Heads I Win, Tails You Lose

Reflecting upon the 2008 US presidential race, can you think of a single American election in which the philosophical difference between the two candidates was as insubstantial as it was between McCain and Obama?

Perfectly encapsulated:

(*)

Obama: "I want change."

McCain: "Well, I want change too."

Obama: "But I want it for the sake of this great nation."

McCain: "Yeah, you have to put your country first."

Obama: "And that means taking your money."

McCain: "Yes, we're going to take your money. But I mean that in an increasingly conservative way as we get closer to the election."

Obama: "I still mean it in the socialist way but I'm going to get more and more vague on the details until I'm elected, mmmkay?"

Not A Joke: Obama Spent $11 PER PERSON On His Campaign

... Compared to McCain's spending of $1.49 per person.

4-Block World paints the picture for us:



There has never been a campaign in U.S. history that has spent even close to this kind of money. I guess the night was historic in more ways than one, am I right Mr. Obama?

Now, I should caution, the number $700 million may be a bit inflated. I found the number $640 million in a bunch of articles but the contrast is startling either way.

H/t Fairly Conservative

Well, Doncha Know, McCain Aides Are Just Gunnin' For The Barracuda, By Gosh

Since the old man's November 4th election loss, McCain staffers have started speaking out against Sarah Palin, accusing her of confusion over Africa's status as a continent and leaking stories painting her as a "hillbilly". I know, I'm shocked too. It isn't as if they've been subtly suggesting that if McCain lost it would be her fault for the last two weeks.

I'm not of the opinion that Palin is responsible for McCain's electoral defeat. He ran a weak campaign and he is a weak political character (to head off McCain supporters at the pass, that is to say a weak political character - I acknowledge the danger he has faced to defend his country and the quality of character that demonstrates).

Once McCain was nominated to lead the GOP, I essentially turned off the ideological side of my brain. My views were not well represented by either candidate for the American presidency. From a strategic standpoint, however, I was excited by the Palin choice. It was surprising - and who doesn't enjoy a plot twist? - and, more importantly, it seemed consistent with the spirit of the election period: change, change, change.

Now that I've turned on the ideological side of my brain again, however, I'm finding it extremely difficult to muster up an ounce of support for the so-called Barracuda. She represents the now-dominant side of the Republican Party that I evaluate to be the least conducive to pursuing policies with an eye towards liberty. She is socially conservative across the board, she could certainly benefit from purchasing "Economics For Dummies" from her local Indigo, and she fits very comfortably within the evangelical tradition of Republicanism.

If these were the reasons the McCain aides were gunning for Palin in the wake of the Republican election loss, I wouldn't have much problem with it. Unfortunately for them, it just looks bratty. The Republicans lost the election because many conservatives aren't too thrilled about a "maverick" running their divided and enfeebled party. Can you blame them?