McCain vs. Every Damn Journalist
August 1, 2008 1 Comment
You know your shit stinks when every damn reporter calls you out, even the entertainment ones:
McCain’s latest attempt at discrediting his handsome, photogenic young rival particularly galls stars and executives with a memory, because only eight years ago, McCain was a fixture in Hollywood fundraising circles when he tried to raise money from the very people his ad now ridicules.
At the time, dozens of people in Hollywood — including Lear, Harrison Ford, Quincy Jones, Berry Gordy and Michael Douglas — gave to McCain because they thought he was a Republican celebrity ƒè with a great personal story. And, dare we say, some celebrities, namely Warren Beatty, even became friends with the Arizona senator.
But the truth is most of Hollywood won’t return McCain’s calls nowadays because many of the stars and executives he initially impressed now believe the maverick stance they found so attractive was just a pose. Hollywood doesn’t object to a good pose — unless, of course, it doesn’t work.
… The fact of the matter is that for all his popularity in the entertainment industry, Obama has kept Hollywood at a friendly but slight distance. He’s hardly waded into the scene with the sort of relish that Bill Clinton did in the 1990s.
The press kicking the crap out of McCain is not going unnoticed… the recent tirade from the Wall Street Journal is definitely special – as I read it, I found myself worrying that the writer was going to accidentally choke on his tie because of how upset he seemed while writing it.
However, in “Dick Move of the Week,” Jon Stewart is our new Secretary of Awesome.
Politico also gets in on the fun:
When McCain has focused on domestic policy, it has generally been to offer headline-grabbing plans, such as his proposal for a gas tax holiday and his claim that allowing offshore drilling could have an immediate effect on gas prices, both of which were almost universally derided by economists across the ideological spectrum.
The Washington Post gets out its big stick and swings at McCain over his failure to understand economics:
Experts on the financial markets have had a different experience with the candidate. One who met with McCain earlier this summer to discuss the subprime lending crisis said McCain spoke about it only “in platitudes,” relying on populist political talking points.
McCain did not seem to understand economics, or to be interested in the subject, said this person, who insisted on anonymity to discuss the meeting.
McCain admitted his lack of expertise to the Wall Street Journal in 2005: “I’m going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated.”
his vague foriegn policy:
McCain can be impatient with complicated answers to questions he considers straightforward, with gray when he sees black and white. For example, he sees no gray outcome possible in Iraq: “In war,” he has said, “there is no such thing as compromise; you either win or you lose.” But he has not defined victory in Iraq, and many wars have ended ambiguously.
McCain’s commentary on Iraq often echoes his descriptions of the Vietnam War. He can make both sound like classical military confrontations and rarely mentions their political complexities. Asked about this in the interview, McCain said the North Vietnamese won with a tank-led invasion of South Vietnam at a time when President Richard Nixon, hobbled by the Watergate scandal, could not respond by using American air power. “We lost in Vietnam because we lost the will to fight, because we did not understand the nature of the war we were fighting, and because we limited the tools at our disposal,” McCain has said, implying that the war could have been won — again without defining victory.
… In recent days, he has all but declared victory in Iraq: “This conflict has succeeded,” he said in the interview. “All I can say is they [the Iraqis] are establishing the rule of law, they’re going to be having elections, and I think they’re becoming an effective government, which is what our strategy was, thanks to the genius of a guy named David Petraeus.”
and generally not making a damn bit of sense at all:
… in a speech this past spring, McCain called for expelling Russia from the Group of Eight, the club of leading economic powers, on the grounds that Russia is not a real democracy. Not long after, he gave a speech in Denver on arms control and suggested that the United States “can work in partnership with Russia to strengthen protections against weapons of mass destruction.”
“Would that happen before or after we kick them out of the G-8?” quipped a Republican arms control expert who held high positions in previous Republican administrations.
Asked about this, McCain seemed to back off the threat to expel Russia from the G-8. “Well, you know,” he said, “I’d like to send them a hard signal [but] . . . you need to work with them in areas of common interest.” But Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” McCain returned to the idea of expelling Russia from the G-8. “We need to improve their behavior,” he said.
Of course, the surest sign of a campaign on fire is when the insiders start complaining to the press about how bad the campaign is going. We’ve seen this before with Hillary’s campaign, with her advisers scrambling all over each other to place the blame on somebody else, desperately trying to make sure they can still get a job after working for such a fiasco…
McCain, who was most comfortable as an underdog in the unscripted environment of the New Hampshire primary, makes his advisers cringe as he delivers the attack line — and then keeps talking. In that respect, he is no Bush, his handlers say.
… “It’s the candidate,” said one GOP strategist with close ties to the campaign, who added that efforts to identify a theme for each week quickly unravel as McCain veers off message in his public comments.