1115.org

There are any number of people out there who are firmly convinced that by the time you become a serious presidential candidate you are already deeply in thrall to dark and shadowy king-makers who firmly control your puppet-strings. They tell you what to do, and you obediently keep on doing it. (That, for example, is why Obama suddenly decided to support the FISA bill despite his previously stated categorical opposition to telecom amnesty.) Most of the time one easily dismisses such speculation as tinfoil hat stuff.

But the recent behavior of John McCain and his campaign staff — from his most senior advisers to second tier spokesmen — certainly makes it appear that whoever calls the shots in McCain’s campaign, it is not John McCain himself.

On Sunday, in the interview with George Stephanopoulos that is already rightly famous, having caused so much embarrassment and grief to the McCain campaign, McCain stated categorically that he supports a ballot initiative in Arizona that would dismantle affirmative action.

But McCain’s own campaign refused to say whether it stands by the candidate’s announcement that he supports the ballot initiative.

In an interview broadcast on ABC’s “This Week,” host George Stephanopoulos asked McCain if he supports a referendum on the ballot in his home state “that would do away with affirmative action.”

“Yes, I do,” he responded. “I do not believe in quotas. But I have not seen the details of some of these proposals. But I’ve always opposed quotas.”

Stephanopoulos asked, “But the one here in Arizona you support?”

“I support it, yes,” replied McCain.

McCain did not indicate that he had a standing opposition to such initiatives, or that he was changing his stance by supporting the initiative in Arizona.

Contacted by CNN, McCain’s campaign sent a statement from spokesman Tucker Bounds.

“John McCain has always been opposed to government- mandated hiring quotas, because he believes that regardless of race, ethnicity or gender, the law should be equally applied. He has long stood for the protection of civil rights and equal opportunity for all Americans,” the statement said.

But pressed about whether McCain indeed supports the Arizona initiative, the campaign would not answer. In 1998, McCain called a similar ballot measure “divisive.”

So John McCain himself is not authorized to speak for John McCain? Who does his campaign have to check with to figure out if McCain’s policy on immigration has been officially changed?

And this wasn’t even the only such instance this week.

John McCain’s tax policy has come under fire in the past, particularly for its dependence on huge revenue windfalls to balance the budget. But now a new study from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center (a joint venture between Brookings and the Urban Institute) suggests there’s another flaw: a rhetoric gap.

According to the study, the tax plan McCain’s campaign laid out privately is different from the one he’s selling on the stump. If you include the policies he has advocated publicly—such as repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax, increasing the dependent exemption to $7,000 right away, and reducing the corporate tax rate to 25 percent immediately—then the deficit after 10 years would actually be $2.8 trillion greater than if you go by his private plan. There’s also a rhetorical gap for Obama, but in his case the public version generates more revenue than the private one, thanks to a suggested hike in payroll taxes for people who make $250,000 or more.

Here’s how Douglas Holtz-Eakin, McCain’s chief economic adviser, responded to the study:

“He has certainly I’m sure said things in town halls” that don’t jibe perfectly with his written plan. But that doesn’t mean it’s official.

He’s John McCain, but who approves his message?

*** Update, 4:15 pm ***
Today for the third time in a week, the McCain campaign insisted that John McCain is not authorized to speak for himself:

On Sunday, ABC’s George Stephanopoilos (sic) asked Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) about his plans to fix social security. McCain said repeatedly that “everything has to be on the table” regarding possible reforms — including a payroll tax increase:
STEPHANOPOULOS: So, that means payroll tax increases are on the table, as well?

MCCAIN: There is nothing that’s off the table.

The comments drew a “sharp rebuke” from the Club for Growth, who wrote McCain a letter calling the comments “shocking because you have been adamant in your opposition to raising taxes under any circumstances.” In fact, just last year McCain explicitly told the National Review that he refused to consider any sort of tax increase. He also told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, “No new taxes.”

Trying to stymie the conservative blow-back over his boss’s recent comments, McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds insisted to Fox News this morning that the senator hadn’t really been speaking for the campaign. When Fox host Megyn Kelly insisted Bounds stop “waffling” and answer whether a tax increase was “on the table,” Bounds replied, “No”:
KELLY: Might the Social Security tax go up? Is that on the table?

BOUNDS: No, Megyn, there is no imaginable circumstance where John McCain would raise payroll taxes. It’s absolutely out of the question.

McCain is not authorized to speak for himself, but Bounds is authorized to flatly state that McCain was talking through his hat?

Who really pays Bounds’ salary? Who does he really answer to?