This one is awesome, too:
... Except that for some reason, this McCain's spokes-bot is eventually let off the hook for rather stupidly insisting that Palin's "experience" as commander-in-chief of the Alaska National Guard qualifies as "foreign policy experience" (which it doesn't) while being completely unable to provide a single instance in which she actually "commanded" the Guard.
It's big a relief to see journalists finally growing a spine and refusing to settle for these dodges and non-answers, though. Why should they get away with it? This is a campaign essentially for the leader of the free world, and it's too important by far for reporters to let politicians get away with refusing to answer questions.
I only hope we see a LOT more of this from now on.
If we ever needed proof that the republicans don't take government seriously, John McCain's choice for V.P. would be it.
I'm not as big a fan of James Carville as I used to be, but this exchange between him and the congresswoman dispatched to vouch for Sarah Palin's credentials on Larry King is pretty hilarious:
I mean, seriously: Was there no one else? Even if you're going to play for the disgruntled Hillary voters by picking a woman -- surely this isn't the best you've got? It's insulting.
A break from the ranting: "American Prayer", by Dave Stewart of former Eurythmics-fame.
Reader beware: I'm about to paint all Republican politicians as sleazy propagandists, so if this notion offends you, read at your own risk.
All righty, then.
Now, while I sincerely do hate to paint an entire group of people with such a broad brush, the fact that this McCain "tire gauge" juvenalia is going completely un-denounced by the "Grand Old Party" just speaks for itself:
Once again, we see the same tired old kind of fifth-grade nanny-nanny-boo-boo-ing that the GOP insulted the electorate with in 2004 when a group of their delegates wore band-aids to mock John Kerry's war medals. Nobody apologized on their behalf then, either. So if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck ... well, the Republican Party is just a big bunch of sleazy propagandists.
If you haven't heard the story yet, it goes like this:
A day or so ago, Senator Obama makes a speech somewhere refuting McCain's assertion that the best way out of the energy crisis is to drill, drill, drill. He cites the opinions of a large number of economists and government agencies who have said that drilling in national parks, etc. will only lower our gas prices by a few pennies per gallon at most, and even then, will only do that after ten to fifteen years (a fact which the news media seems unable to cover).
First of all, Obama goes over some of his energy plan, which includes all kinds of positive, pro-active ideas for addressing this extremely, crucially important issue -- including:
- raising efficiency standards
- encouraging the creation of more green-collar jobs
- providing short-term relief to families hit hardest by the fuel crisis
- and on and on and on ...
... as an afterthought to all of that, just to show how futile the whole "drilling in ANWAR" scam would be, Obama suggests a list of very small things that individuals can do right now that would essentially effect the same amount of change as all that drilling in our wildlife refuges would. One simple action, he said, that alone would outweigh the effects of drilling would be simply making sure our tires are properly inflated. This was according to Bush's own Department of Energy.
Okay, now pan over to the McCain camp, where desecrating God's green wilderness for returns of pennies on the dollar is second only to tax-cuts for Exxon-Mobil on their list of "solutions" to the energy crisis ...
These guys decide to suuuper-dishonestly obscure the entire message of Obama's speech and pounce on this one teensy detail of it. They launch a million-dollar campaign to distribute tire-gauges -- again, not to actually encourage their supporters to check their tires, but to publically deride Obama for even suggesting it.
Which would be just plain weird in and of itself, if they didn't proceed to the next part, which is to launch what basically amounted to a disinformation campaign where they go around insinuating that the "tire pressure" comment is somehow the entireity of Obama's energy plan.
You see, this is the problem when your debating opponent has no qualms about deceiving his own audience: the mess he can easily make in one or two sentences takes at least a paragraph clean up:
MCCAIN: (actual words, recited at every campaign stop)
"My friends, let's do that, but do you think that's enough to break our dependence on foreign oil? I don't think so! "
(raspy sound of tired, obligatory cheers)
ME: (from behind him, or preferably in another dimension, where I'm way bolder and can speak to big crowds)
"But wait, good citizens! For the good of the nation, stop and think!
"Your man McCain is selling you a HUGE straw-man right there -- because Obama was referring to the meager 3% increase in supply that drilling in our Wildlife Refuges would theoretically generate in 15 years versus the surprising 3.3% increase in efficiency that inflating our tires would provide immediately. You see, Obama was actually putting forth an intelligent argument, versus Senator McCain's crass -- and, I should add, deliberate -- oversimplification.
"So -- far from suggesting that one tiny change would do anything like eliminate our dependence on foreign oil, Obama was clearly pointing out the wealth of other options we have before us, and was urging us to consider at least the easy ones before allowing big moneyed interests to run roughshod over our irreplaceable national treasures!"
(Side note: When questioned about his campaign's little stunt, McCain likes to pretend the whole thing is a big harmless joke. But look at the press releases and the transcripts of everything they're telling their supporters, and you'll see they're going around openly suggesting that it's all Obama has ever said about energy, even though they know that's not the case. This eerily resembles the approach Nixon took in his 1968 campaign, using deceptive language that suggests a set of blatantly false assertions, but is just vague enough so he can later claim he never played dirty.)
But my favorite part of the story, saved for last, is Obama's response. Knowing full well that he has the upper hand in this argument (and pretty much all of them so far) Obama responded the very next day (I think) with this:
Let's really, reeeally hope that clip gets picked up by the media, but I'm not holding my breath.
(Sigh)
Y'know, I'm starting to think it's not even debatable any more: Never in my lifetime has it been so crystal-clear which candidate represents the best direction for this country. Of course, this makes it even more crucial that we refuse to let the Republican message-makers distract us again -- with the same childish nonsense -- because if we don't, we'll really get what we deserve. And that would suck, because regardless of how well-informed the 49% of us are who will vote for actual wisdom and positive change, we all have to pay for the ignorance of the other 51% of voters who don't bother to look past the McCain-camp's childish bullshit.
And to think I used to consider McCain one of the "good Republicans" ...
A piece on the Huffington Post dredged up this old G. W. Bush interview with Irish journalist Carol Coleman, who is probably still the only individual ever to subject Bush to the power of capital-J-Journalism. She's definitely still too polite to him, but unlike the rest of the media, she doesn't let his condescension and pouting throw her off-subject.
It is also worth noting that, while it may be hyperbole to say it was "banned", as the title on YouTube suggests, it is still true that no major news outlets played this interview in the U.S. While I agree with you that considering our media establishment, this isn't surprising, it still deserves a rant for the sake of decency, if nothing else:
It ... just ... confounds the mind ... that to this day, after round after round of clear evidence that this man regularly (!!!) lies to this country on so many subjects of the utmost importance, that our media establishment still tiptoes around this man's huge body of misdoings, only referring to them through the most nondescript of watered-down euphemisms: "the President's low popularity rating". Low popularity rating my ass: He's a criminal. And he should be in prison, for the sake of the rule of law, our country's legacy, basic decency, ... and so on.
Another blog commenting on this video suggests that it should be required viewing in classrooms across the country, and I couldn't agree more. Don't watch it if you're in a good mood, though: just like any other media appearance by our overgrown-frat-boy-in-chief, it can ruin a perfectly good afternoon if you let it.
In their world, if someone of stature says something that can sound inflammatory when taken out of context, then by God, they are going to take it out of context. And then milk the ensuing cacophany for all it's worth -- the substance of the story be damned.
Am I just being naive here? Aren't the people in the media supposed to be the grownups?
Over at the Vagabond Scholar, there's an excellently written piece laying out the similarities between the archetypal behavior of common bullies in the junior-high-school lunchroom and that of the purveyors of the predominant politics of the last seven and a half years, the Bush Administration.
... but I just heard the speech Obama gave today (addressing the growing furor over the remarks made by his former pastor), and, well, maybe I should just accept that I am what I am.
