The last thing the McCain campaign campaign should be doing is dropping 'gambling' metaphors

The McCain campaign accused the NYT today of "gambling away what little credibility it still has." You see, McCain is angry that the NYT exposed his extensive ties to gambling lobbyists, and the fact that McCain's work exposing the Abramoff scandal may have simply been McCain's attempt to help yet another lobbyist who was a competitor of Abramoff. Ooops.

But back to McCain's gambling analogies, let me make a few points. One, a guy who just gambled away the security of our country by picking an idiot as his running mate, has no right to accuse anyone else of recklessness. Second, should John McCain, a known actual gambler (with money), be using gambling metaphors to demean others? (Reminds me of when McCain's spokeswoman suggested that POW's don't "cheat" - hmmm, tell that to McCain's first wife.) But back to gambling, if gambling is so bad, then why does McCain himself gamble? And finally, newsflash, but McCain voters don't read the New York Times. They read the Washington Times, and watch FOX News. The newspapers and TV networks need to wake up to the fact that Republicans who don't like you are people who don't read you and people who don't watch you, so it doesn't matter if they threaten to walk away from you. You never had them in the first place. The NYT got the best revenge on the McCain campaign - they told the truth. John McCain ought to try it some time.