McCain's Bailout Blunder
By Andrea TantarosJohn McCain botched the biggest issue of this election cycle and passed up the most important way to differentiate himself from Barack Obama: the financial crisis.
First, suspending his campaign was strange. Heading back to Washington wasn't a bad idea, but if you're going to supposedly return to a town burdened by gridlock to help solve a crisis you still need a cogent message. The message should have been THIS BILL STINKS. McCain didn't have one. All we saw was footage of him sitting silent at a White House meeting. And if he had an opinion on the bailout, we certainly didn't hear it.
Then there was the notion McCain wouldn't debate unless a bill was passed. That, too, seemed odd. Why wouldn't he want to address the nation with his opponent in front of millions of Americans? McCain has always been on the right side of this mess. In 2005 he called for a tough, independent regulator for Freddie and Fannie and he could have made the case on a national stage for proper regulation and personal responsibility. Unfortunately, the only pre-debate dialogue perpetuated on the cable news channels and in print was whether McCain was going to actually show up in Mississippi. Not fruitful, if you ask me.
When he did show up Senator McCain and Senator Obama were prodded by moderator Jim Lehrer on the rescue bill and current state of the U.S. economy. Neither one would address it head on, a giant blunder. Obama isn't known for his cajones. His shtick is ducking tough issues and taking the easy road as not to expend political capital and offend voters. McCain is known for just the opposite. And at time when the country was looking for a hero like McCain to reassure them and display leadership and hope he did not.
Last week when it was time for a vote in the Senate John McCain folded and voted for the bill even though he had an opportunity to differentiate himself from Obama, congressional Democrats and his Achilles heel, President Bush, and be on the side of the American people by voting against this measure. The bill was also laden with what some called pork, but what were actually tax credits for such ridiculous things as wool research and wooden arrows for children. McCain has fundamentally been opposed to special interest legislation and this was his chance to show it and showcase that he is opposed to government spending.
Voting against the bailout would have been risky, but worth it. We don't even know if this bill will work. Yesterday the market still looked bleak. What we do know is Americans are angry about it. They know government is the reason we're this mess. We shouldn't give them more control or our tax payer dollars. McCain could have stood out, and stood up, for the principles and people he is running to represent that echo this sentiment. McCain appears to be puffing off the same pipe as the rest of them.
The Obama camp is now calling McCain a "big spender." McCain is a lot of things, but a big spender he is not. But ever since he voted for the bailout he IS a big spender, so the label works. A pretty tough blow to the maverick just four weeks out.
Tonight McCain needs to address the financial crisis and the economy head on while he toots his own horn on being right in 2005 on Freddie and Fannie. He needs to debunk this highly propagated Democratic urban legend that deregulation is bad and call for proper regulation and responsibility going forward. Channeling Reagan is essential: offer a clear, inspiration vision, and then draw contrasts with whatever and whoever disagrees. The Mac needs to shoot holes through the misleading proposals of Barack Obama and explain why his Santa Claus like list of promises to the American people is a bunch of baloney. He needs to reveal the most liberal candidates we've seen since Carter. Obama is the political equivalent of a new iPod - exceptionally well marketed and sold in cool packaging, entertaining, but empty. Or in Obama's case just filled with some really bad tunes. Reveal it.
Finally, lose the grimace, McCain. And please give Obama some eye contact this time. You reminded us of a fuming father who would speak to you but not look at you when you're in trouble (I know the face well). I think you lost women, swing voters and Independents because of your mug in the last debate.
History is not on your side, but the facts are. Use them.
Andrea Tantaros is a Republican political commentator, media consultant and columnist. Her writing can be found at www.andretantaros.com.


