Yeah, guess why. Note that what Time provides here is "an excerpt," so it's not as if the conversation started out this curt.
How many media folks are dying to piss off McCain and get him to blow up and confirm the idea that he's a big hothead? Obviously, he knows that and he's not taking the bait. Yet you still publish an article called "McCain's Prickly TIME Interview," trying to portray it as the blowup you were not able to procure. Lame. Shameless bias.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
47 comments:
Apologist alert!
I think the idea was that once upon a time there was nothing offlimits when it came to McCain...he was 'the maverick' the 'un-politician' who was in control of his own campaigns...and he's no longer that guy. Yes the headline is completely misleading, he wasn't 'prickly', but compared to the way he was in the past with the media...definitely a change.
McCain was always helped in his previous campaigns because of his cozy relationship with the media- they loved him and drooled over him. But now he's turning his back on that and it could cost him.
You know they write the article before they even do the interview, don't you? There's even a term for it now
Well, I can only reiterate what I said commenting on another post. You have to view this issue in light of last week's issue of Time, where they filled almost a quarter of the magazine with Obama puff pieces more servile than Obama's own paid advertising, mixing fawning prose with longing photographs, and topping it with a full-cover portrait unblemished by the text usually found on Time's covers. It was like a bad joke - I thought at first maybe it was a joke, that maybe this was a spoof issue of Time produced by some conservative outfit as a reductio ad absurdum of liberal media bias.
And now, a week later, Time asks us to take on trust their claims about what McCain did and didn't say? I'm sorry, but no deal. They've lost their credibility to claim that this is what actually happened. I don't believe that what is reported by Time in that piece is representative of what actually happened in the interview. I think that Time has made it absolutely clear last week that they intend to do everything short of outright fabrication to help Obama. They have declared open partisanship - and so, if they make factual claims (and the contents of that interview is a factual claim), they need to have evidence to support it. Unless Time posts unedited video footage of the interview, I just don't believe the honesty of their reporting any more.
Journalists have nothing if they don't have the trust of their readers. And Time has recklessly thrown that trust away. It will be a very long time before they can get it back. What they've done poisons everything that they do hereafter (cf. Althouse's post here (discussing Mel Gibson's credibility bonfire)).
So, he doesn't have to define "honor" in terms of his campaign then? How are these questions biased? McCain is running a campaign that's entirely about how much Obama sucks.
Why shouldn't McCain get asked about this in one of the rare instances he actually sits down for an interview?
But enough about me, Senator McCain. What do you think of my new dress?
McCain shouldn't have to answer questions. He never questioned his love for country when he was in a Vietnamese prison camp. Five questions is too many questions for John McCain. For 5 years he was in a Vietnamese prison camp. It doesn't matter that he owns more than 5 homes. For 5 years his only home was a Vietnamese prison camp. Did I mention that John McCain was a POW? Because POWs can do whatever they want. Any man who has spent 5 years in a Vietnamese prison camp is beyond criticism. John McCain: He died for our sins.
That said, I'd love to hear/see more from this interview. Release the tapes!
Apparently he also said that Iraq is peaceful and stable now in this interview.
Mike, you know that they attribute one coinage to Althouse on that list, right?
Trevor Jackson said...
"That said, I'd love to hear/see more from this interview. Release the tapes!"
Audio can be edited seamlessly extremely easily, particularly if someone has a generally quite flat tone. Video can be edited seamlessly, but it's very, very difficult. My demand for video was specific.
Where exactly is the anger in the text? I listened to audio, but it got old.
McCain should have just reached out and grabbed the reporters neck with both hands and give him an old fashioned
indian burn right on the neck.
P.S. We actually called those "indian snakebites" when I was kid. Is that an example of animal rights people f-ing up our kid's vocabulary?
I didn't, Simon. Thanks for the education.
Ahh, Time's Prickly interview. Reminds me of Newsweek's title for Fred Thompson, "Lazy like a Fox". It was supposed to be neutral too!
Let's examine the choice of "prickly".
Pricks come in all shapes and sizes. Some stick out a lot. Some hurt. If you touch them, you've done something dangerous. If they don't get you in trouble, you're a survivor. Pricks are wonderful to look at, but even better to hold.
Conclusion:
Time Magazine is subtly suggesting that McCain is a prick, but that's a good thing.
Notice how many of the questions are about the interviewer:
Do you miss the old way of doing it?
Really? Come on, Senator.
Do I know you? [Says with a laugh.]
Funny how McCain has long answers to questions about actual topics. His short answers are to questions about the press's love affair with itself.
It's silly that McCain gives interviews to these dicks. He should expect nothing but bias.
Wait... is it true that Britanny Spears designed Obama's set in the giant arena he is giving his acceptance speech. '
chickenlittle said...
"Where exactly is the anger in the text? I listened to audio, but it got old."
There's audio? Hmm. I don't see that, where should I look?
It's a post about McCain, so no "cruel neutrality" is required.
How dare anyone suggest anything negative about McCain!!
But honor in politics?
I defined it in five books. Read my books.
Isn't that the kind of response Ann hates more than anything? The "you weren't paying attention" response?
"There's audio?"
There's a snippet at my 3:25 link. But careful, Simon, it may be "extremely" edited.
Simon: The link opens a page with a "click to listen" button right next to the photo of McCain on the plane.
Hey, wasn't there some journalist trying to anger-bait McCain a few months ago? Josh Marshall oversold it. There was video for that I recall.
How many media folks are dying to piss off McCain and get him to blow up and confirm the idea that he's a big hothead?
How many people are in the main stream media?
This is no longer about McCain. McCain is irrelevant to the big picture. It is about making history. This election year we must make history whether we like it or not or want to or not. We will make history. It was determined that a Black man or a woman must be elected to the presidency no matter who gets trashed, who gets hurt, and who gets thrown under the media bus. Obama was nominated. He is the chosen one. If it were not McCain, it would be someone else. McCain is standing in the. If he will not pull out of the race and let history take its course, he will be put in his place. The issues are secondary now.
Original Mike said...
You know they write the article before they even do the interview, don't you? There's even a term for it now…
The New Journalism
Chickenlittle, McCain snapped at a Times reporter who pressed him on whether he entertained the idea of running as Kerry's VP.
Thanks for the heads up on the audio.
Here's McCain grilling (for) the press corps.
The audio link loaded quickly and played about 20 minutes ago. But now it just sits there in "loading" mode.
Sorry, Chickenlittle. Here's a better link for the Bumiller-McCain dust-up.
My earlier one is about what an anger-management problem McCain has.
Trevor: That's the one!
Now repeat after me, slowly:
McCain on plane, stays mainly just the same!
Here's McCain grilling (for) the press corps.
Awesome. I can't imagine Obama grilling BBQ for anyone.
"I think if there is one common denominator of all women it's that they love road trips"
Heh. I love road trips.
Hey, shrediting. I forgot about that.
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2005/10/coined-word-shrediting.html
chickenlittle said...
"Simon: The link opens a page with a 'click to listen' button right next to the photo of McCain on the plane."
Ah.... It's a flash thing, and I was looking at the link in FF before where it showed up only as a lego brick. I opened it in Internet Explorer this time - I only have flash installed on the latter - and see what you're saying. I'll take a listen.
@peter: thanks for the link.
That Meghan McCain is just gorgeous. Good genes I guess.
The shameful bias is actually against Obama, and McCain gets a free effin' ride on EVERYTHING.
At least Ann is not even trying to pretend where she stands any longer. Between this post and the "I love Lieberman" post she has finally stopped the fake passive-agressive posing.
If Obama's temperament were questioned the post would be "yes Obama, we need to know about your temperament and we have a lot of questions about it". Umbrage is taken when her beloved corrupt midget is questioned.
The P.O.W. stuff is meaningless, so save it.
Wow, don't pop a capillary there, sugar.
chickenlittle: Meghan looks better in some photos than others. BTW, what's with Cindy and the crutches in the first one?
I read the entire interview and McCain was an asshole from start to finish.
For the ladies (and some guys):
Jack McCain
Damn good genes, Chickenlittle.
damn--like a case of herpes, LOS is back--no matter. Mortimer: you always impressed me as an intelligent person. and I could listen to your usually well argued points, Alas, you look like an idiot now. What a shame.
for those of you who think McCains POW status doesnt matter--you folks keep thinking that--POWs have been elevated to mythic status in this country and that is the way it is--Right? nahh but true--Yahhh so deal with it. Your opinions don't count--only the bitter americans who cling to guns and religion when the economy is growing and gas prices are falling. Sucks doesnt it to be wrong all the time?
In two weeks McCain and Obama will be tied in the polls with McCain trending up. just my guess. So I dont need any arguments here, and dont intend to respond to any.--lets just wait and see who is right.
From Roger: "Mortimer: you always impressed me as an intelligent person. and I could listen to your usually well argued points, Alas, you look like an idiot now."
Gee, with friends like Rog...
"Luckyoldson said...
I read the entire interview and McCain was an asshole from start to finish."
Funny, I read all of your previous comments and you were an asshole from start to finish. The only good part was that I thought you were finished. Unfortunately, like an inconvenient corpse, you've bloated to the surface of the canal yet again.
McCain was always helped in his previous campaigns because of his cozy relationship with the media- they loved him and drooled over him. But now he's turning his back on that and it could cost him.
"Turned his back on it"? You don't think the fact that almost the entire news media prefer Obama over him might have some small influence over the media/McCain relationship?
They loved him when he was the AntiBush. Now that he's the AntiObama, well, that's something else entirely.
Luckyoldson said...
I read the entire interview and McCain was an asshole from start to finish.
Damn, and to think that I thought you were Valtrex'ed from the comment section. Some infections, it seems are more immune than others.
ron st.amant said...
McCain was always helped in his previous campaigns because of his cozy relationship with the media- they loved him and drooled over him. But now he's turning his back on that and it could cost him.
The media loved and drooled over him because A) he wasn't the nominee and made for good sound bites with his straight talk express. Which is only indicative of the media's ability to be suckered at every turn by anyone with a nice gloss. And B) now that he has turned his back on them or is it the other way around, is only because they like the much smoother glide that Mr. Barely generates than mean old McCain does.
"How many media folks are dying to piss off McCain and get him to blow up and confirm the idea that he's a big hothead?" Substantially all of them, however many that is.
You can search these comments for a statement I made several months ago, "They [the media] hate your guts, John, you're a Republican." I stand by that statement.
I wonder if this actually surprises McCain. There were so many telling him, "Hey, they only like you because you're the enemy of their enemy--or they can paint you that way."
Win or lose it's going to be interesting to see what his opinion of the press is when this all shakes out.
integrity said...
If Obama's temperament were questioned the post would be "yes Obama, we need to know about your temperament and we have a lot of questions about it". Umbrage is taken when her beloved corrupt midget is questioned.
Now we know that you do not read or watch anything except the KOS kids, MYDD, and HUFFINGGLUE. You sure haven’t been reading any real news sources.
Now we know that you do not read or watch anything except the KOS kids, MYDD, and HUFFINGGLUE. You sure haven’t been reading any real news sources.
Kos I do not like, except for numbers provided(polls and money). I don't even know what MYDD is. HuffPO I use for links only. I read all mainstream columnists, both left and right. I read informational blogs, both left and right. I read Althouse's & Reynolds' opinion blogs to get worked up, just for kicks. I watch all 3 cable networks, and never watch the big 3 networks for either local or national news.
I don't know if you have noticed, most HuffPo columns and contributors are nighmarishly passive and inert. I like aggressive liberals.
Mr. Bella, your team is the only team that fights. My side seems to be oblivious and incapable of putting up a fight(unless we are fighting each other), as this convention has demonstrated. So you guys win, and will again this year.
The media love John McCain, and refuse to scrutinize him. I stand by what I said.
Post a Comment