INDIRECTLY ACKNOWLEDGING THE TRUTH?

A few pages into New York magazine's cover story about John McCain, we get a brief peek at the truth, as an unnamed GOP operative talks about Barack Obama:

"Our strategy will look a fair amount like the one that Hillary is running against him now," a party official says. "It'll build on two things: first, that he's way too inexperienced to be commander-in-chief, which not only polls incredibly well but has the virtue of being true; and, second, that he's way too liberal."

Which doesn't, and doesn't?

The rest of the paragraph is provocative, but I'm struck by that last part -- by the fact that the party official didn't finish off with "which is also true." II'd like to believe that it's because the official knows "way too liberal" is nothing but the same load of crap Republicans throw out there every election cycle to fool the rubes.

The official also doesn't say that calling Obama a liberal polls well. If it doesn't now, there's a very good chance it will eventually, after the usual months and months of hearing Republicans using "liberal" as a slur and reporters dutifully recounting the use of it as a slur. But maybe, just maybe, this is the presidential year when it won't work, or maybe this is the candidate who's found the formula to beat the whammy. We'll see.