-
It's that time of year again - our ISP is asking for money. If you have some spare change, please click the Donate link... Thanks!
- About Us
- Search
- Need Help?
- Donate
- Login/Register
Latest Entries
Actions Menu
Blog Roll
- 4F Facebook Page
- Turn Up The Night with Kenny Pick
- Stephanie Miller Show
- The Tim Corrimal Show
- The Rachel Maddow Show
- Angry Americans with Paul Rieckhoff
- Thom Hartmann Program
- Turnips! Fans of Turn Up the Night Facebook Page
- Snopes.com
- Factcheck.org
- Official White House Page, if you must.
- The Brad Blog / Green News Report
- The Poorly Written Political Blog (Joe Santorsa)
The Ugliness of the McCampaign
Author: BobR
Date: 06/25/2008 12:19:39
With the conventions still two months away, the campaign season is already in full swing. Both candidates have vowed to run a clean campaign. Whether they will remains to be seen; whether they have is open for interpretation. For the groups and high-profile individuals who support the candidates, it's business as usual. Here's a sampling of some of the less savory items out there...
First up we have Laura Ingraham on FAUX News. I was at a place that had the TV tuned to that wretched station and the sound turned down. I saw this graphic on the screen:
I didn't need to hear the audio to know what she was trying to do. Actually, that may be the intent of those that design the graphics for FAUX News. They know that their show may be on TVs and bars and gyms where the sound is not turned up. A patron's quick glance would capture the picture of Kim Jong Il and the words "Obama Supporter", and that would be imprinted on their subconscious.
Next up we have our favorite religious nutjob the Rev. Dobson, saying that Obama is distorting the Bible and pushing a "fruitcake interpretation" of the Constitution:
So the Old Testament doesn't apply anymore, Mr. Dobson? Does that include what the Old Testament says about gays? I don't remember Jesus saying anything about dietary codes, but I do remember him saying things about helping those less fortunate and not being judgemental. Frederick Clarkson has a very good take on Dobson's credibility, re: religious and Constitutional interpretation.
Moving on, author David Freddoso - responsible for the smearboat book "Unfit for Command" which attacked John Kerry - is releasing a book with a similar intention aimed at Obama called "The Case Against Barack Obama":
As I questioned previously on the 4F message forum, will he be doing a book providing similar scrutiny of McCain?... Don't we deserve the same "clear and honest view" of him as well?... I'm not holding my breath for that.
So let us compare and contrast... In the news yesterday was Tran Trong Duyet, the man who actually held John McCain captive during the Viet Nam war. He claims that McCain wasn't tortured while under his care, and that he actually liked McCain, they struck up a friendship, and he supports McCain for president. Will we see that splashed in a graphic in the MSM? I doubt it.
His comments raise the question was John McCain really tortured (beyond the initial 3 or 4 days)? If not, why did he release so many tapes critical of the west? That question has been asked in an online column by Douglas Valentine:
This column raises some questions and makes some pointed commentary. Those that support McCain would have a fair argument that it's a smear because there is little hard evidence. The comments by Mr. Duyet, however would certainly seem to corroborate some of it, if you think he's believable. Still - this isn't coming from a major religious leader, a major news network, or a best-selling author.
That - I think - makes all the difference.
First up we have Laura Ingraham on FAUX News. I was at a place that had the TV tuned to that wretched station and the sound turned down. I saw this graphic on the screen:
I didn't need to hear the audio to know what she was trying to do. Actually, that may be the intent of those that design the graphics for FAUX News. They know that their show may be on TVs and bars and gyms where the sound is not turned up. A patron's quick glance would capture the picture of Kim Jong Il and the words "Obama Supporter", and that would be imprinted on their subconscious.
Next up we have our favorite religious nutjob the Rev. Dobson, saying that Obama is distorting the Bible and pushing a "fruitcake interpretation" of the Constitution:
"Even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools?" Obama said. "Would we go with James Dobson's or Al Sharpton's?" referring to the civil rights leader.
Dobson took aim at examples Obama cited in asking which Biblical passages should guide public policy — chapters like Leviticus, which Obama said suggests slavery is OK and eating shellfish is an abomination, or Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, "a passage that is so radical that it's doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application."
"Folks haven't been reading their Bibles," Obama said.
Dobson and Minnery accused Obama of wrongly equating Old Testament texts and dietary codes that no longer apply to Jesus' teachings in the New Testament.
So the Old Testament doesn't apply anymore, Mr. Dobson? Does that include what the Old Testament says about gays? I don't remember Jesus saying anything about dietary codes, but I do remember him saying things about helping those less fortunate and not being judgemental. Frederick Clarkson has a very good take on Dobson's credibility, re: religious and Constitutional interpretation.
Moving on, author David Freddoso - responsible for the smearboat book "Unfit for Command" which attacked John Kerry - is releasing a book with a similar intention aimed at Obama called "The Case Against Barack Obama":
Conservative journalist David Freddoso’s “The Case Against Barack Obama” will offer “a comprehensive, factual look at Obama,” according to Regnery Publishing president and publisher Marjory Ross.
But the book’s subtitle makes clear its perspective: “The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media’s Favorite Candidate.”
Ross contends that the mainstream media has offered insufficient scrutiny of Obama and likens the goal of Freddoso’s book to that of “Unfit for Command,” the scathing assessment of Kerry’s war record that rocketed to No. 1 on The New York Times best-seller list.
By highlighting negative aspects of Obama’s record and background, Ross says, Freddoso may compel others to offer more critical coverage of the Democratic nominee.
“I think it’s critically important that the country gets a clear and honest view of who is running and what they stand for — warts and all,” Ross says. “With ‘Unfit for Command,’ like ‘The Case against Barack Obama,’ we believe the media has whitewashed the candidate.”
As I questioned previously on the 4F message forum, will he be doing a book providing similar scrutiny of McCain?... Don't we deserve the same "clear and honest view" of him as well?... I'm not holding my breath for that.
So let us compare and contrast... In the news yesterday was Tran Trong Duyet, the man who actually held John McCain captive during the Viet Nam war. He claims that McCain wasn't tortured while under his care, and that he actually liked McCain, they struck up a friendship, and he supports McCain for president. Will we see that splashed in a graphic in the MSM? I doubt it.
His comments raise the question was John McCain really tortured (beyond the initial 3 or 4 days)? If not, why did he release so many tapes critical of the west? That question has been asked in an online column by Douglas Valentine:
McCain, in his carefully prepared statements, claims he was tortured while in solitary confinement, and that is why he signed a confession saying, “I am a black criminal and I have performed the deeds of an air pirate. I almost died and the Vietnamese people saved my life, thanks to the doctors.”
However, on March 25, 1999, two of his fellow POWs, Ted Guy and Gordon "Swede" Larson told the Phoenix New Times that, while they could not guarantee that McCain was not physically harmed, they doubted it.
As Larson said, "My only contention with the McCain deal is that while he was at The Plantation, to the best of my knowledge and Ted's knowledge, he was not physically abused in any way. No one was in that camp. It was the camp that people were released from."
This column raises some questions and makes some pointed commentary. Those that support McCain would have a fair argument that it's a smear because there is little hard evidence. The comments by Mr. Duyet, however would certainly seem to corroborate some of it, if you think he's believable. Still - this isn't coming from a major religious leader, a major news network, or a best-selling author.
That - I think - makes all the difference.
