An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
Jon Stewart Unleashes on McCain
In my opinion, this is the way to attack McCain’s smear campaign: with incredulous laughter. Jon Stewart takes up McCain on the Paris Hilton ad and unleashes on both McCain and the media on the ‘Obama-eats-arugula-and-is-arrogant’ meme. Don’t get down in the mud with him; fight the smears by pointing and laughing…
opinions powered by SendLove.to
9 Responses to “Jon Stewart Unleashes on McCain”
Obama IS arrogant so it is not a smear at all.
Holly “Troll” in Cincinnati,
I accept your bait.
What politician isn't guilty of being arrogant?
The smear is in the implication that Obama suffers from a new and special type of arrogance that makes him unlike 'real Americans,' whereas McCain is a humble, real guy. It worked for Bush, after all.
The fact is that we are governed by wealthy plutocrats. Obama's no better or worse than any of the others. This sort of class-based attack was used by his campaign against Hillary, and I didn't like it then.
I don't like it now, either. It needs to be called out whenever it crops up. I could argue that he 'deserves' it….but I find it insulting regardless of which side is using it.
Damozel,
Good points.
I hate saying this, but Hillary played the elitist card on Obama. I'm not sure who did it first, but she definitely did.
And certainly we're governed by wealthy people, but there is gulf between the kind of wealthy life McCain has led and married into, versus the one Obama has only recently become accustomed (thanks to his books). We also have McCain's policies which do little for the masses but a lot for the wealthy, which is quite the converse of Obama's. Their tax cut and health care policies are the best examples.
Damozel: “The fact is that we are governed by wealthy plutocrats. Obama's no better or worse than any of the others.”
Damozel, I suspect you didn't quite mean that.
I think that while “elitist” labelling certainly works, the wealth of a president has little relevance to their values.
FDR, for example, was American aristocracy. Pure blue blood. Yet, he did more for working class Americans than any other president.
A close second comes LBJ…who accumulated millions by corruption, with Lady Bird's broadcasting licenses etc…but who pushed through the Great Society, Civil Rights Act etc. Average Americans owe him a huge debt.
Thus, I share ChrisWWW's view on this point. We have to look at their policies, not their bank accounts.
OMG… Marlow and me agree!
*Cracks open a beer to celebrate*
Poor Hillary, so abused and misunderstood, when all she did was a little thing like give McCain his talking points. Ah, the humanity!
But I'm glad her name came up, because it just points out the similarities in political style between her and McCain: anything goes.
Anyone who fails to see the racial angle fails to realize that it's not aimed at those without racial prejudice. The targets are those in many parts of he country where the sight of a black man and white woman together is deeply disquieting. Even in cosmopolitan NYC, a bi-racial couple can be, and often is, the subject of undue attention. The sophistication just keeps reactions under wraps, that's all.
Stewart had some very good lines.
'Damozel: “The fact is that we are governed by wealthy plutocrats. Obama's no better or worse than any of the others.”
Damozel, I suspect you didn't quite mean that. '
You're right, Marlowecan. I meant that Obama is no more elitist or arrogant than the others. All of them have the perquisites of wealth and regular access to experiences (and consumer goods).
That one decides (W's dad) to make a big point of the fact that he spends his money eating pork rinds while another chooses to eat arugula doesn't cut any ice with me.
None of them are in any way like the average American in terms of their purchasing power. They are ALL the elite in that sense.
I therefore look ONLY at their policies.