The audacity of arrogance

Karl Rove:

Many candidates have measured the Oval Office drapes prematurely. But Barack Obama is the first to redesign the presidential seal before the election.

His seal featured an eagle emblazoned with his logo, and included a Latin version of his campaign slogan. This was an attempt by Sen. Obama to make himself appear more presidential. But most people saw in the seal something else – chutzpah – and he's stopped using it. Such arrogance – even self-centeredness – have featured often in the Obama campaign.

Consider his treatment of Jeremiah Wright. After Rev. Wright repeated his anti-American slurs at the National Press Club, Mr. Obama said their relationship was forever changed – but not because of what he'd said about America. Instead, Mr. Obama complained, "I don't think he showed much concern for me."

Translation: Rev. Wright is an impediment to my ambitions. So, as it turns out, are some of Mr. Obama's previous pledges.

For example, Mr. Obama has said he "strongly supported public financing" and pledged to take federal funds for the fall, thereby limiting his spending to roughly $84 million. Now convinced he can raise more than $84 million, he reversed course last week, ditching the federal money and its limits. But by discarding his earlier pledge so easily, he raises doubts about whether his word can be trusted.

Last month he replied "anywhere, anytime" to John McCain's invitation to have joint town hall appearances. Last week he changed his mind. Fearing 10 impromptu town halls, Mr. Obama parried the invitation by offering two such events – one the night of July 4, when every ambulatory American is watching fireworks or munching hotdogs, and another in August. His spokesman then said, "Take it or leave it." So much for "anywhere, anytime."

My former White House colleague Yuval Levin pointed out that Mr. Obama, in his first national TV ad rolled out Friday, claims credit for having "extended health care for wounded troops," citing the 2008 defense authorization. That bill passed 91-3 – but Mr. Obama was one of only six senators who didn't show up to vote. This brazen claim underscores the candidate's thin résumé and, again, his chutzpah.

...

Mr. McCain will be helped if he uses Mr. Obama's actions to paint his opponent as someone driven by an all-powerful instinct to look out only for himself. In a contest over who is willing to put principle above personal ambition and self-interest, John McCain, a war hero and a former POW, wins hands down. That may not be the most important issue to voters in electing a president, but it's something they will rightly take into account.

As Obama was stumbling toward the finish line in the Democrat primaries he started revealing himself in ways that would have resulted in him losing the nomination if they had occurred before Super Tuesday. Since wrapping up the nomination the stumbles have continued. The last few weeks have been filled with gaffes and an inconsistency of commitments. So far, these failures have not dented his aura as much as you would normally expect.

At some point voters need to focus on issues where Obama is wildly at variance with what voters say they want. Voters are rejecting his energy solutions by a wide margin. They indicate that his tax policy is also unacceptable and only 30 percent of voters support his Iraq withdrawal timetable. The problem McCain has is that most voters don't know what Obama's positions are on these issues. He has effectively obfuscated his points by attacking President Bush.

What is really strange about these voter surveys is that more voters are aligned with Bush policies on these three issues, yet they still don't like him. I have never seen polling where voter candidate preferences have been so divorced from what they say they favor. This is the area where McCain has to get some traction and then hammer the points.