“I will not sign a bill with earmarks in it, any earmarks in it. ”

That is a base-turning-out promise…

I agree, but here, here, here and here, with many worthwhile links, Instapundit notes that the GOP is determined to keep going in the opposite direction.

Glenn Reynolds remarks

Sometimes I think they’d rather be a porky minority than a porkless majority.

A similar thought has crossed my mind. I prefer Instapundit’s phrasing, which is a tweak or two away from a mot juste–something like “Better to be a corrupt minority than an honest majority.”

McCain is saddled with Bush’s underperforming record and with continuing Republican parasitism. Maybe, without being explicit about his own party, he needs to make the case that Obama’s messianism will yield an extrapolation of how Republicans have governed.

That is a base-turning-out promise, one President Reagan was afraid to make or do.

IF he can convince us he means it, and will stick by it. And I think he can- the North Vietnamese didn’t break him, and the Democrats in congress haven’t better tools.

It might be an election winner. Find out how much would not be spent if we cut ALL the earmarks. Talk about a tax rebate, this is a real stimulus- you get to keep your money! And it’s not inflationary.

It would be interesting to see it happen- Congress sends him the usual pork stuffed budget, and he refuses, with lots of highlighting of exactly what he’s turning down. Stuff that no one who isn’t profiting personally can defend.

So all the representatives have to put themselves out there on their “I hate earmarks” rhetoric. In the past, they have been able to evade responsibility- “I hate earmarks, but since they are all getting them, I have to fight for my district.”

But when no one will get them…

Like, y’know, about that First Amendment thingy…

McCain didn’t pledge to squelch attempts to restore the so-called Fairness Doctrine. Maybe he decided to let sleeping dogs lie.
***************
Perhaps it’s my disappointment with the 41 and 43 administrations that makes me read some of McCain’s statements as criticism of the Bushes:

All I ask of any American, conservative, moderate, independent, or enlightened Democrat, is to judge my record as a whole, and accept that I am not in the habit of making promises to my country that I do not intend to keep.

Take that, President Read-My-Lips? And President Axis-of-Evil?

I hope I have proven that in my life even to my critics. Then vote for or against me based on that record, my qualifications for the office, and the direction where I plainly state I intend to lead our country.

In contrast to an unfocused profligate President on whose watch our party lost Congress and is set to lose the White House and then the Supreme Court?

Often elections in this country are fought within the margins of small differences.

Especially when a Bush runs against a Democrat?

This one will not be.

I’m not a Bush.

I…defended my opposition to the prescription drug benefit bill that saddled Americans with yet another hugely expensive entitlement program….(p)I will not permit any expansion whatsoever of the entitlement programs that are bankrupting us. On the contrary, I intend to reform those programs so that government is no longer in that habit of making promises to Americans it does not have the means to keep.

I’m not George Bush.
**************
McCain’s speech would be fine if he were following a popular President with a unified party. Instead, he he has to restore and update a rancorously fractured coalition. Then he has to restore Republican credibility on the heels of the 2006 no-confidence vote and before the Democrats have had a chance to govern.

He’s taken a step but there’s an extremely long way to go uphill.