John McCain: Is he back, as in really back?

Some of our schoolmarmish goo-goo types use the relatively modern term of "permanent campaign" -- the nonstop pursuit of the presidency -- as a pejorative, principally because they view politics, as opposed to the noble profession of governing, as a seedy endeavor.

Political animals, in this civics-minded view, should keep their beastly aspirations to themselves, right up until some mutually accepted and meticulously circumscribed period of campaigning. Nice, tidy little campaigns, or so the goo-goos admonish, neatly separated from immaculate governance -- now that's the ticket.

On some democratic planet in some faraway galaxy the business of campaigning may actually work that way, but it sure doesn't here, and in fact it never has. One can trace the history of permanent campaigns back to the eras of Thomas Jefferson and Henry Clay without breaking a sweat, but a sweat is what those poor goo-goos break out in whenever they read -- especially prior to a presidential inauguration, no less -- sentences like this:

John McCain is running again.

Now do I know that for a fact? Hell no. How could I? But I strongly suspect it; furthermore I strongly suspect McCain suspected it by late September or early October, just as the recessionary walls were closing in and thereby dooming his 2008 chances, just as Sarah Palin was proving herself the clueless political bimbo she is, and just shortly before McCain himself began to see the long-term political benefit of self-parody on "Saturday Night Live."

He was running for 2012 by late 2008. That's my guess. His age? Sure it'll be a problem, just as it was last year. But remember, John McCain sees himself as an altogether different kind of cat -- as the ever-vigorous flyboy who succumbs not to common-man frailties. And besides, what's the real difference between 72 and 76, other, of course, than an indisputable but negligible little 4?

What prompted these musings was a recent article in the Politico -- "The 'old McCain' is back" -- which, admittedly, I chose to read mostly between the lines. At no point does the piece even mention 2012, let alone delve into McCain's possibly innermost desire.

There were, however, lines like this: "The Arizona Republican has made clear that he will seek reelection in 2010, and he recently created a leadership PAC to help bolster his fundraising profile." That one, I think, speaks for itself: Most 72-year-old incumbent senators don't sit around brooding about their money-raising "profile" as a vehicle for accumulating chits, and that's what "leadership PAC"s do.

And at the most curious time, the "old John McCain" is returning to his profile-shaping roots. Said the Politico, he is once again "hammering away on government reform, earmarks and wasteful government spending."

Said McCain himself: "There’s a profound lack of confidence and trust on the part of the American people that the Congress will do the right thing. I talked about this on the campaign trail. I don’t like this, and it’s not pleasant, but there is corruption here.... It’s just a fact, a matter of record. So we have to restore the trust and confidence for the American people by fixing what we do."

I labeled all that "curious," because if ever there were a time for not worrying about indistinguishable earmarks and pork -- and going so far as to characterize both as "corruption" -- this is it. Because as Paul Krugman noted yesterday, "fiscal stimulus can sometimes have a 'multiplier' effect: In addition to the direct effects of, say, investment in infrastructure on demand, there can be a further indirect effect as higher incomes lead to higher consumer spending. Standard estimates suggest that a dollar of public spending raises G.D.P. by around $1.50."

In other words, even a Palinesque $300 million bridge to nowhere might itself stand idly, but it can also act as a $450 million economic stimulus. Nevertheless, this sort of thing is what McCain loves to condemn, and his present -- and future? -- base eats it up.

But did I say "Palin"? Well, you won't hear McCain say it. "He especially wants to avoid discussions about his relationship with Palin," reported the Politico. I suppose that's because these days it's more a haunting than a relationship. Just act like it never happened, and perhaps public memory of his worst decision ever will fade.

And then there was this: "During a GOP-senators retreat this week at the Library of Congress, McCain told his colleagues that Republicans need to reach out more to diverse groups, rather than just relying on Christian conservatives, if they want to regain majority status."

That's another way of saying they're crazy if they nominate Sarah Palin in 2012, though I can't imagine why John McCain would care, unless ...

At any rate, all of this gives us incurable politics junkies something to wildly speculate on for a while, at least until other and more bankable permanent campaigns kick in. Like some rabid 9/11 Truther, I may indeed be connecting all manner of wholly unrelated dots seemingly plastered on McCain -- but it sure is fun.