Send Sarah!

The McCain campaign has decided to give up on Michigan. Whether this is a good move or not I can't comment on; I doubt myself that he can carry my home state and not knowing the exact nature of his resources, he may well have the right idea in spending them elsewhere. But I am reminded of his view on attacking Pakistan (Pak-ess-tan, as Barack calls it): never tell an opponent what you might do.

Don't overtly give up on Michigan, Senator. This will only help the Obama campaign paint you as uncaring about its plight. But if you need to reallocate resources, then attack Michigan on the cheap. In this case, send your vice presidential nominee as she encourages you to do. Send Sarah here.

Face it, John. She's the best thing you've got going for you right now. You don't inspire many folks, including me. I was only intending to vote for you because the alternative was completely unpalatable. But Governor Palin is sincere, homespun, fresh, and without that Washington political glare. She plays to an audience better than you. Use that, as you had started to but for whatever reason backed away from, becuse it's your best chance.

Send Sarah to Michigan. And Ohio and Pennsylvania and Virginia and Florida. Send her before the voters send the wrong message to you.

You gotta play the hand that's dealt ya.

For the first time, the Supreme Court has ruled on a Second Amendment issue, and it is certainly a victory for gun rights. The District of Columbia’s virtual ban on handgun ownership has been declared unconstitutional. Still, we are not in clear: the fact that the vote was a mere 5-4 signals division among the justices, and looms important with regard to who the next President may be.
Not that long ago we had a comfortable 7-2 slant on the side of conservatives; the close tally indicates the tide may be turning. More than gun rights will soon be at issue if a Barack Obama and a Democratic Senate are able to replace Scalia or Thomas with someone of their selfish constitutional ilk. Further, the opportunity to replace, say, Ruth Bader Ginsburg with someone more constitutionally palatable may possibly be at hand if we at least have John McCain in the Oval Office. Sure, a Republican president would be under greater scrutiny on his choices, given, that we don’t see the GOP retaking the Senate in 2008, but wouldn’t that option be preferable to whatever Obama may choose? He would likely get whomever he wants, and who knows what that might mean.
This isn’t to say that we relish the thought of potential McCain nominees, as there is a republican/right wing tendency to play to the crowd on such matters. This is especially true about someone not truly our league. But the point: one of my (thankfully few) disappointments with Ronald Reagan was nominating Sandra Day O’Connor rather that Robert Bork to fill the first Supreme Court opening of his presidency. He could have gotten Bork easily in 1981 with a Senate controlled by the GOP, but opted to show that he was a good guy by nominating a woman first, to fulfill a promise to put a woman on the highest court. The result? One (at best) lukewarm justice while the more preferable constitutional scholar was roundly rejected by Democrats when the controlled the Upper House in 1987. See how much the left cares for inclusiveness and diversity?Anyway, I can more readily see McCain falling into that trap.
Our choice in November is limited, but, somewhat sadly, it is still clear. To have any hope of a Supreme Court steeped in constitutional principles, we have to pull the level for the Arizona senator, and hope for the best.