Remember my posts here and on Girlfriday? I knew I wasn't crazy:
McCain getting hammered on late-night TV
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
About Me
- Lois E. Lane
- Flying by the seat of my pants, playing by heart, cooking with no recipe — just a full-time wife and mommy masquerading as a part-time writer. In no particular order, my favorite things are my husband, Jesus, my baby, morning tea, green, my wonderful family, words, my iTunes "Autumn Thoughts" mix, good journalism, theology, and the idea of sitting down to read.
Subscribe To
Posts
Comments
5 comments:
Getting called out on the nonsense one spouts isn't getting hammered.
Oh, by the way.
http://rickeypac.org/
Well, when only one side's nonsense is called out, that's called lopsided (and yes, there's nonsense on both sides and yes, I rightly observed it).
P.S. Proof of "nonsense" that hasn't been "called out" by TV comics, at least that I've seen:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8MCtLwIUBI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98gA-rbMBLw
P.P.S. Jason, I hope you come to understand that I'm not a card-carrying member of the John McCain fan club; I AM, however, a fan of fairness.
Full interview (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzUBqZBeH-g). The clip you provided cuts off Obama’s explanation and cuts to McCain stating what he actually said. In the full interview (your provided example starts at 3:20 of the full interview segment) Obama states why he isn’t spouting nonsense when he claims McCain wants or rather has no problem staying in Iraq for fifty, a hundred or even ten thousand years (as long as no American troops are harmed or killed).
Here’s the problem with that. Maintaining an occupational force in a hostile country is inherently unstable and “incidents” in which forces could be harmed or killed (not to mention loss of innocent lives in the form of collateral damage). But more to the point of Obama’s analysis of the situation and a point made more germane in light of our economic crisis and military stresses, staying in Iraq at the troop levels we have is a severe drain on our military and our treasury. And if we’re bogged down in Iraq, what do we do when we have an economic crisis or an actual military crises somewhere else in the world?
Now, what is more nonsensical? Obama saying that McCain has no problem with staying in Iraq for one hundred years (something McCain did say and a sentiment captured in context) with no real end in sight or McCain saying Obama wants to bring home the troops in defeat while he will bring them home with victory and honor? Ok, well what’s the difference? What would be victory? Does McCain elaborate much on that point? What is victory in Iraq? A stable, peaceful, democratic Iraq? Ok, what will that look like? What are the benchmarks for that? Are we saying victory is a carbon copy of America? Or is it just good enough for them to have democratic elections (something they’ve already done, twice)? Tell me, where is the distortion?
On the Obama Spanish-language ad (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98gA-rbMBLw). No doubt about it, that was a low-blow, a mischaracterization and a way out of context ad. No defense for it by me and another disappointment on my list for Obama and his campaign. But McCain had his own misleading Spanish-language ad (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S417X0RsHks&feature=related) as well.
But I think, on the whole, you’ll see way more nonsense coming out of the McCain-Palin camp than camp Obama-Biden (most of which would probably be Biden with his foot in his mouth).
Lois, apologies if I’ve mistaken you for card-carrying McCain fan (not that there’s anything wrong with that) and as you’ve stated you’re not but in your quest for fairness, I’d ask you dig a little bit deeper. Too much of politicking, for far too long, has preyed upon the ignorance of the populace and that will not change until we can prove to them that not only will we call them out on their bull, but hold them accountable for it.
Thank you for visiting :)
Ah yes, clip "splicing" -- Sam would also frown at me :) I fully comprehend your explanation of Obama's viewpoint. Perhaps I should have picked a different clip, like the one that shows Obama saying over and over again at rally after rally that McCain has no problem with a "war" that lasts 100 years. The error isn't in Obama's train of thought, but rather in the dishonest way he presented McCain's statement in front of crowds. People hear "war" and think fighting or death, not merely a drain on military funding because of an occupational presence.
But for the sake of argument, I have to say either of these men, if elected, will have to deal with a mess in Iraq that is complex and constantly changing. Obama's 16-month plant sounds very appealing, but even he admits that changing circumstances require a lot of flexibility. So I have to say that as far as a concrete definition of "victory" goes, neither of them have the market cornered.
One thing you and I can agree on for sure is this exhaustion from politicking. I can't even watch a friggin' debate any more without getting bored to tears -- candidates are so determined to "stay on message" and get their soundbites out there that real things are rarely said. Ideology is almost never discussed. What does it mean to be a Republican or Democrat today? Does anyone even care? If not, why continue a two-party system? Both sides offer almost identical campaign promises. Almost all that's "debated" (that's a stretch) is policy and who voted to pass which legislation. It's just such a product of this PR-driven society where everything has to be marketed. I realize marketing works, but is it any way to elect the leader of the free world? Blech. That sums up of my feelings in one word :)
Post a Comment