An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right

“Vindicating” a Bridge Too Far for McCain

I see that both the Sunday morning talking heads and the McCain campaign are trying to spin some last minute gold out of damp, moldy straw. It all centers around a single, off the cuff remark from Barack Obama on Friday.

Seizing on a comment Obama made Friday that his faith in America was “vindicated” by his win in the Iowa caucuses, McCain mocked the Democratic presidential nominee for needing a test of the nation’s goodness. “We learn more and more about Senator Obama. He said the other day that his primary victory ‘vindicated’ his faith in America,” he said, as the crowd booed. “My country has never had anything to prove to me, my friends. I have always had faith in it, and I have been humbled and honored to serve it.

It’s a nice try, I suppose, but I find it rather surprising that neither the chattering class nor McCain’s campaign staff bothered to break out a dictionary. One of the primary definitions of the word “vindicate” reads as follows:

verb: show to be right by providing justification or proof (“Vindicate a claim”)

For some reason these folks seem to be attempting to play this remark off as evidence that Obama “didn’t have any belief in America” until Iowa “proved it to him.” Unfortunately, that’s not what this means. When something is vindicated, it indicates that the previously held belief had been proven true. So, in fact, Obama’s statement could just as easily be read to mean that he had believed in America all along and his victory in Iowa simply confirmed what he had known all along.

Sometimes swinging for the fences in the last inning will result in a surprise win. As Babe Ruth learned, though, all too often it leads to striking out. Mark this one down as a swing and a miss.



8 Responses to ““Vindicating” a Bridge Too Far for McCain”

  1. T_Steel says:

    Ya gotta love the dictionary. Sometimes a solid definition blows an argument away.

  2. JWeidner says:

    Logic has never gotten in the way of a cheap shot delivered by McCain/Palin before…no reason for them to start now I suppose…

  3. JSpencer says:

    This whole business of redefining words, or attempting to redefine words, has been a popular tactic coming from the right in recent years (give or take a decade or two). The idea is that a “new” narrative can be created by switching the tracks (the rules) at the beginning of an argument, and a new direction (false conclusion) will follow. It's just another propaganda technique, and like all propaganda the intent is to influence opinion. In this case the technique depends on a certain lack of knowledge among the target audience in order to tweak perception. The fact is, any narrative which hinges on the deliberate misuse of words is flawed from it's inception. Having said this, all bets are off when it comes to persuading any persons who might consider actual ownership (and use) of a dictionary to be elitist.

  4. DLS says:

    Actually, it was similar to Michelle Obama's controversial remark if you've heard or read both.

    What was vindicated then, and since, has been not the USA (as with Michelle Obama's remark, that is liberal activism and conceit, nothing truthful at all, just making the adoring activists Feel Good once more), but rather, Obama's campaign (yes, he _did_ have a chance to win this election). That's despite vote-share convergence as McCain actually has started campaigning forcefullly and seriously (how late!).

    http://iemweb.biz.uiowa.edu/graphs/graph_DConv0…

    http://iemweb.biz.uiowa.edu/graphs/graph_Pres08…

    http://iemweb.biz.uiowa.edu/graphs/graph_Pres08…

  5. DLS says:

    Heh. The maturation process — Port Outbound, Starboard Home.

  6. JSpencer says:

    DLS, after reading your comment, I think it's safe to say, I can rest my case. ;-)

  7. DLS says:

    The status quo, now? no, I don't believe it's what's called for, either. Nor was it supported in 2006, before recent economic issues.

  8. SteveK says:

    Port = Left / Starboard = Right is only true if you're looking forward… If you have a backward (aft) viewpoint the opposite is true. Port is ALWAYS port and Starboard is ALWAYS Starboard whether left or right is determined by perspective alone.

    In two days we will see which direction the new captain of OUR ship of state is looking, and which direction he wants to take us. If you haven't already… please vote on Tuesday.

© 2003-2011 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Mode Equity