Higher Standards Bite Obama, McCain

June 12, 2008 -- For a campaign that's short on poetry of late, we've sure got a fair dose of poetic justice.

First, some data points as we try to figure out why really rich folks need to squeeze an extra quarter of a percentage point on their mortgages:

- Jim Johnson trips on the wire Sen. Barack Obama set for his opponents -- the latest casualty of a "game" where Obama helped set the rules.

- Sen. John McCain helps Obamaland color in a fading argument -- slipping up with the same kind of gotcha-gaffe manner his campaign delights in using against Obama.

- The Obama campaign brings you www.fightthesmears.com -- a sort of snopes.com for all things Obama that also serves to chart the distance between Obama and John Kerry as presidential candidates. (Lead item, on the legend of the Michelle Obama "whitey" tape: "No Such Tape Exists.")

- James Carville wants a former vice president to run for vice president (and while Obama's not returning Carville's calls any time soon, he chose the one name that's guaranteed to get him some notice).

- Is this the Obama bump? Obama's up, but Brand McCain remains strong: It's Obama 47, McCain 41 in the new Wall Street Journal/NBC poll -- compared to 51-35 in the generic Republican-vs.-Democrat White House ballot.

The Obama campaign is showing that it knows how to fight with the big boys -- but his big week got sidetracked on its date with destiny, and Obama really does have himself to blame.

Washington wisdom dictates that you don't run for president as a Democrat without having Jim Johnson vet your running mates -- except that Obama's campaign rationale centers on rejecting Washington wisdom and Washington players.

Johnson "resigned from that unpaid position [Wednesday] amid criticisms that Johnson represented a world of influence and special interests that stood in stark contrast with what Obama's campaign purports to stand for," ABC's Jake Tapper writes. "The perceived chasm between Obama's rhetoric and his association with Johnson served as a distraction for his campaign and an opportunity for his critics."

This is a complete reversal from Obama's defense of a day earlier -- and perhaps the timing had something to do with this:

"For one previously undisclosed loan last year for a Montana real-estate project, Countrywide overrode its internal limits on loan size, amount of allowable debt and number of loans to a single borrower, the lender's loan records show," Glenn R. Simpson and James R. Hagerty write in The Wall Street Journal. "At the time he got the loan, what the records indicate were Mr. Johnson's monthly obligations were nearly twice his stated monthly income."

Yes, you do have to vet the vetters -- or, as your oppo staff will tell you, others will vet them for you.

"[Johnson's] resignation highlights the difficulties for Mr. Obama's campaign in trying to live up to his promises to remain independent of the Washington establishment and the special interests that populate it," John M. Broder and Leslie Wayne write in The New York Times. "As questions about Mr. Johnson grew, Mr. Obama felt he had to move quickly to rid the campaign of a man who had come to symbolize the Washington fixers that Mr. Obama was running against, aides said."

The Journal can claim this scalp with its weekend scoop -- but credit Obama with a big assist.

"Politicians deploy righteous indignation like college students use credit cards -- to excess and with abandon," Time's Michael Scherer writes. "But there are sometimes hidden costs in the fine print, interest payments not due for months, especially when the outrage is calculated for maximum political effect."

Gail Collins sees an unforced error: "It's like having your career ruined because you invited the wrong person to host a party in honor of your nephew's godparents," she writes. "Gentle spirits may decide that it's a good thing that the Obama campaign is getting this sort of thing out of the way early. Crueler ones may note that at least they can't blame this one on Hillary."

And Johnson departed maybe a day too late for Obama to get any real credit for decisive action: "The American people have reason to question the judgment of a candidate who has shown he will only make the right call when under pressure from the news media," said McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds.

In the same vein of living by one's own standards, we bring you McCain himself, setting back his efforts to distance himself from President Bush with one tin-eared phrase Democrats are pouncing on.

By saying that the timeframe for removing troops from Iraq is "not too important," McCain looked (to Democratic eyes) Bush-like in his steely (rusty?) resolve.

"On behalf of Sen. Barack Obama's campaign, Democrats pounced, saying McCain's statement showed the Arizona Republican had little concern for the troops," the Chicago Tribune's John McCormick writes.

A hundred years lasted a few months, "Bomb Iran" was fading like the Beach Boys themselves -- it was time for McCain to help a Democrat out (and the DNC was quickly up with a Web video highlighting the rhetorical lowlights).

Leaving aside the fact that the new politics appears to last about as long as it takes for another gaffe to emerge from the other side, and that the context on this quote makes McCain's meaning pretty clear -- this stuff works (ask Kerry -- tapped to fight this one for Obama on Wednesday, in a role what had to make him smile just a bit).

Yes, this moves the campaign to a playing field where McCain is rightly confident: national security. Yes, McCain can legitimately claim independence from President Bush, even on the war. Yes, McCain may even be right that the public has soured on this kind of politics.

Still, for Democrats who are trying to brand "third Bush term" into the national consciousness, this was a gift.

"Wednesday's flurry was another in a series of Democratic attacks aimed at portraying McCain as committed to an open-ended U.S. presence in Iraq," per USA Today's David Jackson.

It was an old trick, but was it an OLD trick? Democrats repeatedly referred to McCain as "confused" -- "seeming to feed into concerns voters might have about the Arizonan's age," ABC's Jake Tapper writes.