Michelle Malkin » WaPo starts the inevitable thrashing of Charles Black

WaPo starts the inevitable thrashing of Charles Black

By see-dubya • May 22, 2008 09:10 AM

The Beltway insiders at the Washington Post are suddenly shocked, shocked to find a lobbyist leading John McCain’s campaign.

Charles Black is McCain’s chief strategist, and he’s a smart guy and, I believe (though correct me if I’m wrong here) what we’d call a “movement” conservative. He’s also a lobbyist extraordinaire, and he’s been a lobbyist for some very unsavory foreign governments:

In addition to [Angola's Jonas] Savimbi, Black and his partners were at times registered foreign agents for a remarkable collection of U.S.-backed foreign leaders whose human rights records were sometimes harshly criticized, even as their opposition to communism was embraced by American conservatives. They included Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos, Mobutu Sese Seko of Zaire, Nigerian Gen. Ibrahim Babangida, Somali President Mohamed Siad Barre, and the countries of Kenya and Equatorial Guinea, among others.

McCain’s been taking flak for his ties to lobbyists for a while now, and I predicted it would expand into a Black Attack back in February. I even gave a better example of Black’-Manafort’s shadiness the WaPo didn’t dig up. But at this point I’m just going to shrug my shoulders and say “whatever”, because we’ve picked a deeply flawed candidate and we’re stuck with him.

It’s like buying a house with foundation problems and a damp, creepy basement in a cruddy neighborhood. No matter how many flags and azaleas the sellers put out on top, the fundamentals aren’t sound and that’s going to give you problems. But we bought it anyway, and we own it. The Democrats are clamoring for Black to be fired, but that won’t fix McCain’s water damage after years of immersion in the toxic beltway muck. Black is a symptom of this underlying problem, and firing him is just a cosmetic fix.

Well, actually, it’s not even a fix. Black’s a competent manager and he’s been scrupulously ethical in his representation of blood-soaked autocrats. I actually think he’s a benefit to the campaign and one of McCain’s few ties to the conservative movement. That’s why Democrats are bothering to attack him.

It will be interesting, of course, to hear these Democrats explain why exactly Black’s ties with evil dictators are so bad, when their presumptive candidate is proposing to go work with them face to face and legitimize relations with a whole assortment of repressive thugs. Sit down for a tea party with Bashar Assad? Why, that’s exactly the sort of legitimacy and international prestige that dictators hire lobbyists like Charles Black to arrange for them.

If the WaPo really wanted to cripple McCain, of course, they’d do it from the right flank and focus on conservative discontent on immigration and do this kind of reporting on adviser (and former Mexican government employee) Juan Hernandez. Plus McCain has been keeping Hernandez out of the media limelight. Good thing the media will help keep him there–they don’t want this race to turn to illegal immigration any more than McCain does.

_________________________

{Post by See-Dubya. Ooh, I’m not going to get any “McCain points” for this post, am I?}

~ For the latest breaking news, be sure to join Michelle's e-mail list ~

Posted in: 2008 campaign,John McCain

Printer Friendly

comments (21)

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

#1

On May 22nd, 2008 at 9:14 am, sonofdy said:

I can’t believe there are no lobbyist on obamas side.
#2

On May 22nd, 2008 at 9:20 am, Craig said:

Equatorial Guinea? I’ve got to bone up on my geography…Good grief, I missed that memo.
#3

On May 22nd, 2008 at 9:24 am, Barry F. said:

Nope. No points for you, See-Dubya.
#4

On May 22nd, 2008 at 9:25 am, Boomer said:

because we’ve picked a deeply flawed candidate and we’re stuck with him.

What’s this we stuff I still don’t get my say in Idaho until Tuesday. Not that it matters what anyone thinks about our 4 electoral votes anyways. It is a solid Red state and would go to a chimpanzee as long as it had an R after its name. The sad part is a chimp would be a much better candidate than we are stuck with now.
#5

On May 22nd, 2008 at 9:34 am, Barry F. said:

On May 22nd, 2008 at 9:25 am, Boomer said:

The sad part is a chimp would be a much better candidate than we are stuck with now.

Do you think that is that where McCain’s “foot soldier” recollections in the Reagan Army come from?
#6

On May 22nd, 2008 at 9:38 am, lgm said:

he’s been scrupulously ethical in his representation of blood-soaked autocrats.

Is this April fools’s day? Let’s think about Obama’s campaign manager who is “scrupulously ethical” in his efforts to promote Ahmadinejad (who, for all his faults, is not yet a mass murderer on the scale of people Black represents). Would that be cool too?

I actually think he’s a benefit to the campaign and one of McCain’s few ties to the conservative movement.

The only available “conservative” is a paid apologist for murderers and terrorists. That tells you something about conservatives, or about McCain.

Sit down for a tea party with Bashar Assad?

The Prime Minister of Israel can negotiate with Syria. JFK was willing to “bear any burden” in the cause of peace. That may have included sipping Islamofascist tea.
#7

On May 22nd, 2008 at 9:51 am, DaveC said:

Let’s think about Obama’s campaign manager who is “scrupulously ethical” in his efforts to promote Ahmadinejad (who, for all his faults, is not yet a mass murderer on the scale of people Black represents).

yet

forget about how he treats homosexuals in Iran?

That may have included sipping Islamofascist tea.

right along with Nancy Pelosi..
#8

On May 22nd, 2008 at 9:52 am, abstractmind said:

On May 22nd, 2008 at 9:38 am, lgm said

honestly, i’m not going to stop you from beating on mcshamnesty this time…he’s earned it. hammer away.

the dealing with israel/syria falls into a slightly different catagory. Geographically, israel is practically surrounded by its enemies. It would be the same(difference scope, but same idea) if the US and the USSR were in close border proximity during the Cold War.

In Israel’s case, they have a vested interest to talk to their neighbors and try to keep things peaceful. they’ve got no real allies on either border, and the Med on their west. It is because they are locked into place, and its good policy to get along with your neighbors as best you can, that they are doing that.
#9

On May 22nd, 2008 at 9:55 am, Rinoalert said:

Charles Black has been a part of every GOP presidential campaign since Ronald Reagan’s nomination run in 1976.

He is credited with saving McCain’s flailing campaign last summer. Why would a movement conservative want to do this? McCain’s continued problems with the base indicate that either Black is no longer a conservative or that he has no influence on policy steering.
#10

On May 22nd, 2008 at 10:27 am, DaveC said:

dunno why I responded to someone who drops, squats and leaves…

LGM is worse than a dog laying a lawn sausage in some else’s yard..
#11

On May 22nd, 2008 at 11:22 am, MtsEdge said:

It’s like buying a house with foundation problems and a damp, creepy basement in a cruddy neighborhood. No matter how many flags and azaleas the sellers put out on top, the fundamentals aren’t sound and that’s going to give you problems. But we bought it anyway, and we own it.

Who’s to say the Dems didn’t do an Operation Chaos of their own?
#12

On May 22nd, 2008 at 12:15 pm, b4lucy said:

I agree with previous poster, “what’s this we, stuff”…right on…All my favs were gone by the time of our primary….”we” did not pick McMidgit…I’ve been DISENFRANCHISED!!! This brings up a question…Some are screaming “disenfranchised” about Florida and Mich voters….Many millions of us NEVER get an opportunity to have a say in the primaries as the choice is always determined by those in states like Fl…Mich…Ohio…Ill…and N.Y…For the first time in my adult life, I am prou…no, wait..uh…For the first time in my adult life, Florida and Mich. are NOT among the choosers of the nominees…How is this such a problem?? Can someone enlighten me??
#13

On May 22nd, 2008 at 12:47 pm, spo-con said:

To MtsEdge……….thats why Rush started Operation Chaos. The MSM more or less propped Juan up for us to vote for. Tit for tat man.
#14

On May 22nd, 2008 at 12:53 pm, MtsEdge said:

spo-con, thanks…I must be the only person in this country who didn’t know that.
#15

On May 22nd, 2008 at 1:01 pm, MtsEdge said:

Second look @ post…I thought maybe the Dems crossed over and voted for McCain in the primaries…as opposed to merely using the MSM as the usual lefty tool to drown out every other contender. Is that what you meant, spo-con?
#16

On May 22nd, 2008 at 1:22 pm, BrianNY said:

see-dub said:

No matter how many flags and azaleas the sellers put out on top, the fundamentals aren’t sound and that’s going to give you problems. But we bought it anyway, and we own it.

Agreed. McCain will have to bake a lot of bread and open more windows in order to attract the volume of prospective conservative buyers that he will need come November. Unfortunately, he hasn’t even fired up the oven yet.

lgm said:

JFK was willing to “bear any burden” in the cause of peace.

Unfortunately, this mainly translated into JFK assuming the bottom coital position with every willing participant besides Jackie.

Actually, you may be right, lgm. Didn’t JFK sit down with Khrushchev in Vienna while hopped up on Dones Back Pills? I believe this “burden” of Kennedy’s ultimately led to Khrushchev viewing him as inexperienced and weak.

PBS’s documentary “The Kennedys” explained that it was JFK’s inexperienced and flubbed, diplomatic performance in Vienna that led to his immediate face-saving call for an escalation of US troops in the Vietnam theater.

When it comes to liberal diplomacy, be careful what you wish for.
#17

On May 22nd, 2008 at 1:29 pm, Azygos said:

But at this point I’m just going to shrug my shoulders and say “whatever”, because we’ve picked a deeply flawed candidate and we’re stuck with him.

Uh, I didn’t get to vote for the R candidate. He was chosen by the MSM long before I had a chance to vote. Thats the part of the system that needs fixing. Duncan Hunter or one of the the other true conseratives is a far better choice but the system was rigged by the MSM. Will I vote for McNasty, probably not.
#18

On May 22nd, 2008 at 1:44 pm, Texas Tiger said:

On May 22nd, 2008 at 9:14 am, sonofdy said:

I can’t believe there are no lobbyist on obamas side.

There are plenty. The Democrats call their lobbyists “community activists.” A turd by any other name is still a turd.
#19

On May 22nd, 2008 at 8:14 pm, starlightwoman said:

Whine, Whine, Whine —- Black is the least of the problems as long as Hernandez is still an advisor.
#20

On May 23rd, 2008 at 12:00 am, hadsil said:

But Black is innocent! It was Pettigrew!
#21

On May 23rd, 2008 at 2:26 am, drfredc said:

Oh, and the thousands of NEA delegates, trial lawyers, MoveOns dominating the Dem’s don’t count for squat?