The Bailout, McCain, and the Smoking Gun - Virtual Conspiracy Exposed!

Every conspiracy has one weakness. It must remain a secret. For politicians, most of the time this is not a problem, as the conspirators can blend in with the pack. They are free to differ, and frequently do, on irrelevant issues.

This week, however, we have been granted the rare opportunity to observe the behavior of the Virtual Conspiracy in its most naked form.

I will give the actions of one U.S. senator as an example. But the same logic could be applied to any number of other politicians involved in the debate over the so-called "Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008".

Just as an astronomer can detect the existence of an invisible celestial body by its gravitational effects on the orbit of a visible planet; we can infer the existence of a hidden agenda in the irrational behavior of a politician.

When I speak of "irrational", I am not speaking of actions that are counterproductive, useless, stupid, or greedy. These are almost synonyms of "political".

What is rare in any politician, however, is to act against his own political ambitions.

When that happens I think any rational observer must come to one of two conclusions: either the politician in question is one of those rare individuals of great integrity, high principles, and unshakable honesty, or he has a hidden agenda.

For example, if a politician takes a bribe to kill a bill that is very popular with his constituency he runs the risk of losing his next election. He will, of course, plead that it is in everyone's best interest, that his constituents don't understand the complexities and that he must exert some "leadership". That may or may not save his political career, but it is certainly a risky gambit that should elicit great suspicion as to his true motives.

Now to our example, Senator John McCain.

He is supposedly locked in a hotly contested campaign for the presidency. Ever political analyst sees his greatest challenges as being:

1) Demonstrating leadership on economic issues.

2) Distancing himself from the wildly unpopular Bush administration.

3) Appealing to his conservative base without alienating independent voters, especially in the swing states.

He had a golden opportunity to make great strides toward ALL of these goals by simply opposing the bailout.

He could have done it with virtually no risk to his popularity. On the contrary, he almost certainly would have shot up in the polls. He would not have had to backpedal or flip flop on any of his (or the Republican's) supposed positions or principles. He would not have had to come up with any complex or convoluted arguments.

He could have simply stated that he found the bill to be fundamentally flawed and counter to the principles of the free market.

Even if he felt that this was a good and necessary bill, his "No" vote would not have come close to changing the outcome in the senate.

With one simple gesture he could have:

1) Differentiated himself from Obama and appeared "presidential" on an economic bill.

2) Distanced himself from the current administration and neutralized the accusations that his would be the "3rd term" of George Bush.

3) Sided with the vast majority of conservative and independent voters who oppose the bailout.

This was a political move so obvious and beneficial to his campaign that if he HAD done it, I would have suspected that the whole episode had been staged by the Bush administration to help McCain get elected!

Instead he linked arms with Obama and joined the sheep-like ranks of senators following their party leaders and the Bush administration in passing the bill.
Predictably he has sunk even further in the polls.

No, I think that any objective observer is left with only one of two possible conclusions:

1) John McCain is one of the most highly principled and selfless politicians in history.

2) John McCain is subject to the hidden agenda of puppet masters that can compel him to risk losing the most important election of his lifelong political career over a single, meaningless, "symbolic" vote.

Which theory do YOU believe?