From Sen. John McCain's remarks today in San Antonio, TX.

“It's a peculiar kind of moral evolution that disregards the democratic process, and inures solely to the benefit of child rapists. It was such a jarring decision from the Court that my opponent, Senator Obama, immediately and to his credit expressed his disagreement. I'd like to think this signals a change of heart on his part about his votes against the confirmation of two of the four dissenters in the case, Justice Samuel Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts. More to the point, why is it that the majority includes the same justices he usually holds out as the models for future nominations? My opponent may not care for this particular decision, but it was exactly the kind of opinion we could expect from an Obama Court.



First, McCain doesn't hold out Ginsberg or Breyer as models, but he did vote for their confirmation. Second, this dig seems a little bit illogical, although I can gather what he was aiming at. There's sort of an icky, underlying argument here that Obama is somehow sanctioning a decision that benefits child rapists because he supports the model of jurisprudence that the court's liberals generally adhere to.

The Obama campaign sends along a response:


“Senator McCain voted for 4 of the 5 judges who supported this flawed ruling, which is why this attack is particularly disingenuous and nothing more than the same old Bush-style politics that the American people are tired of. Senator McCain knows full well that Senator Obama disagreed with the decision and believes that certain criminals who commit heinous crimes like child rape should be subject to the death penalty,"

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.