July 1, 2008
Feigned outrage always works
John McCain’s campaign and the whole right wing got in an uproarious huff at the start of the week after retired General Wesley Clark made some comments pointing out John McCain’s military experience is not the type that would really prepare him for the whole Commander in Chief gig that comes free with the US Presidency.
McCain’s group has been at it ever since Clark he pointed out that while the Republican Presidential nominee served in Vietnam and was shot down and held as a prisoner of war for years, he never held a wartime command position and has no experience as an executive in a military capacity. Clark’s point is certainly valid, but the McCain camp is up in arms claiming their candidate’s service and patriotism are being called into question.
From the tone of their response you’d think questioning a veteran’s service is something they consider to be on par with the seven deadly sins. They’ve pounced all over Clark, and because of his perceived questioning of McCain’s service; he’s now a traitor (if he hadn’t been for some other past “transgression”).
Democratic candidate Barak Obama and his campaign backed away from Clark and denounced his comments. This was one of many sad actions from the campaign this week. Instead of standing up to the critics and explaining that their outrage is for a phantom sleight, he distanced himself from the comments and the commenter, and that was disappointing to see.
Still, those easy to outrage Republicans jumped right on Obama for not apologizing for the comments someone else made. Now I’ll lose all respect for Obama if he does end up apologizing for a misinterpretation of something true stated by one of his advisors, unless his apology is for the Republican’s misinterpreting, because I’m pretty sorry they didn’t see this for what it was.
That’s really the heart of this; it seems ludicrous that McCain and his campaign really believe their indignation. If they’re not intelligent enough to see the totality of Clark’s definitely apt remarks, the thought of them being in charge of anything is quite scary. Seriously, they can’t be that dense in real life, I mean they drive cars and order on their own at restaurants and dress themselves right?
So then the only logical assumption is that the days of outrage this week are simply manufactured and calculated for political gain. While I know politics has always been like this, I’m still disappointed by such manufactured indignation and the notion that the public is gullible enough to be caught up in it without seeking out the easily discerned reality of the original comments at the center of this thing. What does it say about a candidate and his party that they’re willing to create a furor over something they know to be nothing in an attempt to manipulate the public? Even sadder, what does it say that the tactic usually works?
You didn’t even point out the extremely amazing fact that one of the main people the McCain camp used to express there outrage was one of the key people behind the Swiftboat Veteran’s for Truth…but according to him that was jsut exposing the truth not disparraging a war hero’s record…
My anti-spam word was “cromulent.” I’ve never had a cromulent, but I imagine they are delicious.
As for this whole incident, it speaks to me of an early indication of where the politics are headed this time around - straight to the lowest common denominator. I’m bracing for months of Fox “News” muckraking and mudslinging with little more than any cursory attempt to be accurate or truthful.
On the plus side, Stewart and Colbert should have a field day…