You may - or may not - have heard that McCain's people have filed a lawsuit to kick Libertarian candidate Bob Barr off the Pennsylvania ballot. This is not only antidemocratic and cowardly on McCain's part - it's also a flip flop from his own position in 2000, yet another indication that McCain's values are written in smoke.
The details of the lawsuit are presented on Barr's campaign website: McCain and Republican Party Try to Block Barr From Ballot. The short version is that Pennsylvania law allows petitions to be collected for a party in the name of a stand-in candidate, for which the real candidate will later be substituted. McCain's complaint is that Barr's name was not substituted quickly enough once he became the Libertarian candidate. In other words, it has nothing to do with whether the people of Pennsylvania want the option of voting for the Libertarian candidate, which happens to be Bob Barr. Instead, the suit seeks to twist the letter of the law out of context until it can be used to undo the will of the people, expressed through tens of thousands of petitions gathers.
This lawsuit tells you three things about John McCain:
The first, and most obvious, is that McCain fears Bob Barr. McCain is worried about Barr's impact in Pennsylvania, because Barr is farther to the right on so many issues (taxes, abortion, guns), and quite frankly makes a more credible Republican nominee than McCain. Although McCain's big narrative is all about courage, trying to get your opponent kicked off the ballot so you don't even have to face him is an act of cowardice.
The second point, somewhat more nuanced, is that McCain is not a big fan of democracy. Bob Barr followed the rules and got his name on the Pennsylvania ballot, and Barr's presence there gives the voters of Pennsylvania another option to consider on election day. Does McCain think Pennsylvania voters are too stupid to handle more than two options? Or does he fear that those voters are smart enough that having that third option makes them realize that McCain is the worst out of three instead of the worst out of two? Either way, since the only way Barr being on the ballot hurts McCain is if there are voters out there who want to choose Barr over McCain, it is those voters that McCain is trying to stifle and hurt through this exercise.
Finally, the most ironic point of all. McCain in 2008 is again spinning away from McCain of 2000. In 2000, the New York Times reported: McCain Urges Bush to Halt New York Ballot Challenge! That's right, Bush tried to pull the same kind of stunt against McCain in the 2000 primaries, and McCain called it as a foul. In McCain's own words:
"We all know that the Berlin wall is down, ... People should be able to get on the ballot in states. I'm sure that if Governor Bush told them, don't do that, don't remove McCain's name, they would respond. Everybody knows that I am a legitimate candidate. I should be on the ballot."
McCain went further than that even, declaring: "I would never consider, ever consider, allowing a supporter of mine to challenge Governor Bush's right to be on the ballot in all 50 states."
McCain, in suing to remove Barr, has made a complete flip-flop from his 2000 statement that he would "never consider" challenging an opponent's "right to be on the ballot in all 50 states." It's what takes this from being common dirty politics to being a legitimate campaign issue, an issue about McCain's character and values, and a reason for the media and the candidates to talk about the legitimacy of Bob Barr's candidacy, compared to that of John McCain.