Saying It to His Face

I didn't get to see the first two-thirds of the debate last Tuesday, and what I saw didn't make me worry for Obama's chances. I don't have much new to add several days after the fact, but what's unfolded afterward has me wondering if Obama's playing the Ayers game wrong. People saw that Ayers didn't come up during the debate, and McCain made no attempt to bring it in, despite that everyone was supposedly "taking the gloves off" in this one, and that he'd been up with ads about Ayers suggesting something dark and troubling about Obama's past.

Obama's response to the absence of Ayers in the debate, when asked about it by Charles Gibson, should've been, simply, "He didn't bring it up in the debate, because he knows Americans don't actually care who lived in my neighborhood years ago in Chicago." This would've made it even harder to bring it up next time.

Instead, Obama said this:

"I am surprised that, you know, we've been seeing some pretty over-the-top attacks coming out of the McCain campaign over the last several days, that he wasn't willing to say it to my face. But I guess we've got one last debate. So presumably, if he ends up feeling that he needs to, he will raise it during the debate."

On its face, this is bold. Go at his strength; challenge McCain's masculinity. It's a trap disguised as a challenge: either McCain can bring it up and look like someone hopelessly out of touch and possibly dishonest, or don't bring it up and look like a coward... and still possibly dishonest.

But there's another possibility in this next debate. Bob Schieffer, who'll be moderating, could ask a question that sounds something like, "Senator McCain, you've been running ads questioning Senator Obama's ties to former Weather Underground member William Ayers. Senator Obama noted that you didn't seem anxious to 'say it to his face.' Would you address the relevance of Ayers to the campaign now, given the tough economic times?" This would give McCain the opportunity to make scurrilous suggestions while getting him off the hook for having brought such a frivolous thing up. It would also satisfy the media's need to seem less Obama-friendly, and their need to spice up the debate after the second one was widely panned.

This might be a little paranoid. I'm probably looking for something to worry about, and the electoral map isn't providing it. But it seems a little early to be call the dogs in, and whatever else James Carville said: