Mark McKinnon was very cagey when he was interviewed by NPR, refusing to explain why, but saying that he made the commitment (warning?) to McCain in writing. What gives? Is Obama a former client? Family friend? Something else?
McKinnon also don’t say why in this interview from June 2007.
On Hardball a few weeks ago, Chris Matthews said the guy really respects Obama, and wouldn’t feel comfortable going negative. Because he wouldn’t be able to give it his all, he would not campaign.
This seems to support that view.
So, isn’t he basically saying that a fine person like Obama could only be defeated by McCain via lies and personal attacks by McCain’s hired hatchetmen? 
I’m not sure his story adds up. It’s very common for politicians to say “I respect this person but I strongly disagree with them on this issue.” If he feels such an affinity for Obama that he would refuse to campaign against him even with such a disclaimer, I doubt McCain is going to be getting his vote come election day.
He’s just scared of losing. Either that, or he was Loaded for Hillary, and Obama requires ammo he doesn’t have.
Wow. How about: He understands that a Presidential campaign requires that the parties attack each other, and he’s not comfortable doing that to Barack Obama? I mean, sometimes the answer is just what they say it is.
No. Obama is the Anti-Christ.
-FrL-
…with all magical powers of persuasion that follow thereupon.
Maybe he doesn’t want to get turned into a newt (though he could probably get better).
While I’m inclined to applaud Mr McKinnon’s stance, and would applaud heartily if he actually sticks to it, my cynical side predicts that he’ll be brought around. For a political operative, “fall into line or you’ll never work in this town again” is a powerful incentive.
It is a dumb statement. The only reason why you wouldn’t want to go up against someone is if you agree with their ideas. He says he doesn’t agree with Obama’s ideas. So attack him on the issues. If you are running the campaign then run a clean campaign with no personal attacks. So now you can only campaign against people you dislike personally? Ridiculous. It’s supposed to be about ideas.
Whether or not it is supposed to be about ideas, we both know it actually comes down to saying nasty things about the other person. That’s the reality of politics.
Which, of course, means that the person in question has just indicated he’s quite willing to say nasty things about HRC. 
Looks like he’s true to his word (at least until McCain is 20 points down in the polls, mebbe?)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080521/pl_nm/usa_politics_mccain_aide_dc
Reminds me of how Bill Clinton charmed George H. W. Bush on their post-Tsunami tour and Bush Sr. promised that he would no longer engage in personal attacks against Bill and Hillary.