I don't usually pay too much mind to the characterizations of the right-wing media when considering a Democratic candidate, but as soon as John McCain began echoing waning Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton's cries of "elitist!", after Obama's comments about small-town voters, I couldn't help but think of the far-right's consistent objections to John McCain as a Republican candidate.  They believe McCain is a liberal in disguise.

So rather than follow the MSM's lead and keep talking about what does or does not render Obama vulnerable in a general election against McCain, let's turn the focus to why McCain could be in serious trouble against Obama.

Now I'm not talking in this case about the most obvious advantages Obama is likely to enjoy against McCain.  Things like fundraising ability, voter turnout, grassroots infrastructure, etc.  I'm also not referring at the moment to the fact that McCain is 71 years old and must run, to some extent at least, on the failures of George W. Bush.  No, I'm talking about McCain's liberal-elitist problem.

Just do a Google search on "john mccain liberal" and you'll see what I'm talking about.  You can follow one of the links from the first five hits, say Matthew A. Roberts' April 13 piece in the National Ledger, and see McCain mentioned in the same breath with people like Mao, Stalin, Castro, and even (gasp) John Kerry!  These question marks about McCain are already out there, and argue strongly against his electability in the fall!

If Democrats are worried about McCain using the criticisms of Hillary Clinton as an especially effective weapon against Obama, maybe they should also recognize the equally ripe opportunities to use conservatives' criticisms of McCain against him.  To do so does not have to validate the conservative agenda, but only emphasize that John McCain is unsuitable as a Republican candidate. 
What's equally important, though, is the fact that the right's recognition of McCain's flip-flop toward the right on every issue from the militarism to gay marriage to abortion also reveals his claims to the mantle of centrist maverick to be fradulent.  McCain doesn't represent a maverick centrism any more than he represents cultural conservatism.  And maybe he could have run as the leftist in the race if he hadn't turned against his liberal voting record!  His positions are faux liberal because he breathes the cultural elitist vapors of his wife's vast fortunes.  With all due respect to John Kerry, you would almost think he and John McCain were the same person!  (I'm being somewhat facetious here, of course, but you get my point about how dangerously close McCain is to painting himself into political no-man's land.)

So conservatives have it right: John McCain is a faux liberal elitist who is trying to masquerade, by flip-flopping on central issues, as a Republican.  And there is nothing centrist about him, either.  He flips over that particular heartland of the polical spectrum entirely.  What he tries to sell as centrism is merely the rarified political vacuum of a candidate with no real values. 

As counterintuitive as it might seem to Democrats, Obama needs to throw the label of liberal elite right back at John McCain and then point out that for all his efforts he's not even very good at that.  Obama should be absolutely incredulous to the notion that any such label belongs with him.  Obama is the candidate of common-sense progressivism.  (And anyone who really understands progressivism at all knows full well that it's anything but elitist.) 

Common-sense progressivism is an accurate characterization that upholds Obama's ideals and record, but also highlights his appeal to independent voters.  And there's no shortage of his positions to back this up.  (For a different post, but examples could include his much-endorsed foreign-policy pragmatism and his pay-go fiscal responsibility.*) 

This label also reminds people of what should be self-evident: Pragmatic progressive politics and liberal-elitism are not the same thing.  Barack Obama promises the former.  John McCain is a failed example of the latter.
----------------------

* Just today McCain said that tax cuts were more important than balancing the budget!

The Matthews piece I mention above can be found at http://www.nationalledger.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi?archive=1&num=4925