The Real McCain...

Submitted by Davinci on Fri, 07/18/2008 - 6:32pm. Tags:

Politics

Flip Flop? Posted without comment... :)

I do wonder is the media giving them both to much of a free
ride. And what would and how would an ad like this play to low
info voters?
--

Ask courageous questions. Do not be satisfied with superficial answers. Be open to wonder and at the same time subject all claims to knowledge, without exception, to intense skeptical scrutiny. Be aware of human fallibility. Cherish your species and your

Davinci's blog
Login or register to post comments

One example (#103991)

by Bird Dog on Sat, 07/19/2008 - 9:29am

I'm not going to parse through the video, but McCain's comment about the economy being better was taken out of context to the point of being dishonest. Obama also tried to trot that out, just as dishonestly as Greenwald. Greenwald's dishonesty is further compounded because he's claiming his out-of-context snippet is the "real McCain" when it's clearly not.

When McCain makes comments, he makes them in complete paragraphs, with plenty of qualifiers and conditionals. The problem is that snippets of his statements can easily be pulled out and put in attack videos, but those attack videos never extract the full statements. That said, McCain has made gaffes, but he's not the only candidate who's made gaffes. McCain has said some untruths, but he's not the only candidate who's spoken untruths.

"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton

(

)

Assbitin' video of this sort is just dumb. (#104152)

by BlaiseP on Sun, 07/20/2008 - 10:12am

When I see crap like the above, I'm left with the perverse urge to write something in defense of the victim.

I don't agree with John McCain. But what is gained by making such a video? Or for that matter, the McCain attack ads against Obama are equally stupid and make him look like a putz.

Anyone who wants to run a negative ad ought to follow this formula: there's a clear choice before the people. Here's what [the opponent] believes [and put up the genuine points he makes, in a decent light]. But these policies are wrong. Here's why. [quick cuts of crying children, piles of garbage, soldiers running in alleyways, pinned up against adobe walls, pan shot over military gravestones, all sorts of scurrilous horsesh!t] voiceover: doom, disaster, plagues of locusts, sapping of our manly vigor, zombie invasions. [cue stirring Copland theme] But Candidate X opposes these policies, because he's a manly dude and sires superior children, and he's the Right Man for the Job.

(

| parent )

The political news media needs a horse race (#103887)

by Spartacvs on Fri, 07/18/2008 - 8:58pm

There's enough material out there for them to hobble him any time they want to, but they won't. He's going to get a far easier ride in the media than Obama, which is fine as long as the media don't decide to do an Al Gore on Obama.

GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.

(

)

The Media Needs a Horse Race (#103891)

by Model 62 on Fri, 07/18/2008 - 9:07pm

and so does the money making side of the operation. After all, do candidates spend millions running advertisements on your network if the race isn't close?

(

| parent )

Good point (#103909)

by Spartacvs on Fri, 07/18/2008 - 9:37pm

If you want the influence money out of politics and you want to see the end of horse race political coverage then to heck with the 1st amendment. Seek a reasonable accommodation and get paid political advertising off the TV and give the candidates equal free time on all the networks/cable news channels, say 2 to 3 hours a week during election season?

GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.

(

| parent )

Free airtime is not precisely a violation of the 1st. -nt- (#103940)

by Punditus Maximus on Fri, 07/18/2008 - 10:46pm

It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.

(

| parent )

No (#103947)

by Spartacvs on Fri, 07/18/2008 - 11:09pm

But denying them the ability to purchase time would, no?

GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.

(

| parent )

Give 'em enough time, (#103973)

by Punditus Maximus on Sat, 07/19/2008 - 2:42am

and it's not worth buying more.

It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.

(

| parent )

I wouldn't propose giving them (#103987)

by Spartacvs on Sat, 07/19/2008 - 8:57am

the 2-3 hours of free time in 30 second segments. They would get longer periods perhaps 20-30 mins or even hour long features in which to present their case to the public on a variety of issues. Getting rid of the 30 second sound bite nonsense and replacing it with something more substantive would be the whole point.

GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.

(

| parent )

Recent Diaries