What A Difference A Bad VP Choice Makes

To put it charitably, the WaPo hasn't had the most enthusiastic of editorial pages towards Barack Obama, but now that John McCain has made the worst vice presidential selection in modern history, thing are changing.

On back-to-back days, the WaPo editorial page has slammed McCain, first on his VP choice, and now today on taxes:

Continuing Deception: Mr. McCain's ads on taxes are just plain false.

THERE IS a serious debate to be had in this presidential campaign about the fundamentally different tax policies of Barack Obama and John McCain. Then there is the phony, misleading and at times outright dishonest debate that the McCain campaign has been waging -- most recently with a television ad.

The two candidates have very different positions on taxes. Mr. Obama wants to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans and cut them substantially for low- and middle-income taxpayers. He would cut taxes for more households, and by a larger amount, than Mr. McCain, who would give the greatest benefits to wealthy households and corporations.

Given the lack of timeliness of this editorial, it makes me wonder if it isn't something of a shot across McCain's bow that he ought to reconsider his VP choice. Is it possible that Romney ought to dust off his mansions and get ready to replace Palin?