Heh, a kid I work with gave me a fist-bump earlier today, and when I said "oh no, now we're terrorists!" he was confused. I explained to him the whole terrorist-fist-jab hullabaloo, and he said to me, in all seriousness, "well, we don't really know. I mean, he claims to be a Christian, but he was raised a Muslim. Who knows what he was taught."
My urge to kill was held back only by the knowledge that he wasn't old enough to vote yet.
I'm getting so burned out on politics; any time someone brings up the subject I end up spending 90% of the conversation correcting misinformation and outright ignorance. I guess I should be happy that people are actively seeking me out as a source of political knowledge, but god dammit people can we talk about something other than omg-secret-muslim?
I hate living in west Michigan [strike]sometimes[/strike] pretty much all the time. I can only hope the level of discussion around here goes up a few notches once the campaign season is in full swing.
The fact that being a muslim is considered a negative at all is probably the most discouraging aspect of it. It shouldn't fucking matter in the first place, but oh noes terrorist cells in the legislature!!! Grah!
Agreed, and the most frustrating aspect for me is deciding which aspect of the argument to lead with - "He's not a Muslim" or "What the fuck does it matter anyway?"
'He's a Christian, why does it matter?' is my token response because it refutes the claim and sorta promotes navel gazing about being afraid of/hating on muslims. Xenophobic navel gazing.
3) Republicans (and really, a lot of MSM talking heads) need to learn to read and/or completely listen to people, and maybe try not thinking the worst of people.
I think that statement is applicable to people in general. I didn't see the left lining up to pore over the context of McCain's "100 years" comment, for example.
I thought Obama and Clinton's continuous reiteration of an obvious McCain gaffe during the primaries was pretty embarrassing actually.
3) Republicans (and really, a lot of MSM talking heads) need to learn to read and/or completely listen to people, and maybe try not thinking the worst of people.
I think that statement is applicable to people in general. I didn't see the left lining up to pore over the context of McCain's "100 years" comment, for example.
I thought Obama and Clinton's continuous reiteration of an obvious McCain gaffe during the primaries was pretty embarrassing actually.
I wish they had framed it right. Empire, not 100 years of war. Ah well.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
That he doesn't mind if we have a permanent military presence in the Middle East, which is a really fucking stupid thing to do?
Nah, that he's somehow bellicose or that all things being equal, he'd prefer it.
He tried to put it in context by comparing the future of Iraq to the way Korea is now, sorta skipping over the fact that it's going to take years (probably more than 5) to "stabilize" the country. Having permanent bases over there isn't going to help with stabilization either. Personally, I think his 100 years comment reflects more on his desire to have us in constant conflict in the middle east. Because that's exactly what putting down permanent bases is going to imply and engender.
'He's a Christian, why does it matter?' is my token response because it refutes the claim and sorta promotes navel gazing about being afraid of/hating on muslims. Xenophobic navel gazing.
Maybe I’m odd, but I’ve never found my navel terribly interesting or attractive.
Hopefully Obama is working up a speech to deal with this, because he clearly can't count on Clark to sort this out at this point. As big of a bone headed, and horribly timed, blunder as this was, now that we're here this might be an opportunity for Obama to focus attention on the legitimate attack against McCain.
His experience shouldn't give him a free pass on promoting horrible foreign policy, and if Obama can get the mainstream media to finally take a critical look at what McCain is saying, he's going to go a long way to completely de-toothing McCain.
'He's a Christian, why does it matter?' is my token response because it refutes the claim and sorta promotes navel gazing about being afraid of/hating on muslims. Xenophobic navel gazing.
Maybe I’m odd, but I’ve never found my navel terribly interesting or attractive.
Hopefully Obama is working up a speech to deal with this, because he clearly can't count on Clark to sort this out at this point. As big of a bone headed, and horribly timed, blunder as this was, now that we're here this might be an opportunity for Obama to focus attention on the legitimate attack against McCain.
His experience shouldn't give him a free pass on promoting horrible foreign policy, and if Obama can get the mainstream media to finally take a critical look at what McCain is saying, he's going to go a long way to completely de-toothing McCain.
Haha, you must be new here. The "liberal media" is going to treat this issue like any other concerning McCain, namely using it to toss his salad. Saying they're fellating him wouldn't do justice to the stupidity that pundits have descended to.
'He's a Christian, why does it matter?' is my token response because it refutes the claim and sorta promotes navel gazing about being afraid of/hating on muslims. Xenophobic navel gazing.
Maybe I’m odd, but I’ve never found my navel terribly interesting or attractive.
Not allowing McCain to wave his military experience wang around freely, and it's horribly timed because it's never a good time to raise legitimate questions about a person's military service unless the person is a Democrat.
The media isn't so liberal or partisan at all, most of the time. The only thing it sides with is sensationalism. They just want to jump onto a story that they think will get ratings.
Hopefully Obama is working up a speech to deal with this, because he clearly can't count on Clark to sort this out at this point. As big of a bone headed, and horribly timed, blunder as this was, now that we're here this might be an opportunity for Obama to focus attention on the legitimate attack against McCain.
His experience shouldn't give him a free pass on promoting horrible foreign policy, and if Obama can get the mainstream media to finally take a critical look at what McCain is saying, he's going to go a long way to completely de-toothing McCain.
Haha, you must be new here. The "liberal media" is going to treat this issue like any other concerning McCain, namely using it to toss his salad. Saying they're fellating him wouldn't do justice to the stupidity that pundits have descended to.
I'm well aware the media has a huge stiffy for McCain.
I also know the only thing they love more than blowing him is creating controversy where there is none. So if the idea of questioning McCain's experience in terms of command readiness and how valid his foreign policy is in an objective sense takes root, the very fact the media hasn't stopped fawning over him will get the tons of discussion coverage with dueling talking heads. And given pretty much every military leader who isn't insane hates the McCain/Bush strategy, we can get same damn fine surrogates out there hammering him, hopefully without putting their foot in their mouth like Clark did.
In context? Nothing. When you cut out the fact that he's parroting Schiefer it sounds tone deaf to most people and provides an opening to claim that someone's attacking Saint McCain.
It's poorly timed because this is going to be obsessed over for another day or so completely undercutting Obama's big speeches that he had planned for this week.
It's a blunder because Clark used too many damn clauses to get across an idea in sound byte city, and it's horribly timed because it shit all over Obama's speech on patriotism, which was actually damn good, but gets either completely ignored in favor of tearing down Obama's image by association, or is mentioned only as a weak rebuttal of Clark.
Hopefully Obama is working up a speech to deal with this, because he clearly can't count on Clark to sort this out at this point. As big of a bone headed, and horribly timed, blunder as this was, now that we're here this might be an opportunity for Obama to focus attention on the legitimate attack against McCain.
His experience shouldn't give him a free pass on promoting horrible foreign policy, and if Obama can get the mainstream media to finally take a critical look at what McCain is saying, he's going to go a long way to completely de-toothing McCain.
Haha, you must be new here. The "liberal media" is going to treat this issue like any other concerning McCain, namely using it to toss his salad. Saying they're fellating him wouldn't do justice to the stupidity that pundits have descended to.
I'm well aware the media has a huge stiffy for McCain.
I also know the only thing they love more than blowing him is creating controversy where there is none. So if the idea of questioning McCain's experience in terms of command readiness and how valid his foreign policy is in an objective sense takes root, the very fact the media hasn't stopped fawning over him will get the tons of discussion coverage with dueling talking heads. And given pretty much every military leader who isn't insane hates the McCain/Bush strategy, we can get same damn fine surrogates out there hammering him, hopefully without putting their foot in their mouth like Clark did.
Except the ones who need to be questioning McCain's experience are the media. And it's more than clear that they would prefer that someone else say something so they can go all "OMG, on no he di'int!"
Yeah, I'm of half the mind that they should dig deeper Clark's line of attack. I haven't been watching too much of the MSM coverage, but I did see the Ragin' Cajun defending Clark and saying there was nothing to apologize for. McCain's camp is raising a shitfit precisely because if Clark's line of reasoning sinks in it will be a serious blow to his sales pitch.
Edit: Here's an easy soundbite version of the attack: "McCain made honorable sacrifices for his country, but that doesn't mean he is qualified to run it." Pick a variation of something like that, and run with it.
Other people have gotten to this before me, but it's also worth emphasizing the main problem, which is that the media has fuckall to talk about for the next month. While the primaries were still going on, the most this would last is a week, but with nothing else to distract them, they've got airtime to fill and the outrage factories are still manufacturing at full production.
Other people have gotten to this before me, but it's also worth emphasizing the main problem, which is that the media has fuckall to talk about for the next month. While the primaries were still going on, the most this would last is a week, but with nothing else to distract them, they've got airtime to fill and the outrage factories are still manufacturing at full production.
Every day at lunch on my way out of the building I walk passed a cafe. Every day I walk passed, the television has Barack Obama giving a speech and the room is full of people. The television is tuned to Fox News.
I don't think Obama's speeches are getting tuned out.
Other people have gotten to this before me, but it's also worth emphasizing the main problem, which is that the media has fuckall to talk about for the next month. While the primaries were still going on, the most this would last is a week, but with nothing else to distract them, they've got airtime to fill and the outrage factories are still manufacturing at full production.
Other people have gotten to this before me, but it's also worth emphasizing the main problem, which is that the media has fuckall to talk about for the next month. While the primaries were still going on, the most this would last is a week, but with nothing else to distract them, they've got airtime to fill and the outrage factories are still manufacturing at full production.
Other people have gotten to this before me, but it's also worth emphasizing the main problem, which is that the media has fuckall to talk about for the next month. While the primaries were still going on, the most this would last is a week, but with nothing else to distract them, they've got airtime to fill and the outrage factories are still manufacturing at full production.
Every day at lunch on my way out of the building I walk passed a cafe. Every day I walk passed, the television has Barack Obama giving a speech and the room is full of people. The television is tuned to Fox News.
I don't think Obama's speeches are getting tuned out.
I'd like to think that, but what I've seen of fox news makes me pretty sure that if they're showing anything Obama is saying it's either out of context, or to give the talking heads a specific focus for their bile in the next 30 minutes.
I'd love to be wrong, but somehow I doubt they decided to become a real news network while I wasn't looking.
Every day at lunch on my way out of the building I walk passed a cafe. Every day I walk passed, the television has Barack Obama giving a speech and the room is full of people. The television is tuned to Fox News.
I don't think Obama's speeches are getting tuned out.
Not if you're reliant on evening broadcasts/summaries on Nightly, or equivalent. The obsessives will find it out, but my parents just watch the 5 o'clock news and it doesn't even mention anything substantial on the election that isn't a tit for tat tiffy.
It's still not Snubgate. As long as it doesn't dip below that level of inanity I won't feel any real urges to find a journalist and light him or her afire.
Posts
'He's a Christian, why does it matter?' is my token response because it refutes the claim and sorta promotes navel gazing about being afraid of/hating on muslims. Xenophobic navel gazing.
that was terrible, elks
I thought Obama and Clinton's continuous reiteration of an obvious McCain gaffe during the primaries was pretty embarrassing actually.
Still can't compete with Vitter-Craig demanding respect for the sanctity of marriage. We are living in the Onion.
Jesus Tapdancing Christ.
I can't even watch 3 minutes of that. This makes me really goddamn sad about the state of journalism in the country.
I wish they had framed it right. Empire, not 100 years of war. Ah well.
He tried to put it in context by comparing the future of Iraq to the way Korea is now, sorta skipping over the fact that it's going to take years (probably more than 5) to "stabilize" the country. Having permanent bases over there isn't going to help with stabilization either. Personally, I think his 100 years comment reflects more on his desire to have us in constant conflict in the middle east. Because that's exactly what putting down permanent bases is going to imply and engender.
His experience shouldn't give him a free pass on promoting horrible foreign policy, and if Obama can get the mainstream media to finally take a critical look at what McCain is saying, he's going to go a long way to completely de-toothing McCain.
That's not journalism, it's a long string of pundits trying to stir up shit.
Which would be fine, if it wasn't the only thing approaching journalism far too many Americans get.
That's because your navel isn't bigoted.
Haha, you must be new here. The "liberal media" is going to treat this issue like any other concerning McCain, namely using it to toss his salad. Saying they're fellating him wouldn't do justice to the stupidity that pundits have descended to.
BLAAAAAGGGH.
That is the only response I could gather.
Not allowing McCain to wave his military experience wang around freely, and it's horribly timed because it's never a good time to raise legitimate questions about a person's military service unless the person is a Democrat.
Whatever.
I'm well aware the media has a huge stiffy for McCain.
I also know the only thing they love more than blowing him is creating controversy where there is none. So if the idea of questioning McCain's experience in terms of command readiness and how valid his foreign policy is in an objective sense takes root, the very fact the media hasn't stopped fawning over him will get the tons of discussion coverage with dueling talking heads. And given pretty much every military leader who isn't insane hates the McCain/Bush strategy, we can get same damn fine surrogates out there hammering him, hopefully without putting their foot in their mouth like Clark did.
Pretty much.
In context? Nothing. When you cut out the fact that he's parroting Schiefer it sounds tone deaf to most people and provides an opening to claim that someone's attacking Saint McCain.
It's poorly timed because this is going to be obsessed over for another day or so completely undercutting Obama's big speeches that he had planned for this week.
It's a blunder because Clark used too many damn clauses to get across an idea in sound byte city, and it's horribly timed because it shit all over Obama's speech on patriotism, which was actually damn good, but gets either completely ignored in favor of tearing down Obama's image by association, or is mentioned only as a weak rebuttal of Clark.
Except the ones who need to be questioning McCain's experience are the media. And it's more than clear that they would prefer that someone else say something so they can go all "OMG, on no he di'int!"
Edit: Here's an easy soundbite version of the attack: "McCain made honorable sacrifices for his country, but that doesn't mean he is qualified to run it." Pick a variation of something like that, and run with it.
Well, they could talk about Iraq or Afghanistan.
Every day at lunch on my way out of the building I walk passed a cafe. Every day I walk passed, the television has Barack Obama giving a speech and the room is full of people. The television is tuned to Fox News.
I don't think Obama's speeches are getting tuned out.
So fucking true.
I agree.
Who else wants Dracomicron to cry?
I'd like to think that, but what I've seen of fox news makes me pretty sure that if they're showing anything Obama is saying it's either out of context, or to give the talking heads a specific focus for their bile in the next 30 minutes.
I'd love to be wrong, but somehow I doubt they decided to become a real news network while I wasn't looking.
Not if you're reliant on evening broadcasts/summaries on Nightly, or equivalent. The obsessives will find it out, but my parents just watch the 5 o'clock news and it doesn't even mention anything substantial on the election that isn't a tit for tat tiffy.
People