You’re right, though — if I narrow the picture to just the last three days, rather the the last two weeks as a whole, McCain is just asking to be labeled badly. I’m real interested in seeing if these opinions stick and harden among independents. Even if they’re right, it’s hard to take the NYT, the Post, and Kos at face value if you’re already leaning towards McCain (or Palin).

I sort of anticipated the “New York Times is liberal!” response, which is why I included Dallas Morning News, etc. The fact is though, when the New York Times and the Washington Post are both running a story outlining the same idea (”McCain Sure is Lying a Lot”), it’s out there. When one of the dominant narratives in mid-September is “McCain Campaign – Full of Lies?”, you’re walking a thin line. It’s not just me.

Some more:

Where have you gone, John McCain? (Pittsburgh Post Gazette)

The other hole is the one you’ve thrown yourself into since securing the Republican nomination. Your new home is the self-imposed darkness of a man who jettisoned his principles for an even shot at the highest office in the land.

You once said you’d rather lose an election than lose a war. Is it worth winning an election if it means forfeiting your soul on the altar of political expediency?

How does a man survive five years in a Vietnamese dungeon only to allow himself to be turned into a cynical marionette by the nihilistic disciples of Karl Rove?

To McCain, the truth is expendable (Chicago Tribune (the conservative IL paper))

So when Barack Obama scoffed at the idea that the GOP ticket offered real change from President Bush, saying, “You can put lipstick on a pig—it’s still a pig,” McCain’s camp rose up in outrage at Obama for “comparing our vice presidential nominee, Gov. [Sarah] Palin, to a pig.”

In this interpretation of Obama’s remarks, the McCain people are—what’s the word I’m looking for?—lying.

Now politicians are not saints, and campaigns are not conducted under oath. We all expect a certain amount of deceit from people running for office, in the form of fudging, distortion, exaggeration and omission. But the McCain campaign’s approach, as this episode illustrates, is of an entirely different scale and character. It is to normal political attacks what Hurricane Ike is to a drive-through carwash.

Summing up Republican nominee John McCain (Cleveland Plain Dealer)

John McCain has embraced the right wing of the Republican Party and has moved ever so close to George W. Bush’s positions.

McCain has adopted the truth-be-damned attack methods that were used against him.

Obama camp suggests Palin has distorted record (Kansas City Star)

The question of whether Sarah Palin has ever been to Iraq pushed Obama aides Saturday to accuse the McCain campaign of outright lies, distortions and distractions to the American people.

‘A liar lies to the people….’ (Atlanta Journal Constitution)

Sarah Palin’s foreign policy credentials may be pretty thin, but at least they’re bolstered by the fact that as governor, she spent some time in Iraq visiting members of the Alaska National Guard.

What’s that?

Oh. Well, the Boston Globe now reports that Palin never visited Iraq, that the closest she got was the Iraq-Kuwait border, and from there she could see INTO Iraq. Kind of like being a Russia expert because you can see it from a couple of Alaskan islands.

But at least Palin “knows more about energy than probably anyone else in the United States of America,” according to John McCain. As Palin herself says, and as McCain repeats, she comes from Alaska, which provides 20 percent of the nation’s domestic energy.

What’s that?

Oh. Factcheck.org says “Alaska’s share of domestic energy production was 3.5 percent, according to the official figures kept by the U.S. Energy Information Administration.” But hey, what does the Energy Information Administration know co mpared to the person who “knows more about energy than probably anyone else in the United States of America.”

Well, at least the McCain/Palin ticket is drawing a lot of folks to rallies…

Campaign of lies disgraces McCain (St. Petersburg Times)

This nation is facing real challenges on the economy, health care, jobs and the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. There are significant differences between how Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. John McCain would address them. But McCain’s recent campaign ads suggest the most vital issues are whether Obama wanted to teach sex education to kindergarten children and whether he derided the Republican’s running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, by talking about lipstick on a pig.

McCain’s straight talk has become a toxic mix of lies and double-speak. It is leaving a permanent stain on his reputation for integrity, and it is a short-term strategy that eventually will backfire with the very types of independent-thinking voters that were so attracted to him.

Etc. etc. etc…

…and then the outright mocking begins…

This DailyKos post is along the same lines as that Sullivan comment, and makes a lot of sense.

Andrew Sullivan, who I’ll probably put back on the blogroll pretty soon (he’s still pretty off his nut and lost in campaign fugue, but not being as actively shrill as he was for a couple of weeks there),

I didn’t take him off the blogroll, but I don’t think he’s improved a great deal (was just reading it) and as for actual analysis, there’s basically none. It’s a real shame, as I had really like the Daily Dish. It’s a lot more depressing to read than, say, Michelle Malkin, because I never liked her blog but I liked Sully’s.

…since I realize most people don’t read Adam’s posts…

They are just dazzled by my brilliance.

And as for winning on the issues, I think that McCain’s pretty strong on the issues (even where the answers aren’t what people like to hear) and what Obama’s killing him with is ‘change’, whatever the change might be. Much as our reader weltschmerz is convinced that Obama’s a sekrit atheist, it seems to me that lots of people can project onto Obama’s blank slate whatever they want to see by way of change, short-circuiting the issues. On the other hand, McCain has his own advantages, chiefly including his military service. The electoral context, in which the Republican brand is really devalued, favours Obama and feeds the ‘change’ enthusiasm. I think, alas, that Obama’s going to win, but it’s an interesting fight in the meantime.

I liked your original post and was a little thrown off by your comment that the McCain camp was close to losing all credibility. I didn’t get that at all, even though I didn’t like the intellectual dishonesty of the ads. I hadn’t as yet digested these blowbacks you listed. You’re right, though — if I narrow the picture to just the last three days, rather the the last two weeks as a whole, McCain is just asking to be labeled badly. I’m real interested in seeing if these opinions stick and harden among independents. Even if they’re right, it’s hard to take the NYT, the Post, and Kos at face value if you’re already leaning towards McCain (or Palin).

I just don’t feel immediately uneasy about McCain acting silly. Not that this opinion will hold, necessarily. I get more worried about him acting senile, or losing his temper, or altering the lyrics of songs in a paean to WWIII. With Obama (who is asking for a big leap of faith, after all), I am wary of someone in over his head – making tactical blunders, being thin-skinned, getting off message. Obama just hit those red flags, for me, lately. Whatever else, a Clinton wouldn’t be getting thrown off their game like Obama has the last two weeks.

McCain Barbs Stirring Outcry as Distortions (New York Times)

Harsh advertisements and negative attacks are a staple of presidential campaigns, but Senator John McCain has drawn an avalanche of criticism this week from Democrats, independent groups and even some Republicans for regularly stretching the truth in attacking Senator Barack Obama’s record and positions…

McCain Wrong on Palin Earmarks (Los Angeles Times)

NEW YORK — John McCain got it wrong Friday when he asserted that his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, had not requested any earmarks, the spending directives lawmakers insert in spending bills that McCain has vowed to eliminate.

Palin, in fact, requested $198 million in federal earmarks in February, including such expenses as $487,000 to fight obesity in Alaska and $4 million to develop recreational trails.

McCain Lambasted for Inaccuracies (Seattle Times)

Sen. John McCain has drawn an avalanche of criticism this week from Democrats, independent groups and some Republicans for regularly stretching the truth in attacking Sen. Barack Obama’s record and positions.

Obama also has been accused of distortions, but McCain is under fire for two headline-grabbing attacks. First, the McCain campaign twisted Obama’s words to suggest he had compared GOP vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin to a pig after Obama questioned McCain’s claim to be a change agent by saying, “You can put lipstick on a pig; it’s still a pig.” (McCain has used the same expression to describe Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s health plan.)

He then falsely claimed that Obama supported “comprehensive sex ed” for kindergartners. (Obama supported teaching them to be alert for inappropriate advances from adults.)

McCain Wraps Distortions Around One Truth (Washington Post)

He was the world’s biggest celebrity, but his star’s fading. So they lashed out at Sarah Palin. Dismissed her as “good-looking.” That backfired, so they said she was doing “what she was told.” Then desperately called Sarah Palin a liar. How disrespectful. And how Governor Sarah Palin proves them wrong, every day.

This John McCain commercial, which contains two significant distortions, is part of a larger effort to rule criticism of his running mate out of bounds and to paint her as the victim of unfair attacks from both Democrats and the media.

Fact Check: McCain on Palin and Earmarks (Dallas Morning News)

For more on John McCain’s incorrect claim that Sarah Palin has sought no earmarks as governor, click here. The Associated Press reports that Ms. Palin “asked for nearly $200 million in targeted spending for the 2009 fiscal year.”

Along the same lines, McClatchy declares a new Republican ad “out of bounds” for its claim that Ms. Palin “vetoed nearly half a billion dollars in wasteful spending and cut earmark requests by hundreds of millions of dollars.” While technically true, McClatchy says, the ad takes the remark out of context enough that its meaning is distorted.

And more.

I mean, when the girls of The View call you a liar to your face, there’s a real danger that you’re creating a negative impression and that the idea that you’re basically full of shit is solidifying. It’s one thing to do this in the last week of October. But to do it through August and September?

But here’s a question, you sound like a voter pretty disinclined towards Obama and pretty inclined towards McCain. Have you found the arguments against Obama in the last week to be persuasive? Has it influenced your vote?