First of all explain the "idiocy"gdeangel wrote:Let's recap the "recent decent" of the American political debate...
0) Bill Clinton defeats George Bush, whose tax increases and spending cuts put the country back on track after years of Reagan's "binge" economics. Bill Clinton does so by being young, charismatic, appearing on MTV, and playing the saxophone.
1) George Bush beats Al Gore (and McCain in the primary) by hawking his "good old boy" charm on the sliver haired Jesus crowd.
2) George Bush beats Al Gore through the support of the same "silver hairs", along with the military supporters who are reacting to the resurgence of 1970's "war is evil" idiocy which leftist talking-heads have found appeal with to hawk their books and news "exposes", and which, despite a very deliberate effort, Mr. Kerry and the democrats are unsuccessful in distancing themselves from.
3) Barack Obama runs a "feel good" primary, and the rank and file voters fall in line for the primary.
4) John McCain goes toe-to-toe at Obama's level to challenge his "broad consensus" as elitist and out of touch.
Now all of a sudden we've descended into "fluff" politics? My fellow American chumps, it's been that way for a long time, going all the way back to Kennedy (who nearly got the country blown up because of missiles in Cuba... sound like anything that's going on now in with Russia and the interceptor bases??) Nixon got a famous bump from talking about his little dog "Checkers".
The bottom line, in a large country where people have to vote for candidates that they have no personal knowledge of, and where there is no "official" state propaganda and intimidation, people will by a large margin, pick the candidate that they can identify with. So Obama's little "pig" comment about Palin (quite a different usage than reference to a policy) cuts to the quick at the decision criteria people make. Nobody wants to identify with a pig. Very few people want to identify with a neo-nazi pit-bull dog. These are the lowest form of political attack. They are dumbing down what is already a "choice not on the issues" to the level of a popularity contest on the grade school playground. McCain and Palin have a right to take issue. Referring, even indirectly, to a woman as a pig (meaning she is fat and undesirable) is very different than calling "big oil" pigs (i.e., insatiable appetite for profits), or calling a guy a pig (meaning he is someone who objectifies women as sexual objects). From a bunch of third graders you expect to hear people saying: don't pick Sara to the team captain... she's fat and ugly. But, even though American's may not understand how to balance a check book, let alone evaluate economic stimulus proposals, they do sometimes take note of offensive behavior.
If Obama wants to get by this one, he will have to make a public apology. But for a man whose base idolize him, that is not without it's own risks. So he's testing the waters... just like he did before he denounced Farakan publicly. You watch. By this time tomorrow, he won't be talking about "the silly party of the campaign season"... he'll be saying "I sincerely apologize to Governor Palin for any offense she took personally from what was intended as a general figure of speech about my opponent's campaign."
Second of all how at all was obama's comment about palin? It had absolutely nothing to do with it. Palin says something about lipstick so now all sayings with the word lipstick will be about her. Which makes you a hypocrite
gdeangel wrote:When it became politically incorrect to do anything that might hurt your enemies other than (1) killing them on the open battlefield and (2) taking away their "freedom" by putting them in a 8x10 room with a bed and toilet, you ended up with a no-win situation - the bad guys just find ways to avoid getting caught out on the open battlefield, and we can't hold the ones we catch in 8x10 rooms forever.
America hides behind its air and naval dominance but that cannot do much when civilians are mixed in with the bad guys unless we drop some of our pretenses about "moral" war. War is hell. To try to deny that fact - to try to make soldiers act like police - is just like "putting lipstick on a pig".
But let's face it, even if it every came to a shit kicking contest on the open battle field, China would win. They outnumber us 3 to 1 (more like 5 to 1 if you peek into the demographic composition of the two populations ATM) and they have the weaponry and centralized infrastructure to do it. We need to start recruiting India of we are screwed.
Ouch
. Sarah Palin along with Obama is a nobody and McCain flip flops more than that sunfish I caught last weekend. But for me I am going with the one who isn't gonna let their religion rule this country.
