September 10th Priorities
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in 2008 Election, 9/11, Barack, McCainConsider this…
On the day before September 11th, supposedly one of the most serious and sober days in this nation’s history, John McCain’s campaign treated us to an argument about the use of a commonly used idiom.
Not only that, they dispatched partisan operatives throughout the mainstream media to push that point, and they did so without even a whiff of irony or acknowledgment of the day to follow. They genuinely and seriously wanted all of us to believe that Obama had called Sarah Palin a pig, when the video clearly and definitively proved the exact opposite.
But no, that didn’t stop them from creating an ad with the comment clipped out of context. It didn’t even stop them from clipping a comment from Katie Couric out of context suggesting that she was responding to Obama’s use of the idiom.
It’s hard to think of a presidential campaign with a wider chasm between the seriousness of the issues confronting the country and the triviality, so far anyway, of the political discourse. On a day when the Congressional Budget Office warned of looming deficits and a grim economic outlook, when the stock market faltered even in the wake of the government’s rescue of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, when President Bush discussed the road ahead in Iraq and Afghanistan, on what did the campaign of Sen. John McCain spend its energy? A conference call to denounce Sen. Barack Obama for using the phrase “lipstick on a pig†and a new television ad accusing the Democrat of wanting to teach kindergartners about sex before they learn to read. [...]John McCain is a serious man who promised to wage a serious campaign. Win or lose, will he be able to look back on this one with pride? Right now, it’s hard to see how.
I think everybody should just take a moment and ask themselves, after 8 years of one of the most openly and unapologetically partisan administrations in modern times, do you really want to elect a guy who will put out the childishly false garbage we’ve seen in the past couple days?
And, do you really think McCain will be able to bring “reform” to Washington when he’s running a campaign like this?
We deserve better.
Moving on…
This entry was posted on Thursday, September 11th, 2008 and is filed under 2008 Election, 9/11, Barack, McCain. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
September 11th, 2008 at 9:51 am
I think anyone expecting genuine reform or change from either candidate is sorely delusional. The best we can hope for in the next FOUR years is a relatively quiet time when we can lick our governmental wounds and recover from the mistakes of the past eight.
September 11th, 2008 at 9:59 am
Holy crap, Justin Gardner! It’s almost like…like…liike a political season, er sumpin’?!?
Ohhh, it get worse…
“…and they did so without even a whiff of irony or acknowledgment of the day to follow.” Th-th-those bastards!!!
*sob*
September 11th, 2008 at 10:32 am
“…after 8 years of one of the most openly and unapologetically partisan administrations in modern times,”
Oh, I’m sorry. Did you mean to say “after 7 years of successfully preventing any and all major terrorist attacks on U.S. soil, do you really want to elect a guy who will seek out & destroy Islamic terrorist wherever they are?”
Yeah. I’ll take that one.
September 11th, 2008 at 10:36 am
About Us: “Tired of the rhetoric, bomb-throwing and partisan hackery? Here we offer a respectful, honest forum for people who want to have a conversation about politics, the world and beyond.”
Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Good one!
September 11th, 2008 at 10:43 am
Snoop,
Seems like a fair enough post to me. If you don’t like the argument being posed by JG, you should respond like you have the ability to form coherent arguments without the excessive use of empty sarcasm and vapid facts (i.e. you cannot prove any attacks were “prevented,” only that no attacks in fact did occur).
Just wanted to put my 2 cents in; anyone can look through the history of posts (and comments btw) and see that there is a fair discussion and no point of view goes unchallenged on this blog. Something I appreciate.
September 11th, 2008 at 10:52 am
Justin,
Well this is a bit over the top. I could do a search and replace on this post, substitute Obama for McCain and make the same charge** vs. Obama. After all – those words came out of his mouth, and the people laughing in the room knew he was talking about Palin and McCain. As I showed in my post on the topic, many liberal democratic feminist women consider his comments sexist and knew he was talking about Palin. My point is that this episode is just not worth the high dudgeon coming from either side.
**Except for the ad – but then I could add that Obama chose to go on David Letterman on the eve of “the most serious and sober days in this nation’s history” and make jokes about lipstick on a pig, question his judgment. etc. etc.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:52 am
Its a good thing that there is such a clear difference in the campaigning style of these two candidates; that way, we can determine who is the right man to be president. We don’t have to worry about those pesky things like “issues” or “values” or “experience” to get in the way of our decision making.
An over the top campaign ad in September of an election year? What a shocking disgrace! Clearly this man can’t be president, whatever his political positions are – as if they matter anyway.
September 11th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
“…(i.e. you cannot prove any attacks were “prevented,†only that no attacks in fact did occur).”
Yes! We! Can, L! A multitude of Islamic extremist cells have been disrupted by both federal and local authorities every year, since 2001. Take your pick: http://www.fbi.gov/page2/page2index/counterterror.htm
Glad you’re staying so nice & cozy in the free country provided at no inconvenience to you.
“…no point of view goes unchallenged on this blog. Something I appreciate.”
Bold, L. A very bold statement indeed.
September 11th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
First off, you have NO idea what the people in that room were thinking. In fact, since that idiom is so commonly used, do you think they may have been responding to Obama’s use of it in the exact context he used it in? It’s not like it’s an unfunny line. So please, spare me the mind reading and stick to the facts.
Second, I don’t care what liberal democratic feminist women bloggers think about the comment. If you watch the video tape it is absolutely, 100% clear that he’s talking about McCain’s policies when compared to Bush’s. Reactionaries can think whatever they want. It doesn’t make it true.
And mw, let’s not be naive. The McCain camp pushed this, the media bought in and then Obama HAD to respond to a ridiculous charge. And if you’ll watch the entire clip of the Letterman show, he actually talked about the policy differences between the two. Sure, he had to respond to it, but he moved past it.
@Jimmy, no, this wasn’t just an “over the top” campaign ad. It was an absolute lie. You’re telling me, as an intellectually honest person, that you don’t care that the lipstick ad took TWO pieces of video out of context to try and gin up a controversy that simply wasn’t there? Really? I know we have vast policy differences, but on at least this I thought we could agree that McCain was way out of bounds.
@Snoop-Diggity-DANG-Dawg – If it’s not obvious to you that pointing out the hypocrisy of what McCain did is a perfect EXAMPLE of why a blog like this needs to exist, then you just don’t understand Donklephant. So either join the conversation in earnest or go away.
September 11th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
I am sure that some attacks were prevented, but I credit the men and women at the tip of the spear (LE, military, and intel agency personnel) rather than George Bush and Dick Cheney, let alone the Republican Party.
I agree with ExiledIndependent about what the next four years mean, unfortunately. But I know we have serious issues in this country that we need to be addressing in this campaign If McCain would rather stir up fake outrage (”OMG! He called Sarah Palin a pig!”) than address real issues, that doesn’t make me want to vote for him.
September 11th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
It’s time to ignore McCain and Palin. These are serious times, with serious problems and they require serious people to deal with them.
McCain/Palin is clearly not up to the task.
September 11th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
Well, I think when Barack Obama keeps saying that McCain is a right wing extremist who has been in lockstep with the Bush administration for 8 years and plans to continue in his image – that its a lie as well. As a “centerist” who has always shown respect for McCain as a moderate politician, you should have come to the same conclusion.
Alas, I think you are more Donkle than Donklephant, you have drunk the Kool-Aid of Obama’s chalice of “hope,” as if that is an actual policy initiative, and much like Andrew Sullivan (who once referred to himself as a member of the “McCain-Lieberman party”) you are turning into hyperpartisan supporter of Obama, and Anti-McCain at all costs.
September 11th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
“@Snoop-Diggity-DANG-Dawg – If it’s not obvious to you that pointing out the hypocrisy of what McCain did is a perfect EXAMPLE of why a blog like this needs to exist”
Hey, it’s POLITICS, ya’ whiny little girl. Here’s a news flash for you: McCain wants to win. Get over it.
@patrikios “I am sure that some attacks were prevented, but I credit the men and women at the tip of the spear (LE, military, and intel agency personnel) rather than George Bush and Dick Cheney, let alone the Republican Party.”
No kidding?!? And how exactly would that be different under Obama? Is he PERSONALLY going to go out and risk his neck?
Bottom line is, whether you hate him or not, the Bush administration has not allowed another terror attack on our country. That may not be ultimate success, but it sure as heck ain’t failure.
September 11th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
“It’s time to ignore McCain and Palin. These are serious times, with serious problems and they require serious people to deal with them.
McCain/Palin is clearly not up to the task.”
gerryf: more Donkle than Donklephant.
September 11th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Third off. If I have NO idea what the people in that room were thinking, then neither do you. I did watch the video tape and it is absolutely 100% clear to me that the people in the room thought Obama ws playing off Palin’s convention speech and taking a shot at both Palin and McCain. So with all due respect, I find the “facts” derived from your mind reading skills to be no more credible than mine,
September 11th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
Did you mean to say “after 7 years of successfully preventing any and all major terrorist attacks on U.S. soil…
No, I think he meant to to say “after 7 years we have the highest unemployment rate and inflation rate in a couple decades, home values are deflating, some of our finest financial institutions are ready to collapse, the budget defecit is at an all time high, home foreclosures are by far the highest they’ve ever been, oil costs over $100 a barrel and we have an elderly clown running for president who wants to talk about lipstick on a pig, which is exactly what he’s offering”.
You can take that, too.
September 11th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Snoop,
It’s bad enough you regurgitate the McCain tripe, but now you’re quoting fellow bloggers? At least Jimmy comes up with his own material.
MW,
I will take you at your word, but I had completely forgotten about Palin’s statement. It never even occured to me when Obama said it that he was even remotely talking about Palin until people started making something of it the next day…Indeed, I completely forgot the said it.
I am pretty stunned you were able to make the connection immediately, and would be pretty stunned if the room respond laughing at it made the same connection immediately.
Listening still, in context, I still cannot see anyone seriously thinking this without the hubub that has been stirred since then.
Think about it–has Obama previously demonstrated subtlety like this? I’m sure somene can come up with something, but for the most part his speeches have been very clear in his meaning…that’s not to say he is not capable of it, just that it runs contrary to experience. Also, it seemed to be a more extemporaneous moment of the speech–an area that is not his strong suit.
Overall, though, he has been very careful to not fall into the Kerry trap of avoiding ambiguity. Now, that’s not to say that he cannot be subtle–a man of his oratory skills can pull off what he wants, but it just doesn’t fit right with what we have seen.
Anyway, I think you’ve made some good points on this issue, some I might not have considered so thanks for that. Ultimately, this comes down to interpretation since none of us can crawl inside their his head at the moment he was speaking.
September 11th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
“after 7 years we have the highest unemployment rate and inflation rate in a couple decades”
False. They’re both still at historic lows.
“home values are deflating”
Home values have always been cyclical.
“some of our finest financial institutions are ready to collapse”
Not George Bush’s fault. Thanks for playin’, though.
“the budget defecit is at an all time high
OK, I grant you that one.
“home foreclosures are by far the highest they’ve ever been”
Again, not George Bush’s fault.
“oil costs over $100 a barrel”
This one belongs to the Dems, who wwon’t let anyone drill anywhere, can’t build a new refinery, can’t build a nuclear power plant, etc. That one’s definitely NOT George Bush’s fault.
“and we have an eldrly clown running for president who wants to talk about lipstick on a pig, which is exactly what he’s offeringâ€.”
Meh. So don’t vote for him. What do I care?
September 11th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
“but now you’re quoting fellow bloggers?”
Jimmy’s a good man. Plagerism is the sincerest form of flattery, isn’t it, Jimmy?
September 11th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
Yes, it is politics, and McCain wants to win. If the country had as little in the way of problems as Snoop wants us to think, I would just take it for granted. But we do have serious challenges (economic, energy, environmental and so forth). And I know Snoop and Jimmy would be whining like little girls if Obama took something McCain said ridiculously out of context and ran an ad about it.
September 11th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
I have discussed Carl Jung’s theory of synchronicity in regards to the campaign before – I believe my application was regarding Obama’s middle name and the fact that we had just toppled a dictator by the same name.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronicity
We could here have ANOTHER case of political synchronicity, but this time with lipstick. Or, as mw suggested, Obama was of such subtle wit that he consciously identified the synchronicity (which in fact implies its plausible deniability of its real meaning) and swung for the fence not fully playing out its implications. I’m thinking I probably agree with mw on this one.
…you see this is what I’m talking about…one of the captcha work is “mastick” — how f&^*ing close is that to “lipstick”…
September 11th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
The more I consider this important issue, the more I am in agreement with mw. Either Obama is rather witty and he saw an opportunity to use a line for its double meaning or he is a ldunce. And I don’t believe he is a dunce. The cliche’ political metonymy (lipstick on a pig)provided him an opportunity and its common political application created plausible deniability. But if he didn’t use it for its double meaning it would show him to be a political clutz (even by his VP’s standards) and a rheotorical dunce -neither which he appears to be. So I think that he said it for the association and he was equally as certain that good soldiers like Justin would take up arms. But at least if he complains about the sharpness of McCain’s campaign it will be the pot calling the kettle black.
I should be president.
September 11th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Snoop, thanks for the website link. If you admit that this success has nothing to do with Bush, “And how exactly would that be different under Obama?†then in one of your first posts you can’t attribute that success to Bush.
Also, the unemployment rate isn’t as telling about the state of the economy as real median income, which after an initial drop did not go up, but remained stagnant. http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/27/ Just take a look at the past few administrations to see how poor a performance this is. You can also look at the U6, a rate of un- and under-employment in the US, and will see that it is not in fact at historic lows, but in an even worse position than after the 2001 recession.
As far as blaming Dems for high oil, Dems took control in 2006. Even had off-shore drilling begun immediately we would not see the benefits for another 5 or 6 years – that is 7 to 8 years total (at least). Also, Dems are not blocking nuclear power plants, there are currently applications filed and construction under way of some new plants.
September 11th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Hey L, if you think the economy under President Bush was bad, just wait until what happens next. Watch this to find out what I mean.
September 11th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Justin,
You might as well give up reasoning with mw. He’s in love. Deeply, madly in love with McCain, Palin and the RNC. He’s bought completely into whatever they say right now and it’s going to stay that way at least through November. At least that is certainly what his posts over the last month or so have shown again and again. People that deeply in love just can’t see anything wrong with the object of their affection.
September 11th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
I have never seen anyone claim that 6.1% unemployment is a historic low. And that number doesn’t even account for the estimated 3.7 million people that are involuntarily working part time.
September 11th, 2008 at 9:29 pm
I don’t think that MW is anymore in love with McCain than I am in love with Obama, but I think that this election is an extension of the last eight years of political hyper-partisanship.
MW is definitely right of center and has said so, but both the left and right have encouraged partisanship with their inability to debate issues and constant efforts to drive a wedge between the two sides has resulted in people taking positions–even extreme ones.
Donklephant has been a place in the past where people meeting in the middle, but the closer this election comes the wider the chasm between the sides grows.
I have always enjoyed the comments from the folks on the right until very recently–I might disagree with them, but I thought they brought something to the table to consider. In recent weeks, I have to admit, I cannot honestly believe some of the things coming from people.
I have become so cynical that I thing some people are making arguments just to be contrary and they really cannot believe the BS they are pushing–and I am pretty certain people feel the same way about what I write.
I admit that I am a left leaner, but I was not fully commited to Obama a month ago–I actually could have voted for McCain then depending on how things turned. It wasn’t likely, but I can honestly say it was possible. Heck, I voted for him in 2000.
Something in the past fews weeks has thrown me violently to the left–so much so I find it hard to recognize myself these days.
I heard Rush Limbaugh say today that people who are independents are too cowardly to take a side. I heard that and actually wondered for a bit.
Screw Limbaugh.
It’s that kind of attitude that has infected politics. And to think that both these candidates actually came to prominence in the primaries because we thought they would promote reaching across the aisle, but the process is so poisoned now it may not be possible.
September 12th, 2008 at 8:59 am
“If you admit that this success has nothing to do with Bush”. OK, L, George Bush is not personally running around looking for bad guys, but ‘yes’, it is in fact, his administration’s policies that have rounded up a lot of these guys. FISA Act (I’m sure you hate it but it works), lifting Clinton’s hiring freeze at federal law enforcement agencies, and authoring aggressive policies empowering our guys to do what they need to do.
“As far as blaming Dems for high oil, Dems took control in 2006.”
But they’ve obstructing development since the Carter administration.
“Even had off-shore drilling begun immediately we would not see the benefits for another 5 or 6 years – that is 7 to 8 years total (at least).”
What a GREAT excuse to keep on doing NOTHING! “I won’t see an instantaneous benefit at the pump, so why do anything?”
“Also, Dems are not blocking nuclear power plants…”
Democrats have been beholden to the seirra club and every other enviro-group for decades, demonizing one of the safest, cleanest, efficient and carbon-free power sources since 1978, and you know it. This, despite demanding that we somehow magically achieve “energy independence”.
Sorry folks. Wind mills and solar panel are not the panacea. Build as many as you like, but they will never get us more than 5-10% of our energy. The only reasonable, plausible answer is nuclear power.
And thank God the left is finally waking up to reality.