Showing posts with label CNN and as found in the Spokesman-Review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CNN and as found in the Spokesman-Review. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 30, 2008

Election takes

Cal Thomas started off on his usual rant about Senator Obama, indeed his (republished to the Spokesman-Review) column starts off with Obama not being the second coming. If Mr. Thomas is that quick to deride and dismiss Obama's soaring rhetoric, I expect it is also because Senator John McCain's own rhetoric stumbles so heavily that he becomes a joke. If anything, a worse joke than GW. In any of the columns that I read, Mr. Thomas' latest is probably the first time he ever mentioned "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart;" and only because Stewart had mocked Obama for visiting the birthplace of Christ, Bethleham where he was born. But, Thomas did not see fit to note how often Stewart had also mocked John McCain. Well now, that would be because Jon Stewart is an equal opportunity mocker of all things political, no matter what party. And an equal opportunist when it comes to playing games with Main Stream Media. It doesn't matter whom he lampoons. Which brings me to a last night "Daily Show" where Stewart hosted author Bill Bishop who says that any more, this nation divides along lifestyle lines. People, when they vote, vote according to the idea that the candidate is "just like me." Which makes it interesting that this nation would vote for doofus GW twice given the wrack and ruin he brought to the U.S. over two terms. We actually have a 51% majority who'd gleefully engage in ruining the nation's economy, wreaking the U.S. Constitution, be more than willing to spy on their neighbors based solely on a suspicion that their neighbors were terrorists? No, make that some 20 odd percent that probably still would. The rest were lied to. But where was GW ever like anyone else in the U.S?

Too bad that CNN didn't have Bishop touting his book "The Big Sort" on "The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer." It just might be that Bishop would have easily answered a Jack Cafferty question about why Obama wasn't doing better in the polls. Because Obama actually doesn't fit into anybody's idea of a lifestyle category perhaps. But the fact that he is ahead in most polls, no doubt also suggests that people have become increasingly tired of GW and the obstructionist GOP. Oh, and by the way, the latest major scandal involving the GOP is Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska indicted now on various corruption charges. Just what Senator McCain needs in an election year, right? He only shared Senate chambers with Stevens, and you can be sure the GOP taint will be hard to wash off.

And finally, Les Payne a columnist for Newsday gets republished in the Spokesman-Review, Wednesday, 30 July 2008. He details that McCain reallly isn't all that he is cracked up to be and likely padded his resume a bit more thoroughly than can even be claimed about Obama. Seems Payne did some checking of his military career. McCain did not graduate at the top of his class. That his own military career is actually more comparable to that of GW who had himself, a hard time even learning how to fly an Air National Guard jet. And McCain as "cocky fighter pilot" had his own comparisons to GW according to Les Payne's column. But that "cocky fighter pilots" did not make it to commanders, IE wing commanders. Reading Payne's column through, it is a thoroughly damning indictment of what makes McCain not qualified to be Commander in Chief. A fellow who, like GW could too easily be the butt of late night jokes. Whom we can all laugh at if only to not end up crying.


Sarcastic Clap

Thursday, May 29, 2008

Whiners in Chief

Having the day off but having to go to a dental appointment and then onto the downtown Sherman Avenue and 5th Street Kootenai County Farmer's Market, I got in on some of CNN and did some planting out of the stuff I had to sell; and watched replays of former President Bill Clinton whining and attacking his fellow Democrats for a "cover up" concerning Senator Hillary Clinton's chances of getting into the White House. "She's winning the general election right now," he said. Uh huh, she lost more states than did her Democratic opponent, I do believe she lost a primary battle with Senator Obama in Idaho, and she is winning the general election right now? If you count the votes of rule breakers Michigan and Florida and dismiss the caucus states that Obama won, then you can claim that Senator Clinton is a victim of sexism and a cover up. But in those states that Senator Clinton did win, seems race was a factor and both he and she were prepared to play up the factors of race. Because Senator Obama stands in the way of an easy walk to the White House. But by the very fact that Senator Obama has weathered many a storm inclusive of Jeremiah Wright and come out of it fairly unscathed, and has gone on to win even more contests, there is no question that Obama is a credible presidential candidate in his own right. But that is no longer the argument that Senator Clinton can make not if her hubby stands in front of an audience and plays up the Senator as some kind of victim of the news media (she's asking for the job of President isn't she?) and the Dems who just don't want her to be president. O-kay. Only losers whine and attack like that. A following CNN poll in a hypothetical matchup between Obama v McCain, Obama leads with 2% against McCain. In a hypothetical matchup between Clinton and McCain, Clinton leads McCain by 2%. But the question of who is becoming the more popular candidate to the Democratic party, Obama now has a double digit lead over Clinton. I wonder why? To put it bluntly, I had considerable respect for both the Clintons, the key word—had. Since this race began, both Bill and Hillary have gone down the tubes in their capacity to be gracious and in his capacity to be a respected elder statesman. Apparently, being back in the White House is more important to them both than what they are currently doing to the Democratic party.



So it came as some hilarity for David Broder of Washington Post fame to look way back into the Carter administration and offer a series of cautions about what President Barack Obama would do well not to repeat concerning the Carter years. Nor is it what I would call a "timely" republished to the Spokesman-Review editorial. Given what CNN had only yesterday, 28 May 2008 concerning Obama and his popularity v Clinton and hers. Seems to me that President Obama would have far less fragmenting of the Dem party than Broder assumes. But, there have been plenty of punditry excitements and pressure on the idea that "to heal the party" (a la the Carter years) Clinton should be put on the ticket as VP. Given what I have seen during this primary season, neither Clinton, Bill or Hillary would ever stand for being in second place. They'd be more than happy to politically shove President Obama out of the picture as they took central stage and demanded the lime light. That would not just fracture the party but also the nation. My own caution for Senator Obama, don't please the Clintons, get your own running mate. (♥)