.      Permalink          

A MAN WITH REAL SOWELL

Posted at 7:51 a.m. ET

I often like to quote Thomas Sowell because of his perceptive analysis of almost any subject he tackles.  Today he tackles, and brings down, the quarterback of the Dem team, Barack Obama.  Obama's strength, Sowell seems to be saying, is his weakness: 

Many years ago, when I was a college student, I took a course from John Kenneth Galbraith. On the first day of class, Professor Galbraith gave a brilliant opening lecture, after which the students gave him a standing ovation.

Galbraith kept on giving brilliant opening lectures the whole semester. But, instead of standing ovations, there were now dwindling numbers of students and some of them got up and walked out in the middle of his lectures.

Galbraith never got beyond the glittering generalities that marked his first lecture. After a while, the students got tired of not getting any real substance.

Sen. Barack Obama's campaign this year reminds me very much of that course from Professor Galbraith.

Ouch.  So cruel, so cruel.  Knocks out two liberal icons with one stone.  Is that fair?  Is that what they call swifty boating, or somethin'?

Sowell notes that the liberal press fell in love with Obama from the start, especially his sermon-like speeches filled with leftist rhetoric:

The media loved the novelty of a black candidate with a real chance to become president, and his left-wing vision of the world was largely their vision as well. There was a veritable media honeymoon for Obama.

And the party "base" was swooning as well.  However...

The kind of talk that won the votes -- and the hearts -- of the left-wing base of the Democratic Party during the primaries may not be enough to carry the day with voters in the general election. So Obama has been changing his tune or, as he puts it, ''refining'' his message.

This was not the kind of ''change'' that the true believers among Obama's supporters were expecting. So there has been some wavering among the faithful and some ups and downs in the polls.

Yeah, we've been noticing that here every day.  Obama's lead is now one point.

Despite an impressive political machine and a huge image makeover this year to turn a decades-long, divisive grievance-promoting activist into someone who is supposed to unite us all and lead us into the promised land of ''change,'' little glimpses of the truth keep coming out.

The elitist sneers at people who believe in religion and who own guns, the Americans who don't speak foreign languages and the views of the ''typical white person,'' are all like rays of light that show through the cracks in Obama's carefully crafted image.

Read that again.  Obama does have real views, and they're being disguised in this campaign.  But there is a record, and it's way out in left field, almost at the wall.

The problem with clever people is that they don't know when to stop being clever -- and Obama is a very clever man, perhaps ''too clever by half'' as the British say.

But maybe he can't keep getting by with glittering generalities, any more than Galbraith could.

Ironically, several Democratic governors have said the same thing in recent days, as we reported here yesterday.  Even members of his own party are on to Obama, and their frustration may well grow if he continues to slide downward in the polls. 

August 17, 2008.      Permalink