Notes on a Scandal: The Old Man and the C BS.

Email Print posted by ProfRich 07/24/2008 09:07:21 AM EST

Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit
If you like this story, digg it!
When I first read Cal Turner's post on McCain lack of comprehension of basic Iraq War history I tended to file it away as the senile old man said something stupid again.  Since then I have refined my position and feel the need to attempt to sort out what is important and what is not important in this story.

There are three major areas for discussion in this story.  Two are being covered to some extent.  One I have yet to hear mentioned.

1) CBS intervened to not only save a candidate from a major mistake but actually constructed a solid attack on Obama through creative editing.  

Two things should happen because of this.  CBS's credibility should take a hit and the "Obama gets all the favorable press coverage" story should die.  Just cause he gets more, doesn't mean he gets better.  If McCain wants more press coverage he should try not to be so damn boring.

2) McCain can't open his mouth without making a blunder.  It happens every single day.  Its amazing.  We should call the guy Old Faithful.

But we should also recognize there are two types of blunders and they are not at all equal.

One type is the Czechoslovakia blunder.  Its wrong and suggests he is outdated but it doesmn't change the point he is trying to make.  Insert the truth (Czech Republic) and the story doesn't change at all.

The other type is the Sunni Awakening began because of the surge type.  Insert the truth and McCain's entire argument collapses.  That is not just a mistake, that cuts the legs out from everything he is saying.

Another example would be the Iraq-Pakistan border.  He was explaining Iraq, not Afghanistan, was the central front in the war on terror because Iraq's border with Pakistan.  Now insert the truth in place of the lie and the story changes from McCain being right to McCain being 100% wrong.

Also in this category would be the Sunni-Shi'a confusion.  You can't just go back and change one word or phrase and it all makes sense.  If you change that word or phrase it all falls apart.

3) This is the one I haven't heard people saying.  Once we insert the truth into the Surge "blunder" (or the Sunni-Shi'a or the Iraq-Pakistan border blunder) we not only see McCain doesn't know what he is talking about (we have gotten that far in the discussion) but we see Obama is right about each one.

Simply taking McCain's statement, editing out the lies and inserting the inarguable truth not only shows us how clueless McCain is but it affirms EVERYTHING Obama has said.

Yes, let's attack CBS and John McCain.  But lets also take every chance to point out, "Hey, when you put the truth in these things, it sounds a hell of a lot like what Obama has been saying."

< Have a cup of coffee with Nancy Pelosi? | BUSH WHOOPING IT UP WHILE AMERICA SUFFERS. >
 Display:
Notes on a Scandal: The Old Man and the C BS. | 18 comments (18 topical, 0 hidden)
Apparently McCain thinks your stupid (none / 0)

Today, Captain Irrelevant told you that you only think he was wrong when he mangled the timeline on the surge.

The surge, he says, does not refer to the increase in troops announced January 2007 by President Bush.  This is, apparently coincidentally, the first time Bush, McCain or anyone else ever used the term but in reality they had been "surging" for more than six months.

While it has never, ever, ever been mentioned before by anyone, McCain expects you to know the surge was not about the troops but was just a convenient little nickname for "insurgency", which began when we the Sunni tribes in Anbar province decided to fight Al Qaeda. 

You thought the surge began in January 07? And that it meant sending 30,000 extra troops?

You are such a dumbass.  Everyone knows the surge was started by the Sunnis in Anbar province in the summer of 2006 (but somehow never came up in the lead-up to the 06 elections). 

So McCain is trying the tried and true "I'm right and you are all stupid" political tactic.  Like telling people what "is" means or explaining that by "with" MLK you meant "in support of MLK".

I remember a time when Republicans thought being a bald-faced liar was a reason to remove someone from office.

Does he actually think this is going to work?  Lets monitor the press and keep track of who treats this even remotely seriously and who reports actual news.

by ProfRich on 07/24/2008 11:12:16 AM EST

It's a sign (none / 0)
If he's making excuses that weak it's over.  I have a certain sympathy for him.  Imagine trying to sell what he's selling.  Anyone trying to promote the GOP's grand strategy is in the position of a door-to-door salesman trying to sell a turd.

by bfaul on 07/24/2008 12:10:10 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Great analogy (none / 0)
eom

by ihavenobias on 07/24/2008 06:27:31 PM EST

[ Parent ]
you know... (none / 0)
turds can actually be quite useful.  They can fertilize things and maybe even run an automobile if combusted properly.  Sometimes they even take some effort to produce.  How about "a piece of driveway gravel"?

by desertpear on 07/25/2008 12:50:58 AM EST

[ Parent ]
I'm beginning to feel sorry for him (none / 0)
but then I remember he's basically continuing to get a free ride while the press waits with baited breath to have a feeding frenzy on even the slightest mistake or off-color comment Barack might make, but amazingly almost never does. I can always look to the daily show to lay bare anti-Obama media bias. John Stewart nailed it the other night when he showed McCain's uncovered gaffes side-by-side with media pundits describing Obama's oversees trip as an opportunity to make a gaffe. WTF?

by hazmat on 07/24/2008 12:24:59 PM EST

I think his free ride may be ending (none / 0)
The media has a pack mentality.  Once a few of the big dogs turn on him the others will follow.  Fox basically can't because it leans one way and one way only whereas the others swing with the changing tide.

by bfaul on 07/24/2008 12:34:25 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Agree with all but... (none / 0)

Yes, the media seems to think covering what Obama might do (might= what the media hopes and prays he will do) is somehow a "news story."

It is the strangest brand of journalism I have ever seen.  Fox is reporting he might change his position on Iraq when he comes home. What is this based on? Nothing.  But he might.

Everyone is reporting he might make a gaff in Israel.  Why? Dunno, but he might.

Last week it was reported he might have a bad fundraising month in June.  Why?  No reason.  But he might have.  He didn't (52 mil, almost broke his own all-time record).

Today the media is reporting he might not get as big a crowd as the media expects (think about that logical construct for a second) at the Brandenburg Gate.  Fox News has set the "disappointment threshold at ONE MILLION!).  They know something we don't? Nope. But it might happen.

Meanwhile John McCain is clearly demonstrating he don't know shit about shit but the press is reporting he might actually be a political genius and the gaffes are just random cosmic burps are something.  On second thought, change that might to definteley is.

As for the media pack mentality.  I have long conteneded two things about the media and McCain.

1) There is an opportunity to make your career as a mid-level journalist by driving the "John McCain has no idea what he is talking about" story to the front page.

2) Once that happens no one (besides Fox obviously) can ignore it.

Problem is McCain had his 100th Tank photo-shock therapy-Donna Rice-I was for it before I was against it-no new taxes- Brooklyn Dodgers moment night before last and I can hardly find hide nor hair of it on the MSM websites and my local paper did not mention it at all.

by ProfRich on 07/24/2008 01:04:44 PM EST

[ Parent ]
hmmmm (none / 0)
Now that you put it that way.

by bfaul on 07/24/2008 01:55:17 PM EST

[ Parent ]
the essence of what frustrates us (none / 0)

you nailed it rich. While John McCain's campaign whines about media bias, there is actual media bias and it's almost completely in McCain's favor. Meanwhile it is not biased for the media to cover Obama's speeches (that seems to be the essence of the complaint) because tens of thousands of people show up to listen. He always fills to capacity regardless of the venue, and overflow is always turned away. That is a newsworthy event. If the other candidate can't gin up enough enthusiasm to fill an auditorium, it's not newsworthy (photo of McCain audience Wednesday):

by hazmat on 07/24/2008 02:42:24 PM EST

[ Parent ]
lol (none / 0)
It's no wonder he sticks to Town Hall meetings!!!  How many Vivarin would one have to take to stay awake through a McCain speech?

by desertpear on 07/24/2008 05:56:06 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Ahem (none / 0)

want to hear something really sad?

That was a town hall meeting.

by hazmat on 07/24/2008 06:36:44 PM EST

[ Parent ]
oh sheet (none / 0)
You just made me snort out loud.

by desertpear on 07/25/2008 12:52:28 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Berlin FD reports 200,000 (none / 0)
people showed up for Obama's victory column speech.

by hazmat on 07/24/2008 06:38:23 PM EST

[ Parent ]
damn those mother frackkers (none / 0)
for beating my home state of Oregon for biggest rally.

by desertpear on 07/25/2008 12:57:29 AM EST

[ Parent ]
The Problem Is... (none / 0)
"Problem is McCain had his 100th Tank photo-shock therapy-Donna Rice-I was for it before I was against it-no new taxes- Brooklyn Dodgers moment night before last and I can hardly find hide nor hair of it on the MSM websites and my local paper did not mention it at all."

The reason you don't find it in the news is in your very own statement.  It's his 100th gaff.  So many reporters have seen him do this they don't even get phased by it anymore.  At this point, I dare say McCain would have to have a moment of incontinence on camera for a reporter to notice.  I can't blame the reporters, though.  Have you listened to a McCain speech?  They deserve credit for not outright laughing (as reporters did when Dukakis rode around on his tank) and thanks for not snoring while mic-ed.

by Kang the Conqueror on 07/25/2008 12:12:23 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Ahhh, the wisdom of the 40th Century (none / 0)

It could be that the one reporter covering McCain fell asleep.

MCCaina Strikes! 

by ProfRich on 07/25/2008 12:41:36 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Let's just call him "old" (none / 0)

We should call the guy Old Faithful.

I can't deny that he's old.  But faithful?  Carol wouldn't like to here him described that way. 

by OneHitKill on 07/24/2008 09:57:35 PM EST

another excellent point (none / 0)
TYT should front-page good posts like this.  McCain wants it both ways. 

by desertpear on 07/25/2008 01:08:56 AM EST

Notes on a Scandal: The Old Man and the C BS. | 18 comments (18 topical, 0 hidden)
 Display: