Impressionable Minds

Until this evening, I was becoming increasingly concerned about Barack Obama's chances of defeating John McCain in this year's presidential election.

My enthusiasm upon learning of the news about Obama's brief nine-point gain over McCain in the national polls, following his overseas trip, was first tempered by the news of McCain's ability to shorten the gap between he and Obama in polls that were conducted in several key battleground states; before it was muted altogether, after I read today's Gallup Poll.

However, after watching the latest TV ad that the McCain Campaign unveiled today, my spirits were buoyed once again.

Is this the best that John McCain and his strategists can do?

Really?

For McCain to argue against Obama's candidacy by pairing him with pseudo-celebrities Paris Hilton and Britney Spears is - and this is an understatement - laughable.

Apparently, he feels that Barack Obama is now too popular to be elected president.

Even Obama's diet is too contempo-casual for the average American to stomach, according to a recent McCain campaign memo.

John McCain would have us believe that Barack Obama's ambition - a characteristic that all politicians, especially those running for president; including McCain, himself - supersedes his dedication to public service as an elected official.

John McCain would be well served if someone on his campaign staff took the opportunity to remind him that in addition to the 25 years he has served in public office, he has several television and film appearances of a non-political nature on his resume: two separate appearances on NBC's Saturday Night Live (once as host), a cameo in the comedy film Wedding Crashers, and a cameo on Fox TV drama series 24.

Seriously though...this latest attack ad is far less troubling than the one that preceded it; one that has since been debunked.

Yet, I wonder how much credence the American people would dare to give to these arguments against Barack Obama - as well as McCain (a la the 2000 Republican presidential primary) - that are based not on matters of policy, but wedge issues, and perceived character flaws.

Furthermore, I cannot dismiss the notion that a considerable number of Americans are disinclined to vote for Obama for no other reason than the fact that he is as black as the night in which things go bump.

Otherwise, why would The New Yorker feel compelled to publish an edition of their magazine bearing an illustration on its cover that satirizes every known stereotype of Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, that has been perpetuated since the day he announced his intention to run for president; especially after considering the potential backlash they would suffer as a result?