« McCain says NO DATE, then he says BY 2013, now he says "It's Not Important When We Get out" | coonsey's Blog | Patti Solis Doyle = Hillary Clinton as VP? I Sincerely Hope Not. »
There They Go Again -- Pundits Using Political Party's Talking Points
There they go again...
The political pundits are zeroing in on specific words of Democrats and accusing them (they are probably using John McCain's talking points memo) of pointing out John McCain's 'age' by using them.
Tonight Chris Matthews jumped on the word CONFUSED. Many Obama supporters used the word to describe McCain after his comment about it "not being important" whether troops come home or not.
Most people were pointing out how McCain was confused about who was fighting whom in Iraq (Sunni or Shia). McCain claimed that all the troops that were sent to Iraq for the 'surge' were now back home, when they clearly are not. On one hand McCain jumps down Mitt Romney's case for even 'thinking' about a possible withdraw date from Iraq, on the other hand during his May speech he announced that 'he' would withdraw (have most of the combat troops home) by 2013. Then yesterday he says it 'doesn't matter' when they come home as long as they're not being killed.
I would say that anybody, no matter the age, sounds pretty darn CONFUSED about what he/she really wants as their Iraq policy -- if they keep switching (flip flopping) their beliefs or knowledge about the issue on a weekly basis.
I sincerely hope the political pundits won't go down the same path they went with the Bush administration by constantly using Karl Rove's talking points as their issue of the day.
The political pundits are zeroing in on specific words of Democrats and accusing them (they are probably using John McCain's talking points memo) of pointing out John McCain's 'age' by using them.
Tonight Chris Matthews jumped on the word CONFUSED. Many Obama supporters used the word to describe McCain after his comment about it "not being important" whether troops come home or not.
Most people were pointing out how McCain was confused about who was fighting whom in Iraq (Sunni or Shia). McCain claimed that all the troops that were sent to Iraq for the 'surge' were now back home, when they clearly are not. On one hand McCain jumps down Mitt Romney's case for even 'thinking' about a possible withdraw date from Iraq, on the other hand during his May speech he announced that 'he' would withdraw (have most of the combat troops home) by 2013. Then yesterday he says it 'doesn't matter' when they come home as long as they're not being killed.
I would say that anybody, no matter the age, sounds pretty darn CONFUSED about what he/she really wants as their Iraq policy -- if they keep switching (flip flopping) their beliefs or knowledge about the issue on a weekly basis.
I sincerely hope the political pundits won't go down the same path they went with the Bush administration by constantly using Karl Rove's talking points as their issue of the day.
Advertisement
Dan Abrahms had that loathsome, odious Brad Blakeman on tonight who got into high dudgeon on the confused comment.
Dear Republican operatives and Talking Heads: what is a word that means confused that doesn't imply ageism or senility? Please tell us which word we can use to describe McCain's blatherings on Iraq, Iran, Al Qaeda, the Middle East, National Security, war planning and strategy and economics everytime he spouts another contradictory statement? Just give us one word, in the entire lexicon that you won't cry ageism if we use it. OK, one descriptive term that is easily understood by all that does not cause you to claim we are accusing McCain of being senile or addle-brained. OK?
June 13, 2008 1:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
The objective is to give McCain a pass for any instances of confusion or memory lapse that would not be afforded to a younger candidate, for fear that any comment would be considered age-related and hence out-of-bounds, but also to deflect attention from the issue at hand (what McCain said) to talk about campaign tactics instead - a double pass!
In all the pundit blather about whether confused is a loaded term, no one has asked him how he intends to get to a state where our troops are safe in Iraq, how we would pay to keep them safe over the next 100 years or so, how did he come up with the year 2013 as a likely date for withdrawal, how Iraq differs culturally and politically from Europe in their potential attitude toward the indefinite presence of American troops in their country...
June 13, 2008 2:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
If just one of the pundits were to say "no, Chris, it has nothing to do with age. 'Confused' is just a nice way to say 'terrifyingly ignorant, stupid or lying'" I think we could lay this one to rest.
June 13, 2008 5:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
All great points ya all. I especially like the one asking McCain how he will get to that point where troops aren't being harmed? Especially if you take away the money WE currently pay the citizens of Iraq to protect their OWN nation.
June 13, 2008 10:38 AM | Reply | Permalink