Potholes in Obama's Path

By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 24, 2008 9:59 AM

What could stop Barack Obama from becoming president?

The expectation--let's face it--is that it's his race to lose. Even some conservative pundits say privately that they don't expect John McCain to be able to pull it out. It's just a Democratic year, they believe--and the fact that Obama may outspend McCain by 3-to-1 or more (while the media barely rapped his knuckles for abandoning his public financing pledge) just adds to his advantage.

At the same time, it's hardly a slam dunk. For all his supposed advantages, Senator O has about a six-point lead in most polls (leaving aside that outlying Newsweek survey). There are, understandably, doubts about his readiness, given his newness on the national scene. And then there is what is often described as the groundbreaking nature of his candidacy.

Beyond that, there is a sense--didn't Hillary Clinton warn about this?--that he is about to get a ton of stuff dumped on his head. That he needs to be battered and bloodied if McCain is to have a shot. That the election will essentially become a referendum on Obama. That is why, as I reported yesterday, the campaign is taking pains to present him as a basketball-playing, bike-riding dad who watches ESPN and could live down the street from you.

Here's something you may not have thought about, considering that recent presidents hailed from places such as Hope, Ark.; Dixon, Ill.; Plains, Ga., and Yorba Linda, Calif.:

"Americans also have never sent a Chicagoan to the White House, and one intriguing question posed by his candidacy is whether they are ready to now," says the Chicago Tribune.

"For all his talk about change, Obama remains a product of a Chicago and Illinois political culture renowned for corruption and filled with characters who range from felonious to just outrageous."

In the New Republic, Drew Westen declares that "the only road that could take McCain to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is the low road, one of the few pieces of infrastructure left in good repair by President Bush. His father paved it against Michael Dukakis, George W. Bush repaved it running against John Kerry, and the GOP repainted the dotted line in now-Senator Bob Corker's 2006 contest with Harold Ford. The path to success for McCain is to make the election a referendum on his opponent, by working in silent concert with 527 groups and media outlets such as Fox News to pursue character assassination, guilt by association, and, most of all, the effort to paint Obama as different, foreign, unlike 'us,' and dangerous (and did I mention that he's black?)."

But how exactly is McCain responsible for those other campaigns? Westen continues:

"Over the last several weeks, McCain has been running 'The American President,' an ad with all the trappings of positivity, but that actually sets the stage for all future attacks. The attacks will not come from McCain. They will come from the [momentarily] dormant 527s behind them, giving McCain plausible deniability while they make the presidential contest about Barack Obama's differentness and activate unconscious racial sentiments that Republicans have preyed upon for four decades.

"The name of McCain's ad itself suggests both its positive message and its more insidious subtext: What other kind of President is there? An un-American President, someone who is not really 'one of us'? An anti-American President? Or perhaps just an African-American President."

That seems a bold prediction, given that there are no conservative 527s with any money, while MoveOn, which is not a 527, is hammering McCain with that "don't take my baby" ad.

This doesn't strike me as likely, but Andrew Sullivan is on red alert:

"A fascinating little moment on Fox News Sunday. Bill Kristol airs the idea that if Obama looks as if he will win the election, Bush or Israel may be more likely to attack Iran before next January. Bush could say: Obama made me do it! Kristol also raises the prospect of Saudi Arabia and Egypt going nuclear in response to an Obama presidency. I think we'll see many more of these dire warnings if Obama looks like the next president -- and he's increasingly the favorite. But why do I find the hysteria not so effective this time around? Maybe it's because the period in which we could have stopped Iran's nuclear ambition is now behind us.

"But could it happen? Could Bush bomb Iran before the next election and create a sense of international crisis that could cause voters to swing back to McCain? From everything we know and Bush and Cheney, the answer, surely, is yes. His failed policies have left only one option to prevent Iran's going nuclear: war . . . We could be facing the mother of all October surprises."

Or perhaps the strategy is simply to make Obama unlikable? According to Jake Tapper, Karl Rove, at a breakfast with Republican insiders, described Obama thusly: "Even if you never met him, you know this guy. He's the guy at the country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette that stands against the wall and makes snide comments about everyone who passes by."

Would this be the kind of country club that once would have excluded the likes of Obama?

And then there's war on the bookshelves, as Politico reports:

"Conservative journalist David Freddoso's 'The Case Against Barack Obama' will offer 'a comprehensive, factual look at Obama,' according to Regnery Publishing president and publisher Marjory Ross. But the book's subtitle makes clear its perspective: 'The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media's Favorite Candidate.'

"Ross contends that the mainstream media has offered insufficient scrutiny of Obama and likens the goal of Freddoso's book to that of 'Unfit for Command,' the scathing assessment of Kerry's war record that rocketed to No. 1 on The New York Times best-seller list."

Here's an interesting twist: Some Muslims feel slighted by Obama.

Oh, and this just in: Obama has ditched his new seal.

McCain adviser Charlie Black has kicked up a fuss with these blunt comments to Fortune:

"The assassination of Benazir Bhutto in December was an 'unfortunate event,' says Black. 'But his knowledge and ability to talk about it reemphasized that this is the guy who's ready to be Commander-in-Chief. And it helped us.' As would, Black concedes with startling candor after we raise the issue, another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. 'Certainly it would be a big advantage to him,' says Black."

McCain was forced to disavow the remarks--never a good sign.

The Washington Times: "Mr. Black told reporters traveling with the campaign that he regretted the remark, according to the Associated Press. Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign called the comment a 'big disgrace,' and Sen. John Kerry, the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee, said that by even thinking of an attack in political terms, Mr. Black was practicing 'the worst of the Rove-Bush fear playbook.'

"It was a distraction from what had appeared to be a promising line of attack from Mr. McCain on energy prices in the past week."

Speaking of energy prices, McCain's offshore drilling flip looks very different from a California perspective:

"For decades it has been a bipartisan political staple -- the jaunt to the beaches of Santa Barbara to profess opposition to oil drilling at the spot where a massive 1969 spill despoiled sea life and ocean waters, launching the modern environmental movement," the L.A. Times reports.

"John McCain returned to Santa Barbara this week not to assert his opposition to offshore drilling -- as he did when he ran for president in 2000 -- but to make the calculated gamble that high gas prices have trumped voters' desire to protect the environment."

In National Review, Kathryn Jean Lopez makes her spousal endorsement:

"If you're looking for a First Lady, you've got one in Cindy McCain. John McCain would be well-served by having his wife take a more visible -- and audible -- role on the campaign trail. Without the red carpet, pre-show, New York Times front-pager afforded Michelle Obama when she recently co-hosted The View -- and without buying into false grievances -- McCain demonstrates that she understands the national-security stakes in this election . . .

"During the ABC interview, the wife of the Republican presidential nominee gave a real answer when asked why women should vote for her husband -- an answer devoid of the usual silly-girl gender politics that pretends women look for something wholly different in the voting booth than men. Mrs. McCain said of her husband: 'Supporting our troops the way he does, supporting our young men and women right now who are serving so gallantly is very pro-woman, because every mother, every wife, sister, aunt feels the way I have felt.' She continued, 'The things that he does doesn't make him any more pro-woman, pro-man, pro-anti-anything. He is about America, making America strong.' Notably, though, the interview was spun much differently than it actually proceeded. 'Cindy McCain Presses Obama on Patriotism' abcnews.com proclaimed.

"Mrs. McCain did no such thing. She respectfully presented her preferences and offered that there are differences between the two candidates. But the prospect of a catfight or a Republican questioning a Democrat's patriotism was just way too tempting a trope -- even if it's fiction."

Meanwhile, people are still yakking about Michelle Obama's $148 dress, which is apparently sold out.

I know Hillary is so last month, but Salon's Rebecca Traister has thoughts about her disaffected female fans:

" They are angry because their historic opportunity is over.

"Getting excited about changing history felt awesome. I can't emphasize it enough: This had never happened before. And it was fun. Exhilarating. Hopeful. Changing. All of that . . .

" They are angry about rumors that Obama may choose a woman other than Hillary Clinton as his running mate.

"This is a tricky one. Maybe some Clinton supporters remain so besotted by the idea of their woman as the history maker that they won't be satisfied unless Clinton or someone from her direct bloodline is the first female to breach the executive branch of government.

In reality, however, it's more that the other female politicians whose names are being bandied about (cough, Kathleen Sebelius, cough) seem like pallid substitutes, and the only reason Team Obama would even pick one is to placate stubborn Clinton supporters. It wouldn't placate them . . . If Obama goes with a woman, and decides (as seems certain) not to tap Clinton herself, he must pick someone who has something more going for her than a pair of mams. He needs someone who generates heat of her own, who can energize a crowd, who can do something for him besides providing him with a gender credential. Who is that?

" They are angry that we started to talk about sexism only once Clinton stopped being a threat.

"Yes, it's great that we are finally having panels and conferences and news stories about the way in which Clinton's candidacy was met with an enormous amount of gendered antipathy from the media. (And for any of you sitting at your computers yammering about how the coverage of Clinton had nothing to do with her sex, allow me to be frank: can it.) Those discussions shouldn't stop. But it is painfully obvious that this was a conversation that could only be had once Clinton stopped threatening Obama's prospects, or men generally. This is really depressing."

It took a NYT magazine interview, but the Tampa Bay Tribune picks up on rumors about Florida Gov. Charlie Crist's personal life.

Tom Brokaw may be moderating "Meet the Press" through the election, but Variety says that "Andrea Mitchell, Peacock's chief foreign affairs correspondent, also has the resume, the Washington relationships, the reporting skills and the extra-thick skin to take on the job . . .

"She's covered Congress and the White House, presidential elections, national crises et al, and her extensive overseas experience during the past 15 years certainly can't hurt either.

"Mitchell, of course, is also one-half of a high-wattage Washington power couple -- her husband is former Federal Reserve Board chairman Alan Greenspan -- which means she ranks very high on the Beltway social pecking order that is so important to understanding Washington (or so I've read in the Washington Post) . . . NBC's current man covering the White House, David Gregory is clearly a smart and a pit bull of a reporter, but he still needs some marinating. Mitchell's the one."

I suppose we can ramp up the speculation about who will be The Washington Post's next editor. The big media news, particularly in my shop, is that Len Downie is stepping down after 17 years as executive editor. In this veepstakes period, there sure are some Washington horse races going on.