LOL. He's answering Katie Couric's question why politicians risk everything by committing adultery. McCain is asked the question too in this clip, and it's interesting to see the similarities and differences between the 2 candidates:
The most fascinating thing to me in this clip is -- can you guess? -- the way Obama moves his mouth in silent words at 0:46. I've never seen him do that. That's a completely new mannerism for him as he answers a question that is far from any question I've seen him try to answer before. In context, it seems to show him trying to get to the right answer, as if it needs a little rehearsal, which is striking since the answer he arrives at through this lip-fumbling is that he wants to be, truly, the person he seems to be: "that there's no gap between who I am and the face that I'm presenting in the world."
To compare the 2 candidates: Both refrain from explaining why other politicians do what they do, and both reflect on their own behavior. Obviously, the 2 men are differently situated, since we know that McCain committed adultery. (Long ago, but still.) McCain stresses the Biblical admonition: "Judge not." (The full text is:"Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.")
Obama stresses his personal effort to achieve integrity. Obama's answer is more articulate, more deeply touching. I like the way we can see him thinking, formulating values. McCain by contrast, takes refuge in the teachings of traditional morality. This is evidence -- take note! -- that in some very fundamental way Obama is a liberal and McCain is a conservative.
Oh, now look how serious I've gotten! My post title is now completely off. This happens a lot. I should change it. But for some reason, I do not.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
198 comments:
Observe: the sublimation of the Althouse vortex into the Obama vortex. It's a swirl within a swirl.
Sorry, I'll hang here, beyond the event horizon.
Ann, Get an NIV Bible.
"I like the way we can see him thinking, formulating values. McCain by contrast, takes refuge in the teachings of traditional morality. This is evidence -- take note! -- that in some very fundamental way Obama is a liberal and McCain is a conservative."
You hit the nail on the head above, Ann. Liberals "formulate" values on an as-needed basis, while conservatives "take refuge" in "traditional" morality. Yup, "traditional morality," the last "refuge" of the scoundrel.
ps. You forgot to mention "nuance"
Obama's wife is still young and competitive with other women. His kids are young and cute and fun to be around. He is living through the best days of his marriage...When I was young I was skinny without effort. Now that I am older my weight is in check only because I go to bed hungry once or twice a week. My paunch at 60 is a better gauge of my self control than my flat stomach was at 40....You are giving Obama credit for giving up broccoli for Lent.
Neither candidate wants to badmouth other politicians. The way they avoid doing so reflects a generational difference.
Obama accepts the transparency of a politician's personal life as a given. He responds with introspection. His is the Facebook value system -- you can't be too careful.
McCain's values are embedded in a different era, one in which the personal and political were thought to be separate. His refusal to judge is, in fact, a rejection of the premise of the question.
The difference between "shame" and "guilt" culture.
..."that there's no gap between who I am and the face that I'm presenting in the world."
I think it's safe to say there is a gap between the leftist, racially obsessed Obama of his writings and associations and the post racial liberal of David Axelrod's creation.
"Thinking About Obama"
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: October 16, 2008
We’ve been watching Barack Obama for two years now, and in all that time there hasn’t been a moment in which he has publicly lost his self-control.
This has been a period of tumult, combat, exhaustion and crisis. And yet there hasn’t been a moment when he has displayed rage, resentment, fear, anxiety, bitterness, tears, ecstasy, self-pity or impulsiveness.
Skip to next paragraph
Some candidates are motivated by something they lack. For L.B.J., it was respect. For Bill Clinton, it was adoration. These politicians are motivated to fill that void.
Their challenge once in office is self-regulation. How will they control the demons, insecurities and longings that fired their ambitions?
But other candidates are propelled by what some psychologists call self-efficacy, the placid assumption that they can handle whatever the future throws at them.
Candidates in this mold, most heroically F.D.R. and Ronald Reagan, are driven upward by a desire to realize some capacity in their nature. They rise with an unshakable serenity that is inexplicable to their critics and infuriating to their foes.
Obama has the biography of the first group but the personality of the second. He grew up with an absent father and a peripatetic mother. “I learned long ago to distrust my childhood,” he wrote in “Dreams From My Father.” This is supposed to produce a politician with gaping personal needs and hidden wounds.
But over the past two years, Obama has never shown evidence of that. Instead, he has shown the same untroubled self-confidence day after day.
The entire article can be viewed here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/opinion/17brooks.html?_r=1&em&oref=slogin
It's been apparent for some time that Obama is a thoughtful, reflective person and McCain is not.
But I still don't think Obama wrote "Dreams From My Father." You don't shoot a 422 page hole-in-one the first time out if you've never swung a golf club before. And there is no evidence Obama ever wrote anything remotely comparable to "Dreams" in terms of style, metaphor, or allusion. What few samples we have of his earlier writings are unerringly pedestrian, like those of an activist attorney with plenty of ideology )and a tin ear for the written word).
jdeeripper: "...racially obsessed Obama..."
Where in the world do you come up with things like that?
You don't shoot a 422 page hole-in-one the first time out if you've never swung a golf club before.
Oh please.
Angela's Ashes by Frank McCourt
Prozac Nation by Elizabeth Wurtzel
A River Runs Through It and Other Stories by Norman Maclean (recommended for a Pulitzer)
A Confederacy of Dunces by John Kennedy Toole (did with the Pulitzer)
Harry Potter
Duscany said..."But I still don't think Obama wrote "Dreams From My Father."
And of course, that's based on absolutely nothing factual, but merely the opinion of someone who doesn't like or approve of anything Obama says or does. (And I can't believe you actually read the book anyway...did you?)
*I'm sure Obama, just as most authors, whether they be experienced or not, relied heavily on copy and structural editors after producing each draft.
And I also have to assume, based on your silly comment, that you don't do much reading.
"Crap" "Garbage" "Tabloid trash"
Those were the words used in 1992 (or thereabouts) by ABC News personality George Stephanopoulus and former Clinton aide to describe Gennifer Flowers' statement that she had had a 12-year love affair with Presidential candidate Bill Clinton.
Six years later (ten years ago), on March 14, 1998, the New York Times reported the following:
"The Presidential deposition released today confirmed several revelations reported earlier, including Mr. Clinton's confirmation, after years of denial, that he had had sex with Gennifer Flowers, a one-time Arkansas worker."
The House impeached Clinton on charges arising from extramarital affairs and/or mistreatment of two other women; his trial in the Senate lasted 21 days.
The MSM was humiliated on the Clinton and Edwards' adultery stories. It's possible that Couric asked the question to set up Obama.
She's got to be aware of the Daily Mail article about the woman rumored to be his mistress. And of other rumors that the US press is about to go after the story. Wouldn't they be ultra-aggressive now, if for no other reason than to prove they're not in the tank for Obama?
And that's a first...a presidential candidate talking about picking his nose
Goffman says that nose-picking is accepted but you're expected to stop if somebody comes into the office.
I missed this before, so I just have to thrw it out:
Duscany says Obama has..."a tin ear for the written word..."
Now that has to be one of the most ridiculous comments I've read in quite some time.
*You think Obama has someone writing all of his speeches? Did Clinton have someone doing the same? How about Reagan?
I wonder why John didn't say something about his own experiences with adultery?
He did.
original george - From what I've read, the Daily Mail's article and others before it have basically said the entire rumor was nothing but bullshit.
True?
No male reporter would ask this question of a male candidate.
As Chris Rock said: "New pussy."
I think McCain's "judge not" was not an authoritarian directive but rather an appeal to look at the situation the way the other guy sees it. He had in mind the full quote that you provided, which means that others will judge you the way you judge them.
Obama is saying the same thing, although in a modern way. He is aware of public scrutiny and judgement of his actions. He is aware that his actions will be held against his words.
Great answers by both men. Either one will be a fine president, but McCain is 73 and his vice president is a small town bigot.
cokaygne, we almost completeley agreed until you fcuked up (pardon mon français) at the end.
Obama stresses his personal effort to achieve integrity. Obama's answer is more articulate, more deeply touching. I like the way we can see him thinking, formulating values. McCain by contrast, takes refuge in the teachings of traditional morality. This is evidence -- take note! -- that in some very fundamental way Obama is a liberal and McCain is a conservative.
LOL! You seem to be forgetting that of the two of them, McCain is the one who engaged in (multiple) extramarital affairs.
He's quoting the Bible verse "Judge not..." not because he has such reverence for traditional Judeo-Christian teaching, but because he could so obviously be judged himself!
Gee, I was just thinking today how nice it's been around Althouse without Michael spouting all his ridiculous nonsense, and then, guess who shows up again spouting the same ole same ole.
By all accounts, Senator Obama appears to be a great family man--and thats a really good thing--if fact, thats about the only good thing that can be said for him.
Now if he just had the guts necessary to give up smoking he might impress me...Somehow I don't think Chimp II is up to that test of fortitude.
Doyle,
How do you know Obama hasn't cheated on his wife.
Ann's post wisely emphasizes that we "know" McCain has committed adultery. Not that Obama hasn't.
Personally, I don't care if the POTUS is an adulterous anymore than if my dentist is.
Donn,
I've said this before and will repeat: If you don't like what I say...DON'T READ IT.
And are you implying that I'm now writing articles for David Brooks?
I swear, you're dumb as a bag of rocks.
I swear, you're dumb as a bag of rocks.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
cokaygne, the first gubernatorial veto cast by the prson you refer to as a "small town bigot" was of an Alaska Legislature bill that would have done an end-run around an Alaska Supreme Court decision which mandated that the state extend the same full benefits package to same-sex partners as to married ones.
Bigotry is forming unchangeable opinions based on fantasy or fear or misinformation. Look in a mirror.
Michael, I agree with jdeeripper: As for Obama being racially "obsessed," one need look no further than (a) the occasion of his first national celebrity, on becoming the first black president of the Harvard Law Review; (b) the subtitle of his first book: "A Story of Race and Inheritance"; (c) the subject of his first speech to the American public at the 2004 DNC; (d) his most famous (and ridiculously overpraised) speech of the campaign; (e) the massive, but comparatively quiet, efforts being made to mobilize black voters, including some number who couldn't tell you his Veep nominee's name if their lives depended on it, but who do indeed know Barack Obama's race; and (f) the #1 defense played by both his campaign and his allies to any criticism leveled against him.
I would not go so far as to say that it squeezes out all of his other interests and concerns. Nor is it particularly unexpected of someone with his atraditional personal family background. But "obsessed with race" isn't too harsh a description. And he and his campaign want to make this election -- which ought to be about what's best for America in the broadest possible sense -- about race relations instead.
chip: You're right. Prof. Althouse is enjoying her teasing far too much. She's gone meta-squared, I think.
Prof. A: Thanks for the pointer to the interesting mouth movements. What's particularly interesting to me is how quickly his lips are moving, as if he's previewing the sentence he's about to speak, or (more likely) re-saying something he's already said to ensure that what's about to come out next will fit, in the kind of compressed and squeaky voice of a replaying dictaphone. You listened to his first book on tape/disc, rather than reading it, if I recall correctly. I'm not someone who gives any credence to the idea that it was ghost-written, because I know just how much most lawyers, and every former law review editor, believes him/herself to hold within the Next Great American Novel. (The second book may well have been completely ghosted.) But I wonder: Do you have any guess as to whether he composed his first book on a keyboard (typewriter or computer) or with a pen in hand, as opposed to with a dictaphone? I'm guessing the latter.
Because they can.
I like the way we can see him thinking, formulating values. McCain by contrast, takes refuge in the teachings of traditional morality. This is evidence -- take note! -- that in some very fundamental way Obama is a liberal and McCain is a conservative.
Could it just be that McCain is 72 full of life experiences and Obama is not?
Obama has to think. He has not experienced enough of anything to arrive at the conclusions necessary to be able to answer a question with any kind of conviction.
I.e. – What don’t you know and how will you learn it
answer - Ask Michele.
As to adultery, mostly because they're not getting any at home.
roger: So one of your primary concerns about Obama is that...he smokes?
Hell, that should immediately disqualify anyone from holding office of any kind.
Funny.
Professor Althouse: "forumlating values." hmmmm. Since values are what one personally believes, I am not sure that I want Senator Obama formulating MY values. He is free, of course, to formulate his own values as long as he doesnt push them down my throat. I do agree, however, that you have put your finger on a fundamental difference between what passes as conservatives (Burkean conservatives) and modern liberalism (progessivism).. I will have no part of the latter.
Henry, I must have missed the McCain discussion of adultery.
Wouldn't ear-picking be more of an issue for Obama?
knox said...
Wouldn't ear-picking be more of an issue for Obama?
3:36 PM
10+ you win!
lem says: "Obama has to think. He has not experienced enough of anything to arrive at the conclusions necessary to be able to answer a question with any kind of conviction."
So...Obama, and I assume others who have to "think," do so...because they just don't have enough "experience" to bypass the thinking process before speaking or making decisions??
Good lord...please tell me you don't really believe that...and that you don't want a President who just doesn't have to take the time to "think" before acting.
*We have that right now.
I think the answers represent the fact that, in part, McCain has been adulterous in the past, and therefore would rather not answer the question because it perhaps brings back pain that he would rather forget, and Obama doesn't understand because perhaps to him, I hope, adultery is something he's never considered and therefore is not something he's thought about.
I too like to see someone actually 'thinking' about a question. Though McCain I believe is as well, he's just more reflexive in his answer (again perhaps due to his experience on the subject).
It was an interesting question to have asked.
Professor Althouse, do you suspect The One (PBUH) has to rehearse what he says not to let out something potentially compromising?
I just reread your comment, that's why I'm asking.
no Michael: because he smokes? No, because it cant stop. When you can't control your own addictive behaviors that,in fact, affect others, including those in your immediate family, you forfeit the right to dictate to others how to control the behaviors of others. Clear enough?
Michael wrote: Henry, I must have missed the McCain discussion of adultery.
McCain, at the very end of the clip: "I've been an imperfect servant so I'm not judging."
What more did you want? And why in the world would you want it?
Does Obama realize you can pick your friends (as he did Ayersm, Rezko, Rev. Wright & Father Pleger)? But you can't pick your friend's nose.
henry, I didn't want anything.
I probably just missed the end of the clip.
Michael, I don't have time to re-watch the entire clip, but my recollection is that at the very end of his answer, McCain says something like "I've been there," or makes some other fairly clear reference to his own history.
He's never hidden his adultery. To the contrary, every time he's asked about his greatest failure, he references the dissolution of his first marriage and takes full responsibility for that. (I've never seen a marriage in which one party was guilt-free, but McCain isn't quibblng.) And as with the Keating Five mess, it something that he's squarely addressed and learned from. (Obama is still defending his overall relationship with Tony Rezko, while quibbling about whether he was merely boneheaded or bribed when Rezko, the professional slumlord, paid full asking price for the lot next door to the same seller who gave the Obamas a magnificent discount).
The smoking concerns me too, by the way -- less as a health hazard, although it's a horrible risk factor for black men of his age -- but as an egregious example of his lack of self-discipline in what's otherwise an apparently disciplined life. I'm an ex-smoker (heart attack victim), so I can empathize. But he and his campaign have been absolutely RUTHLESS, and entirely successful so far as I know, in preventing so much as a single credible (non-Photo Shopped) photograph or video of him smoking from being released to the public. (And he's been coy with his medical records too). There is a disturbing pattern, although I'm far, far more disturbed about him being a naive child when it comes to foreign policy and national defense, and him being a redistributionist when it comes to my wallet.
roger, If the most important problem our President has is that he can't quit smoking, I'll just have to let it slide.
How about a President who can't stop making horrible decisions?
"Obama says: "The more I'm in public, I don't even want to pick my nose.""
Ha! If he thinks that scrutiny is bad, he oughta imagine what it must be like for an average Joe (Sam) who dares to ask him a tough question on camera!
"Obama says: "The more I'm in public, I don't even want to pick my nose.""
I try to remember that when I'm driving.
News today on the increasing thuggishness of the delusional right wing:
- A reporter physically attacked and sent sprawling to the ground at a Palin event.
- ACORN offices vandalized and receiving death threats.
And, the Ayers fixation is truly clueless and a sign that these people should be kept out of power, not given more power. Obama nailed it in the debate two nights ago.
Beldar: well said.
Michael: of course you will let it slide because you can't come up with a reasoned answer.
He's quoting the Bible verse "Judge not..." not because he has such reverence for traditional Judeo-Christian teaching, but because he could so obviously be judged himself!
And in this you criticize McCain? McCain's reading and use here is, in fact, aligned with the very point of the proscription on judging.
The Lord didn't tell us to "judge not" because it is PC
The reason the Lord told us to "judge not" is precisely because each one of us is obviously subject to being judged for our own failings, many times the same failing we are judging harshly.
And since we each have failings, we have no standing to judge, and to do so is unjust, unkind, and unloving.
Christ was, after all, trying to show us the constructs and methods of a unified and caring society, not a divided and brutal society.
you don't want a President who just doesn't have to take the time to "think" before acting.
Yes ... let's go to the UN by all means, and then?... the World Court. and then... Non aligned nations. and then? let me ask my daugter Amy. and then?
Thats it.. and then?
thats it ... and then?
AlphaLiberal: go pound sand. And I mean sand, not a Republican, something you libs do often enough. Republicans don't need to be lectured on thuggishness from the likes of you.
Smokers or tobacco chewers:
John Adams
Andrew Jackson
Zachary Taylor
Ulysses Grant
Grover Cleveland
Benjamin Harrison
Dwight Eisenhower
Gerald Ford
William Henry Harrison
Hebert Hoover
Andrew Jackson
Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Martin van Buren
John Kennedy
Gerald Ford
Ronald Reagan
George W. Bush
lem - How about the EU?
Were you around last week when they stepped up to the plate?
I believe that all of those, one way or another, are former smokers or tobacco chewers. But honestly, I think attacking Obama over smoking is pretty weak tea. We've got plenty of other dirt to fling.
mcg, well, duh...ya think?
MCG: I would have been a bit more explicit. :)
The country is strong enough, and diverse enough, to survive an Obama presidency--and it might, ultimately, be a good test of the American exceptionalism. There is always a silver lining.
AL:
News today on the increasing thuggishness of the delusional right wing:
- A reporter physically attacked and sent sprawling to the ground at a Palin event.
And now, for the thuggishness of the delusional left wing:
A spokeswoman for the Manhattan District Attorney confirms the authenticity of a story circulating on conservative blogs: That during a (rare, and small) McCain rally on Lexington Avenue and 51st Street in Manhattan last month, a hostile local grabbed a woman's sign, broke it, and hit her in the face.
Also, it's pretty telling that the only examples of politician sex scandal Katie Couric mentioned were with Democrats.
She forgot Newt Gingrich, Strom Thurmond, Vito Fossella, Larry Craig, Robert "Bob" Allen, David Vittner, Mark Foley, Ted Haggard, Jeff Gannon, Neil Bush, Dan Crane, Helen Chenoweth, Henry Hyde, and the long list of other oversexed and kinky Republicans.
Granted, she wasn't talking about pedophilia, diaper fetishes, bathroom sex, homosexual hypocrisy, or S&M fetishes. So that might exclude a few Republicans.
Oops, in my haste to edit I dropped my italics :( Oh well, it was a joke anyway.
mcg: "We've got plenty of other dirt to fling."
Doesn't appear much of of it is ticking though...and you finally identified it for what it is: "dirt."
How do you know Obama hasn't cheated on his wife.
LOL.
Somehow I'm betting Michelle would smack the taste right out of his mouth if she found out, and he knows it. Same with the kids.
News today on the increasing thuggishness of the delusional right wing:
And what are you doing, alphaliberal, to calm down the over-excited, and find the common ground of mutual interest?
Hating the haters will canker one's soul.
It seems that loving the haters, and ignoring them if all else fails, is a way we can and should go forward.
Michael: you apparently have no concept of the historical evolution of smoking and its role in increasing the health hazards in American society--50 years ago, a majority of Americans smokes including FDR and Dwight David Eisenhower. Since then the role of tobacco and its associated health hazards have been made manifest. So your recitation of people who smokes in that generation, while of historical interest, entirely begs the question of smoking in today's society. But please continue.
mcg, the link you provided has a disturbing example of political thuggishness. I condemn it and would confront the perp if I was on the scene.
You, OTOH, use it to excuse much more numerous and more violent examples from the right wing.
You are silent on the verbal and physical attacks on the news media at Palin events. Let alone the corruption of the Secret Service being used to prevent reporters from interviewing rally attendees.
There's a difference there. But I don't have time to explain it to you.
That's it. Obama should switch to chewing and spitting. It works for baseball players.
Nothing beats the dugout shot of a manager hawking a loogie.
Doesn't appear much of of it is ticking though...and you finally identified it for what it is: "dirt."
Of course it's dirt. It always is. The question is who created it (i.e., Obama himself).
McCain by contrast, takes refuge in the teachings of traditional morality.
WTF?
Traditional morality tells me that adultery is bad, and it is appropriate for folks in leadership positions to say so. And, BHO is correct: it's especially important for folks in leadership to not contradict what they preach.
How can McCain take such a dodge? He basically said that it's above his pay grade by leaving it to God and presumably the afterlife. I'm for more judging, not less--I thought that (in some ways) this was part of the "culture war."
In their own personal lives McCain and BHO's moral records don't fit with their respective positions in the "culture war."
At least, if BHO wins the election the cultural warriors won't need to cringe as McCain falls back on his true feelings about the "agents of intolerance," as he's put it himself.
You, OTOH, use it to excuse much more numerous and more violent examples from the right wing.
I do no such thing, you little twit.
I love all of the anti-smoking zealots. Shit, you may as well become a democrat with that attitude. You remind me of all of the anti-smoking loons I have to deal with in Los Angeles. I light up on outside patio at a restaurant and get looks as though I just murdered someone. Ridiculous.
I am a liberal and I smoke and I am not against tobacco companies in the least.
I thought repubs defended smoking?
roger, I offered a reasoned answer: I certainly would like for Obama to stop smoking, although I have no idea how much he smokes, and with that said, I really have bigger concerns relating to our President and his performance.
But, as for smoking itself, genetics come into play. Everybody on my mother and father's side of my family smoked their whole life and no one died of lung cancer or even heart disease (unless you count it not beating at the end).
Personally, I smoked for a few years in college, but haven't for quite some time.
Michael: still waiting for your answer to my substantive point of controlling one's addictions and holding public office. As of yet, nothing substantive. But do continue
quayle, I never realized canker was a verb. Thanks for that.
Otherwise, I'm going to continue to confront the right wing and try to show them how paranoid, delusional and unhinged they are. They've already done immense damage to the country I love and their movement must be defeated.
Blowing them kisses won't do the job, ya know?
And even Jesus confronted evildoers. Ask the moneychangers in the temple.
To answer Henry's list of 'first time hole-in-ones'.
Frank McCourt was born in 1930, got an MA in English in 1958, and was over 60 years old when he wrote Angela's Ashes.
Norman Maclean was born in 1902, got a Doctorate in 1940, and was close to 70 years old when he wrote A River Runs Through It.
John Kennedy Toole was born in 1937 and studied for a doctorate in English at Columbia. He comes close to Obama since he wrote A Confederacy of Dunces in the 1960s when he was in his 20's. The book didn't win the Pulitzer until 1981, 11 years after his death.
Elizabeth Wurtzel was fired from the Dallas Morning News for plagarism. Prozac Nation has won no awards and the movie adapation, though previewed at the Toronto Film Festival, went straight to video with no US theatrical release.
Joanne "Jo" Rowling wrote Harry Potter pretty much full time while otherwise unemployed.
integrity, you hit it right on the head.
If I were to propose a view tat ALL AMERICANS stop smoking, 95% of the people here would scream to high heaven that I'm trying to tell them what to do...and that it's a God given and American right for them to do as they please.
The argument about Obama smoking is so silly it should be on SNL.
no Michael, your answer was not reasoned at all: you simply cited a list of former smokers while ignoring the modern public health context. My point was that a person who cannot control his own addictions is a poor candidate for telling others how to control their behaviours. I have yet to see a reasoned answer on your part but please direct me to it, and I will apologize forthwith.
Now: congratulations your self discipline, and you and your family are better off for your personal self control
thx, elcubanito. : ) I meant to say the other night, congratulations and welcome to the fold!
Roger, your line of reasoning is pretty weak, as I said above. If perfect control over one's personal habits is a requirement for the presidency I dare say nobody is qualified.
Obama has far more important flaws, like his tendency to coolly and calmly deliver flat-out lie when he thinks the truth would be politically damaging. Of course, that habit is enabled by the MSM on a frequent basis. His smoking habit ranks right up there with, oh, well, the number of squares of toilet paper he uses to wipe his ass. (Rumor has it he uses more than your average male.)
Somehow I'm betting Michelle would smack the taste right out of his mouth if she found out, and he knows it. Same with the kids.
Somehow I'm betting Michelle would happily smack the taste right out of anybody's mouth for almost any reason.
The Daily Mail speculates that BO had an affair with a former staffer, who is now living on a Caribbean island. Michelle Obama, who the Daily Post says has a liking for IRANIAN caviar, exiled her to the Caribbean island. Maybe BO will join the ranks of Eliot Spitzer and John Edwards in the next two weeks.
Let's see.
mcg: Just man up. You're using ONE violent act to excuse many others:
Here's you, a few minutes ago:
AlphaLiberal: go pound sand. And I mean sand, not a Republican, something you libs do often enough. Republicans don't need to be lectured on thuggishness from the likes of you.
And you also engage in name-calling a lot.
der Hahn -- good context. The list was off the top of my head. I don't know how Wurtzel got in there, but so it goes.
Michael said...
integrity, you hit it right on the head.
If I were to propose a view tat ALL AMERICANS stop smoking, 95% of the people here would scream to high heaven that I'm trying to tell them what to do...and that it's a God given and American right for them to do as they please.
The argument about Obama smoking is so silly it should be on SNL.
A lot of the commenters here are more idiosyncratic than your average repub, normal repubs find Obama's smoking a net plus. Reveals he isn't an anti-tobacco zealot, and does not tow the party line on everything. These are not normal repubs, normal repubs still support smoking(except in L.A.).
MCG: rest assured that I not voting for Obama for reasons far more than his inability to control his own behaviors--it simply reaffirms my preferences.
This is fascinating.
First, Couric is pretty good at asking this type of question and the format of comparing answers is excellent.
Second, I realize interpretation of these answers is pretty subjective, but Ann's positive interpretation of Obama's answer shows she is descending into the tank as an Obama supporter (not in a sinister way, but once you decide to support someone, you perceive him more positively). Obama basically said that he has learned not to get caught doing something bad when you are in public life. It was hardly a moralistic answer.
Ann's other point was Obama's weird mouthing of a word or two. I probably would not have noticed it. But someone smart could probably attach some meaning to it.
Third, I thought McCain's entire answer reflected his own guilt or sorrow or embarassment about his own extramarital affair.
You're using ONE violent act to excuse many others:
What utter horseshit. I'm using that one instance as evidence that you libs have no basis for your self-righteousness on the subject. The point is that there are thugs on both sides and I don't choose to tar and feather the left because of their kooks.
And you also engage in name-calling a lot.
You mean names like "delusional right wing"? Go whine to your mother. Maybe she'll give you an extra cookie.
MCG: rest assured that I not voting for Obama for reasons far more than his inability to control his own behaviors--it simply reaffirms my preferences.
Then if it doesn't matter to Michael that he smokes, so be it. Give it a rest.
Kansas City, how are you, neighbor?
And even Jesus confronted evildoers. Ask the moneychangers in the temple.
But that was a limited act (i.e. limited in both time and space).
It was only in the temple. It was only those two times. He was showing zeal for His father's house, which was supposed to be a sacred space where people could get out of the world.
So far as we know, He didn't devote his life to going back every week to re-clear the temple, and He didn't chase the money changers down the street or follow them around yelling at them.
Alphalib, I'll bet your time could be better used forming constructive solutions, or even discussions, to our problems, along with the other people here.
As Jesus said, the poor will always be with us, and I suppose that includes the poor idiots who hate that are on each side of the political spectrum.
Obama seems to mumble/fumble before he comes up with an answer. Watch it again, Althouse. I wonder how you grade your students.
kirby olson: "Michelle Obama, who the Daily Post says has a liking for IRANIAN caviar, exiled her to the Caribbean island."
Some of you are crazier than others.
This is just plain nuts.
mcg sounds a bit cranky today:
I'm using that one instance as evidence that you libs have no basis for your self-righteousness on the subject.
You brought a case to my attention. I condemned it. As would Howard Dean, Barack or Joe Biden.
You refuse to condemn right wing attacks and threats. John McCain defended the attendees at his rally during the debate and refused to condemn threats.
One group, Dems, criticizes their own for these acts. Another, Repubs, defend these actions.
Again, the difference is simple to grasp.
You mean names like "delusional right wing"?
That's not a name, it's an apt description. "Right wing" is a commonly accepted political description.
"Delusional" refers to:
a) attributing all critical press reports of Republicans to a liberal media conspiracy,
b) elevating 15-year passing associations to a concern above issues of prosperity and war/peace,
c) thinking that some low income workers falsely filling out some voter registration forms and then those forms being turned in, as required by law, is anything of any importance let alone a vast conspiracy,
d) thinking that you can manufacture your own realities and that the rest of us have to go along with it.
This list goes through Z, believe me. There's a motherlode of material on the delusional right wing.
(And leave my mama out of it!)
You refuse to condemn right wing attacks and threats.
False. I refuse to do so at your beckon call. I think most reasonable readers on this blog understand that difference quite well.
If only Obama could give a really good speech.
You know, like John.
For the delusional right wing who think the close inspection of Joe the Plumber is a vast Dem-Media Conspircacy:
Eschaton agrees with Malkin that the media is going overboard in digging into the guy's life. (Malkin being a hypocrite on this after what she did to that little kid).
I tend to agree but think when he makes his proposed company's income a national issue that is worth looking at.
Precious:
False. I refuse to do so at your beckon call.
But Obama is supposed to condemn Ayers, Wright, whoever the right wing demands?
Shoe, on the other foot, is a poor fit apparently.
No doubt Obama's talent exceeds McCain's on that score. But to be fair he's given some barnburners in his time. His 2004 convention speech was widely praised among Republicans... it was panned by the left, but I think that can be forgiven since it was by design highly partisan. I also think that his convention speech this year was received better than pundits initially predicted.
Oops that last reply was meant for Michael.
mccullough said...Doyle,
How do you know Obama hasn't cheated on his wife.
Because the thought of Barack cheating on Michelle with anyone other than Brian Doyle is too much for him to deal with.
But Obama is supposed to condemn Ayers, Wright, whoever the right wing demands?
Well no, I think it's reasonable to limit our demands to people he's had close relationships with. You know, like a man he's served with on multiple boards, appeared on stage in public with, blurbed a book the man wrote, etc. etc. Or like a man who baptized his kids, gave him spiritual counsel for 20 years, etc. etc.
You want to compare Ayers and Wright to anonymous turd-bags at a political rally?
And what the hell does smoking have to do with self-control? We smoke because we enjoy it, I'm sure Obama loves every inhale as much as I do. I am far more disciplined than most people I know in every way, almost like my home is military(you can bounce a quarter on my bed).
What's discipline got to do with it? It's about pleasure and relaxation.
mcg, John is just fine, but he does appear to rely heavily on file cards and the like.
At this stage of the game I have a feeling smoking and speeches aren't going to weigh too much on the minds of voters.
I've said it before and will say it again: I think John McCain sealed his fate when he bypassed qualified V.P. nominees the likes of Romney, Pawlenty, Ridge and even Lieberman and selected Palin. (And yeah, yeah, I know all about the excitement and the base bullshit.)
I can't even imagine how he was talked into that...but as a Democrat I'm glad he was.
Otherwise, he would probably be leading in the polls and headed for the White House.
"Obama stresses his personal effort to achieve integrity. Obama's answer is more articulate, more deeply touching. I like the way we can see him thinking, formulating values."
Man, I didn't see that at all. I saw struggling to come up with an answer. And the answer basically was: given that I'm so much in the public eye I don't dare do things that I otherwise might want to. Not that much of a "value," but better than Clinton recklessness if true.
He presents his concern with public image as being a desire to make sure no one gets a false impression of him; but, given his past close association with currently "inconvenient" characters (Ayers, Wright, Rezko), I have to think he's more worried about the opposite sort of mismatch between image and reality.
Graeme Frost. That's the 12-yr old kid's name whose privacy was grossly violated by the right wing because he delivered a speech on SCHIP.
Joe the Plumber is, what, 50? hey, I agree the media have gone off the deep end on him, as they are wont to do. Though just looking at his expected income and seeing how it fares under the different tax plans shouldn't be an issue.
But the right wing has a bit of "consistency" (they're very sensistive so I won't say "hypocrisy") problem here. It's worth noting and learning from.
I agree the Frost episode was unseemly, but you need to remember an important distinction.
The Democrats chose him to give the radio address, with his parents permission. He was a willing tool of the party.
Joe the Plumber was hanging out in his front yard when Obama came up to him. It wasn't even a rope line. He was not prompted by the McCain campaign to say what he did.
No, mcg, my point is that the "denounce on demand" tactic is overplayed, boring and sanctimonious.
Dems could easily play that with numerous McCain associates (Liddy, Keating, his lobbyist staff). But we don't so much (campaigns, especially). Maybe we should.
I do wish the Obama-Biden campaign would flail McCain for having his transition government planned by a guy (Timmons) who lobbied our government for Saddam Hussein.
Frankly, what was unseemly about the Frost affair was that they'd have a 12-year old kid do an adult's job.
Joe the Plumber was hanging out in his front yard when Obama came up to him
That's just false, by Joe's own descriptions. He sought out Obama, who was campaigning in the neighborhood. (Smells like a setup actually).
That's just false, by Joe's own descriptions. He sought out Obama, who was campaigning in the neighborhood. (Smells like a setup actually).
Ooh, are you buying the whole McCain plant conspiracy? Puh-leeze.
I concede I might be wrong on the details there. But it doesn't change the fact that he was not seeking the national attention. That was quite by accident.
Nothing wrong with dragging a kid with health problems and his family through the mud, eh, mcg?
There were other examples of Republicans dong similar things. Your "ethics" are situational.
What is wrong with a child witnessing to a public policy issue is beyond me. Why should children be silenced?
What is wrong with grown up beating up a kid should be easy for most humans to grasp, except for the morally deficient Republican mob.
Here's a NY TImes take: One week ago, Joe Wurzelbacher was just another working man living in a modest ranch house near Toledo thinking about how to expand his plumbing business. But when he stopped Senator Barack Obama during a visit to his block this weekend to ask about his taxes, he set himself on a path to being the newest media celebrity — and, like other celebrities, found himself under scrutiny.
Yes, it suggests he sought to ask Obama a question---when Obama was walking his neighborhood.
More from that blog:
Mr. Wurzelbacher told Ms. Couric that his encounter with Mr. Obama was a matter of impulse.
“Neighbors were outside asking him questions, and I didn’t think they were asking him tough enough questions,” he said.
Nothing wrong with dragging a kid with health problems and his family through the mud, eh, mcg?
Do you even read what I wrote or do you just argue for the sake of it? I said it was unseemly. It is possible for there to be blame on both sides here. It was wrong for the Frost kid to be used by the Democrats and the conservative response was unseemly.
In fact, I'll even admit that in hindsight McCain should have known the left would pounce on Joe the Plumber and shouldn't have brought him up so directly at the debate.
...he was not seeking the national attention.
a) He's been all over the media, hardly shy about it. His claim of being hosed by Obamas tax plan is worth discussing but not every little detail of his lfe*).
b) I don't care and it's not relevant.
* - I do find his close familial relationship to Charles Keating, found by a conservative web site, to be intriguing. Remember, the convicted fraud Charles Keating
vowed to be "together for life" with John McCain. Are they still BFFs?
"I am far more disciplined than most people I know in every way, almost like my home is military(you can bounce a quarter on my bed)." Ingreity: you have no clue: you mistake anal retentivness for discipline. The rest of your post goes downhill from that.
I think Obama was 8 when McCain was out committing adultry, so it doesn't count.
"Obama stresses his personal effort to achieve integrity. Obama's answer is more articulate, more deeply touching. I like the way we can see him thinking, formulating values."
Yea, someone who can see thinking. That is the guy I want negoiating nuclear weapon treaties, trade deals, and other important issues. I am sure he will do great when the opposition knows what he is thinking.
Ann no wonder you teach law and don't practice it.
Ditz.
Shame on you, Quayle, for bringing up "cankles" after Hillary's dropped out of the race!
Wait, what?
Nevermind.
Um... which are the "numerous" "violent" Republican attacks you're referring to, alpha? Could you please cite them (so we can count)? (NB the lack of corroboration by anyone else re the "kill him" remark, ostensibly shouted when Palin was talking about *Ayers*. In any case, I assume wishes of death/assassination of Republican presidents/candidates, expressed at rallies, must be few and far between..)
I assume by "violent attack" you primarily mean "violent act"... like, oh, hitting a person in the face with a sign, or throwing molotov cocktails, or defacing property... As opposed to "just words" like-- oh, approvingly predicting a candidate's gang rape...
And I will merely note (since I don't have time to dig up the McCain quote), it is one thing to (quite rightly) "defend [the vast 99.9% majority of] attendees at his rally" as good, patriotic Americans (refuse the insulting suggestion that they are to be conflated with the "fringe element" that exists on *both* sides) and quite another to "refuse to condemn threats."
Isn't it true that the criticism of Graeme Frost and his family was mostly from the blogosphere?
I may be wrong about that, but really don't remember reading it in the NYT.
I think there is a big difference here with the mainstream (Obama media) going after Joe the Plumber.
I'm actually a little amused by it. They seem a little desperate. Why would that be??
And Donn: Have I told you that you're brilliant yet today? :)
Darcy,
Why thank you for the nice compliment.
*Blush*
McG--
FYI: beck and call
"Beck" is from "beckon" so you're not far off.
elcubanito, felicitaciones en su ciudadanía de los E.E.U.U.
* soy feliz *
* estoy bailando *
Bienvenidos al diálogo ¿La cosa entera no está encantando? Creo que usted encontrará nuestro país extremadamente esquizofrenico
a) He's been all over the media, hardly shy about it.
Only after he was sought out. And I think it is reasonable that he might not imagine the kind of scrutiny he received. He is still a private citizen after all.
His claim of being hosed by Obamas tax plan is worth discussing but not every little detail of his lfe*).
Well, to be clear, he admitted freely that he currently is not in the "rich" tax bracket and as such would be a recipient of Obama's claimed tax cuts.
b) I don't care and it's not relevant.
You think there is no difference between someone who willingly engages in politics and someone asking a candidate for president a question? Come on.
Maybe you're right, AL, perhaps Joe was a plant. He's lived in Alaska, after all.
Why even converse with Alpha Lib? The Obamessiah was questioned doubtfully by one of the serfs. The press and Obamas campaign (but I repeat myself) must destroy him for being a doubter of The Ones Plan. Barrage of "news" stories from National Media? Of course that equals 1 blogger driving by The Democrat poster child for more socialisms house and noting it's a pretty nice property to own for someone saying they need a hand-out.
Saying Obamas tax plan would unjustly take money earned is ALWAYS the same as leftwing politicians using a child to pimp for the another welfare scheme for people who don't really need the money.
And if George Bush were to move his lips like that before he spoke, we'd get a deluge of articles about how stupid W is, cause he cain't think without moving his lips.
I like the way we can see him thinking, formulating values.
Or is he formulating the right spin for the moment? Isn't that the definition of situational morality?
Both men answered a vapid question poorly and awkwardly. Couric wasted an opportunity on nonsense.
What I'd like to know is who Couric had to screw for the anchor chair.
Joe the plumber...actually doesn't even have a plumber's license...
And...
By David Neiwert Thursday Oct 16, 2008 8:59am
Turns out that Joe Wurzelbacher from the Toledo event is a close relative of Robert Wurzelbacher of Milford, Ohio.
Who’s Robert Wurzelbacher? Only Charles Keating’s son-in-law and the former senior vice president of American Continental, the parent company of the infamous Lincoln Savings and Loan.
The now retired elder Wurzelbacher is also a major contributor to Republican causes giving well over $10,000 in the last few years.
(http://crooksandliars.com/node?page=1)
bjm - "What I'd like to know is who Couric had to screw for the anchor chair."
What I'd like to know is which Democrat Ruth Bader Gisburg had to screw to get on the Supreme Court. And why that politician is not locked up in an Insane Asylum.
I'm still laughing at the attacks on Joe the Plumber. Hilarious.
Not for him, though. That's not the least bit funny. But hopefully, fair-minded Americans are taking notice of just exactly where the magnifying glass is - and isn't - in this election.
Joe the Plumber hit a nerve.
Michael,
You probably don't own a home, so this may come as a surprise but you don't need a "license" to be a plumber. It's not like a medical license or a law license.
It's a business license. A lot of people don't bother to get one because it's just a tax that towns use to generate fees. (And most plumbers who do residential work aren't in the union, so the NYT can go fuck itself on that as well. Do they have any reporters who actually know anything?)
Also, Joe works for a business so it's up to the business to get the license, not Joe. That's why it's a license.
Leave Joe alone. He's a single dad who works for a living who owes some back taxes, no big deal.
Charlie Rangel owes way more in back taxes than JtP, and Charlie's in charge of the committee that writes the tax code. He hasn't even had to give up his chair of the Ways & Means committee because the Dems consider this such a minor transgression.
Also, Obama's campaign treasurer owes back taxes as well, and he makes way more than JtP and is, you know, a financial guy who should probably be better with his money than a plumber.
Hopefully JtP can turn this celebrity into something, write a few books about himself, and run for POTUS in 4 years. That appears to be all it takes.
Why even converse with Alpha Lib?
Because he's an easy mark.
Joe the plumber...actually doesn't even have a plumber's license...
Yes, Michael, we know that. He also has a tax lien. Just like the treasurer of the Obama campaign.
Why even converse with Alpha Lib?
Because he's an easy mark.
It's also not a conversation.
FYI: beck and call
Thanks for this. You know, as I wrote that I went back and forth about which one it was. I remembered incorrectly.
Hello Elcubanito in Kansas City.
I viewed the answers again and was struck by their weakness. McCain knows that everyone knows he has cheated (although not a powerful politician at the time), so he wanted nothing to do with the question. Obama considered it a question about tactics and how important it is to avoid getting caught doing something wrong, and he really struggled to get through it (my guess is that he probably has cheated on his wife as well).
Neither attempted to answer the question about why guys do it, but presumably as guys, they both know why guys do it - a combination of the thrill and pleasure of sex with a new and attractive woman and the calculation (with mental capacity diminished by the lust for the sex) that they are unlikely to get caught. I also assume that once they have sex with a woman, then they probably calculate that continuing to have sex with her will diminish the likelihood of exposure (since it will help to keep the woman quiet while continuing to provide the pleasure of the sex).
I think this subject is probably something that most guys understand and most women do not. Looking at Couric ask the question, she certainly seemed to come across as not being able to imagine why a guy would do it.
"I’ve learned that I have what I believe is the right temperament for the presidency. Which is, I don’t get too high when I’m high and I don’t get too low when I’m low. And we’ve gone through all kinds of ups and downs."
I don't think Couric has had to sleep with anyone in recent years to get ahead, although my recollection is that there were some fairly well logcial sounding stories about her doing so at the start of her career. But that is a different issue. If it is true that she used sex to advance her career, she was not risking loss of career through exposure; she was advancing her career through promiscuity.
Could you get the implications right?
Not the facts but the suspicions-you're having a hard time with even the hypotheticals-
Man this is getting gross-
Here is CBS News trying to top fake but accurate: {I wish this place did blockquotes-this is all CBs "reporting"}-
Other blogs say Wurzelbacher may be related to Charles Keating of the Keating Five and that his father is a major Republican donor:
Joe the Plumber, the star of tonight's debate, may have a very interesting connection to John McCain. In fact, Joe the Plumber (Joe Wurzelbacher) of Cincinnati, Ohio may be related to one Robert Wurzelbacher of Cincinnati, Ohio, who happens to be Charles Keating's son-in-law. Robert Wurzelbacher was implicated in the Keating 5 scandal, and sentenced to 40 months in prison in 1993. Wurzelbacher is also a huge Republican donor.
Keep watching this story because if it proves true that "Joe the Plumber" is the wealthy, Republican regular the liberal blogs are claiming he is, the McCain campaign could go down as the most corrupt and inept in history.
CBS News
Who the hell is CBS kidding?
Are they talking about themselves there?
"The most corrupt in history..."
Ok do you get that-they are not sure but he may be related to Keating's son-in-law.
They aren't even saying that he is Keating's son-in-law.
To top it all off the stupidest thing about this is-Obama walked up to him in HIS yard-and Obama was not tricked into his redistribute the wealth answer.
The fact that Obama has been coddled by the media and by the Democrat primary process is why when faced with a real conflicting philosophy he fumbles.
Michael said...
Everybody on my mother and father's side of my family...
Well, here's your problem--your mother and father are on the same side of your family!
Susan, that was awesome.
And this from FOX News-
According to them Daily Kos has disproven that Joe the Plumber" is related to Keating's son-in-law.
And the Daily Kos even corrected The Huffington Post's claim that he was related to Charles Keating.
FOX News
Given a choice, I would not have selected his ears, either.
madawaskan, I've heard that Joe the plumber is actually related to Kevin Bacon. What a scoundrel!
Actually I didn't hear that. I just made it up.
But Wurzelbacher does mean "Bacon" in German.
Really.
Okay, no.
Keep diggin' dirt on that unlicensed (illegal, undocumented) plumber. You guys have no idea where you're going with this do you?
Ancient Chinese Proverb-
You can pick your nose, you can't pick your relatives, and you can pick who's living room you do your fund raisers in.
Ha! Henry. That was cute.
CBS. Pfft. Didn't work the last time they tried this crap.
Henry-
LOL!
I think it means -
Super Bacon...
That would be Überwurzelbacher
I love it. The left and their media enablers have labeled this poor guy Joe the Plumber and now they are calling him out for not being what they themselves labeled him as.
How about Joe the Guy Who Dared Questioned the One in His Own Yard?
P.S. Nice sexism, T Mack. Dick.
Look my German is fake but accurate.
His full name is Angenommener Schwiegersohn von Keating
Angenommener Schwiegersohn von Hitler Keating
he wants to be, truly, the person he seems to be: "that there's no gap between who I am and the face that I'm presenting in the world."
WHAT a revealing thing to say.
I do not think these words mean what he thinks they mean.
Seven-
LMAO you win-I'm off to go snap my own lederhosen.
Gawd people are trying to drag me out to see "W" I've got to come up with a Plan B..
They told me they were joking but still.
Obama rocks. He is just who we think he is and will rule us in a fair and just manner.
I want my check and I want it now.
"Joe" can't plumb in Toledo without a license, sad to say.
All journeymen and apprentices working in the City of Toledo must hold a City of Toledo license in their respective trade.
Building Inspection is responsible for examining all journeymen and registering all apprentices and contractors. If you cannot find what you are looking for, please contact the Division of Building Inspection at 419.245.1220
There's a journeyman plumber exam next week; I hope Joe didn't miss the registration deadline.
To view licensing code regulations see below:
Residential home improvement and remodeling (includes fences and pools) - TMC 1313
Residential electrical, heating, plumbing and air conditioning - TMC 1311
Commercial electrical, heating, plumbing, air conditioning, refrigeration, pressure piping - TMC 1311
Sign installation - TMC 1383
Sidewalk Installation - TMC 911
Sewer tappers and cleaners - TMC 927
Trade Proposed
2008 Exam Deadline Proposed
2008 Exam Date
PLUMBING/STEAMFITTER JOURNEYMAN February 15, 2008
September 19, 2008 March 15, 2008
October 25, 2008
Keep diggin' dirt on that unlicensed (illegal, undocumented) plumber. You guys have no idea where you're going with this do you?
Republicans make a practice of (1) Thinking obeying the law is for jerks, and (2) basing their policy decisions on bullshit.
Gawd people are trying to drag me out to see "W" I've got to come up with a Plan B..
Just tell them you can't watch horror movies.
But I still don't think Obama wrote "Dreams From My Father."
Well, I think Maureen Daly wrote "Seventeenth Summer," and Betty Smith wrote "A Tree Grows in Brooklyn," even though the 16-and-under MD did not leave much of a paper trail. Maybe autobiographical novels turn out better.
Picking your nose, or sniffing your finger?
Oh, to inhale the heavenly stank of The One.
I really would like to know how a person's occupational license affects their opinion.
Also, I predict that this general kind of politics of personal destruction will soon backfire on its makers in unexpected ways. Thankfully, you'll always have charges of racism and stupidity to fall back on. Just remember: it's not you. It's them.
Obama's moving his lips because he's being fed the answer. Left ear.
Chip Ahoy said...
elcubanito, felicitaciones en su ciudadanía de los E.E.U.U.
* soy feliz *
* estoy bailando *
Bienvenidos al diálogo ¿La cosa entera no está encantando? Creo que usted encontrará nuestro país extremadamente esquizofrenico
5:47 PM
knox said...
thx, elcubanito. : ) I meant to say the other night, congratulations and welcome to the fold!
4:11 PM
Thank you!!! You guys rock!!!
I like the way we can see him thinking
That's what I like about him, in one-on-one interviews. Makes me think I'd like him as a friend, at least, if not as a president.
I saw him move his lips, put them together in a "P" to say next "President" of the United States when he first introduced Joe Biden. He didn't say it just then but I saw him almost say it; and then it got away from him and he did say it the next time. Yes, if you watch you can read his mind!
The difference is generational as well as ideological. Since the 1960s (remember the "confessional poets"?) we've lived in an age of public psychology, introspection, confession, and memoir. You're right that in McCain's time, public and private were separate and accepted as very different. You put a good face on things in public and kept your sins, addictions, etc. under wraps. Conservatives still somewhat operate on that principle. For liberals, on the other hand, almost the worst sin is hypocrisy, maybe because of the depth of the disillusionment when hypocrites are exposed. What Obama is trying to avoid is hypocrisy. Conservatives, on the other hand, are fond of quoting -- I think it's LaRochefoucauld: "Hypocrisy is the tribute that vice pays to virtue."
Finally, a non sequitur:
I was in Stuttgart Airport, on my way to Milan to meet J, my husband, who was making a commercial there. (They flew him, I found a cut-rate flight.) 1998.
Some bohemian, spiritually-correct middle-aged Germans were seeing off a Tibetan monk in saffron robes. He looked to be maybe in his mid to late 40s. They treated him with great reverence and a visible self-satisfaction at being involved with him.
After they left, the monk sat there and picked his nose completely openly -- screwed his pinky finger up there, with no embarrassment or reflex of polite concealment.
I was awed. Was this a case of, "Enlightenment means never having to say you're sorry for picking your nose?" Or was it just normal Tibetan country manners?
What is the sound of one . . .
Perhaps global warming could be halted if people simply extinguished all the burning votive candles under their framed photos of The One.
All this sophomoric adulation for Obama emanating from seemingly well-educated people is just plain creepy.
Michael--
When Dedalus had put the last touches to what he had begun, the artificer balanced his own body between the two wings and hovered in the moving air. He instructed the boy as well, saying ‘Let me warn you, Icarus, to take the middle way, in case the moisture weighs down your wings, if you fly too low, or, if you go too high, the sun scorches them. Travel between the extremes. And I order you not to aim towards Bootes, the Herdsman, or Helice, the Great Bear, or towards the drawn sword of Orion: Take the course I show you!’
At the same time as he laid down the rules of flight, he fitted the newly created wings on the boy’s shoulders. While he worked and issued his warnings, the aging man’s cheeks were wet with tears: The father’s hands trembled.
He gave a never-to-be-repeated kiss to his son, and lifting upwards on his wings, flew ahead, anxious for his companion, like a bird, leading her fledglings out of a nest above, into the empty air. He urged the boy to follow and showed him the dangerous art of flying, moving his own wings and then looking back at his son.
Some angler catching fish with a quivering rod or a shepherd leaning on his crook or a ploughman resting on the handles of his plough saw them, perhaps, and stood amazed, believing them to be gods able to travel the sky.
at the end of the day Obama is going to beat micky C by a whopper of a margin, we won't have Miss ColdThighs of Alaska to make fun of, the country will be in the mess GWB let it, we will be in 3-4 wars and no one living here except Friends of George will be able to afford oatmeal.
On the brigh side, we will have a President who can speak the majority language of the nation, who won't start every sentence like it was a Quaker meeting (well my friends! my ass), who doesn't spend all day finding the bottom of the pit of low class/low rent, who has nothing to glorify him past being a POW... and I mean that with respect.
McCain's shinning moment came 40 years ago. He has only bitched on moaned since.
Lefties have no problem with illegal aliens (lawbreakers by definition) working unlicensed for construction companies, but a citizen that doesn't have a license is to be shunned as a law breaker.
But, it isn't about the legality. It's about ideology and the ends justify the means.
FLS you are a joke. Thank God you aren't a lawyer.
Vera Baker.
Who is Vera Baker?
http://www.stoptheaclu.com/archives/2008/10/12/did-obama-have-an-affair-with-vera-baker-recently/
McCain's answer is entirely a function of his past experience of committing adultery, and some basic revulsion he feels about being judgmental towars others on that issue as a result (public figures or otherwise). But it reveals nothing about him neyond that.
Obama is, as always, giving us a window to his inner self. Whatever else you can say about him, this type of answer can only provoke admiration, assuming it is true (which we have every reason to believe, and absolutely none to disbelieve).
Those who who are inclined to judge Obama as insincere or "political" do so on every issue nd everyhting he says or does. It says much more about them than it does about him. But at least there is every indication that what we see is what we get; that despite his past associations, which have been deeply distorted by his political enemies for their own political benefit, his public life has reflected none of the political extremism or immorality that typify those with whom he is being associated. I wish I could say the same for McCain, who seems to have been unduly influenced by Gordon Liddy, Rush Limbaugh and other immoral men who have made a life's work of casting aspersions at others for the sake of their seriously warped political ideologies.
Andrew Sullivan explains why Barack Obama is so conservative:
"Obama's skin color has obscured a pretty basic fact about him: he seems to have had a very conservative private life as a public figure. His marriage and family life have been much more traditional than John McCain's - someone who admits to promiscuity and adultery and divorce. Unlike McCain he's a long-time regular church-goer. "
Sullivan twists himself in knots
And what church would that be Andrew? Obama's Church for Twenty Years
But if you raise issues about Obama's church, you are racist.
You cannot make this stuff up.
Gawd people are trying to drag me out to see "W" I've got to come up with a Plan B..
Go with them, then make an excuse like you wanted popcorn after all or need to use the rest room... then go see Max Paine...
Tell them you lost them in the dark and sat in the back.
"Wow, "W" was a better movie than I expected."
SGT Ted said..."Lefties have no problem with illegal aliens (lawbreakers by definition) working unlicensed for construction companies, but a citizen that doesn't have a license is to be shunned as a law breaker."
Yeah, it's ONLY the "lefties" who hire the illegals.
Duh.
Michael: "And I also have to assume, based on your silly comment, that you don't do much reading"
And I have to assume, based on your silly comment that you don't do much thinking (I know, it's hard for you.)
Henry: "Oh please.
Angela's Ashes by Frank McCourt"
I'm sure you know that McCourt taught Engish for 30 years before he wrote his book. My wife, a nationally certified teacher, teaches high school English too. She regularly grades 100 papers a week and writes personal essays and professional journal articles and a dozen other things. If she wanted to write a memoir, she easily could. But she has a 27 year paper trail behind her, starting with her PhD thesis. Where is Obama's paper trail? Time magazine called "Dreams From My Father" a masterpiece. I won't quibble with that. All I want to know is what did Obama write before "Dreams" that has any literary merit whatsoever? He had to have written something--a short story, an essay, a letter to a friend--that at least showed a hint of literary sophistication.
But there are no hints with Obama. He never wrote anything, just as he never wrote "Dreams From My Father" either.
Ive never understood how we can allow people such atrocities in their lives to be president. And its not that they cant committ them but be honest... I mean jeez we dont need anymore lying and fear mongering.... its like my favorite book America2014 explains. Its a sequel of 1984 and demonstrates the reality possible with a Cheney Bush like administration we can not have eight years more of the same. check out the books altered bill of rights at America2014.com
Ive never understood how we can allow people such atrocities in their lives to be president. And its not that they cant committ them but be honest... I mean jeez we dont need anymore lying and fear mongering.... its like my favorite book America2014 explains. Its a sequel of 1984 and demonstrates the reality possible with a Cheney Bush like administration we can not have eight years more of the same. check out the books altered bill of rights at America2014.com
I haven't read all the comments, but from reading this blog post and reading the first few comments, I'm surprised no one's pointing out the obvious distinction.
What's different about Obama vs. McCain when it comes to adultery?
McCain has committed adultery -- definitely against his first wife, and supposedly against Cindy.
When McCain was in the middle of that interview, he didn't know what Couric was going to say next. If he had criticized adulterers, for all he knew, she might have retorted that he, by his own admission, has committed adultery. He was trying to minimize how bad he'd look if she had brought that up (or if viewers made the connection themselves).
Actually, what's different is that McCain was caught.
Obama will be, too.
What prejudice are you basing that on?
Call it "the prejudice of media bias".
I don't suppose he's Clinton-esque or anything. But the #1 ingredient in infidelity is opportunity. Politicians and movie stars hardly stand a chance.
So, there's a prejudice there. Call it "the prejudice of celebrity".
And, hey, maybe Vera Baker really did do something non-sexual for her paycheck, even if it didn't match her title, and maybe she ran off to Martinique for non-BHO-related reasons, I certainly don't know.
I do know that the press isn't going to pursue it as long as there are dumpsters in Wasila to be rooted through, and people to make the adultery claim against Sarah and Todd Palin that are six-times removed.
So, you could call that the "prejudice of If they could clear it, they would, but since they can't it's best just to ignore it."
Enough prejudices for you? I've got more.
And, JAC, linking to that disgraceful NYT article is, well, disgraceful.
Well, first, I suppose, because of the NYT's ombudsman maintaining that the point of the story wan't to allege that McCain had an affair. Because, you know, if they had, they would've had to have come up with some sort of evidence.
Second, because it was such a transparent attempt to plant that idea in people's minds, absence of any actual proof, that the blog proprietress called this argument ludicrous. And yet, here you are offering it as evidence.
Like all political propaganda, the point isn't to prove anything but to make the accusation stick. Whether Obama's Islamic beliefs or the idea that John McCain was a material part of the Keating 5, this stuff gets thrown out so that useful idiots can advance some perceived cause.
It's beneath serious commentary.
Second, because it was such a transparent attempt to plant that idea in people's minds, absence of any actual proof...
Oh, there's evidence. The reporter talked to McCain staffers, and by the reporter's account, they were "convinced" that McCain's relationship with that woman had become "romantic."
It's hearsay, and it's open to question, and it's fine with me if you don't believe it. Of course it's possible that the reporter stretched the truth, or that the staffers were misperceiving things or were just lying. But it is evidence.
So I don't see why you'd think it's "beneath serious commentary" -- given that your earlier comment clearly suggests that you think politicians' affairs can be relevant.
Oh, there's evidence. The reporter talked to McCain staffers, and by the reporter's account, they were "convinced" that McCain's relationship with that woman had become "romantic."
That's not evidence of anything. You have to believe first of all that the reporters: a) didn't just flat make it up; b) talked to someone who was in a position to know; c) said source was capable of making a competent decision.
Now, since the official stance on the story was that it wasn't meant to even so much as imply that McCain actually had an affair, yet here you are citing it as exactly such, I'm inclined to conclude that someone's being dishonest.
In other words, it's only evidence that, minimally, the journalist(s) in question wanted to smear McCain. Whether or not they interviewed others with the same mission isn't really relevant.
Sort of like, I could decide Jews are the cause of the world's problems, and then to "report" on that "fact", I could interview Palestinians, Arabs, Nazis and the occasional Althouse commenter, but none of it would amount to actual evidence.
It's hearsay, and it's open to question, and it's fine with me if you don't believe it. Of course it's possible that the reporter stretched the truth, or that the staffers were misperceiving things or were just lying. But it is evidence.
It's not even hearsay of actual acts, it's hearsay of suspicions. Granted, that looks like the gold standard these days, what with us now getting rumors of hearsay of suspicions.
But, you see, you're still acting like the purpose of the story was to bring some facts to light, but in fact, the purpose of the story was to smear McCain. The "facts" are marshaled, or created, as necessary to fulfill the mission.
So I don't see why you'd think it's "beneath serious commentary" -- given that your earlier comment clearly suggests that you think politicians' affairs can be relevant.
Where do I suggest that?
What I suggest is that the question was asked in order to embarrass McCain. His affairs, real and imagined, are out in the open. Obama knows he's in safe hands, 'cause no one's gonna bring up his indiscretions.
Post a Comment