Showing posts with label misplaced outrage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label misplaced outrage. Show all posts

Thursday, July 17, 2008

Enough Phony Outrage For One Day

When you read things like this, you wonder if Hanson isn't about to burst into tears after he writes something as overwrought as this:

(Barack Obama said this to Glamour magazine)
"It's infuriating, but it's not surprising, because let's face it: What happened was that the conservative press—Fox News and the National Review and columnists of every ilk—went fairly deliberately at her in a pretty systematic way...and treated her as the candidate in a way that you just rarely see the Democrats try to do against Republicans."

And that's where Hanson cuts Obama off. Fair enough. Here's the rest of Obama's thought:
And I've said this before: I would never have my campaign engage in a concerted effort to make Cindy McCain an issue, and I would not expect the Democratic National Committee or people who were allied with me to do it. Because essentially, spouses are civilians. They didn't sign up for this. They're supporting their spouse. So it took a toll. If you start being subjected to rants by Sean Hannity and the like, day in day out, that'll drive up your negatives.

Everybody who knows Michelle knows how extraordinary she is. She's ironically the most quintessentially American woman I know. She grew up in a "Leave it to Beaver" family. She is the best mother I know. And our kids are a testimony to that, because she's really had to raise them, oftentimes without me being there. She's the most honest person I know, she's smart, she's funny, so yeah, it infuriates me. And I think that it is an example of the erosion of civility in our political culture that she's been subjected to these attacks, and my attitude is that the people who have attacked her in the ways that they have...if they've got a difference with me on policy, they should debate me. Not her.

Now that you know the context of the answer--whereby, Obama all but demands that the attacks on Cindy McCain either stop or not be undertaken by anyone affiliated with his campaign--you can see why Hanson dishonestly cut off Obama's answer. So now we get the phony outrage of a man so desperate to find something to hold on to, you'd think he was coming unglued:
But this is disingenuous. First, Ms. Obama is the recipient of almost continuously positive attention and press coverage in the network news. In CNN's comparative profiles of the candidates, it dwelt on her accomplishments, while focusing on Ms. McCain's problems with prescription drugs, her privileged status, the circumstances of her meeting John McCain, etc.

Second, Ms. Obama, not on the prompt of the National Review, chose to play a highly partisan role, and, furthermore, publicly to indict American culture and life on the basis of her newfound prominence and exposure as a wife of a candidate, all in a way none of the other spouses of candidates in either party did with the exception of Bill Clinton — who not surprisingly was equally cross-examined.

These are things that I have simply never heard nor have I ever seen--have you? I mean, she went on The View and people loved her. She meets with people, and she talks about family issues--she leaves the AK-47 at home, obviously.

We're to expect the wife of a Presidential candidate to say nothing and hide in the background? I don't think Michelle Obama has said or done anything differently from that of Cindy McCain--and NEITHER of them approach the levels of partisanship we saw from Bill Clinton in the primary process. Not that that's bad--but Bill was far more political, for obvious reasons--he was the President of the United States, for God's sake.

Most observers, after all, will take offense when told by a potential First Lady that their country heretofore is not the sort of place to inspire pride, or is downright mean, or its people usually "uninvolved and uninformed". Most of us either did not know of Michelle Obama, or, to the extent we did, had a favorable opinion of her as a successful wife, mother, and highly educated and experienced career professional—until in a series of "raise the bar" sermons, she let loose a barrage of indictments against American culture.

Really, Mr. Hanson? Then why did the father of President Bush stand before the American people with the intention of distancing himself from Ronald Reagan and ask for a "kindler, gentler nation?" Amnesia sets in when we start trying to gin up phony outrage.
Once again the pattern proves the same: the Obamas spontaneously offer biting fundamental critiques on the unsoundness of American life and culture, from the important to the silly—whether our national temperament, or our supposed inability to speak a foreign language, or our diet, etc—and then the Senator recoils in anguish and hurt when any of the targets suggests that they are both wrong in their indictments and not especially the sort who can make the case America has been mean or unfair to its citizens.

Here's President Bush calling for more physical fitness and a healthier lifestyle--it's what Presidents do. And here he makes a fool of himself addressing the Italian prime minister in Spanish--now, do you think it would be wise to emphasize a little learning and accomplishment in this regard?
It is the duty of all journalists to call Obama on his double-standard on every occasion he draws upon it, since we are seeing a dangerous messianic quality in which anything short of the accustomed adoration becomes "infuriating" and a sort of exemption from cross-examination on an always expanding array of topics is demanded.

I don't see adoration--I see smears and lies, mostly. The only "adoration" one sees comes when the press attends a barbecue at one of John McCain's seven homes.

Tuesday, May 27, 2008

Yet Another Asshole Who Can't Live With Others

Right on cue, the media gives us another "outrageous" Memorial Day story about people who hate America and the proud American who just loves this country so much he has to put a flag in his yard to prove it.

A Central Florida war veteran faces a lawsuit for flying the American flag in his front yard.

"I don't understand why it would bring down the values of our homes by flying the American flag from a pole in my front yard," homeowner Jimmie Watkins said.

Watkins and his wife, Ria, received a final notices [sic] from the Sussex homeowners' association in Clermont that they must remove the flag or else face legal action.


This is clearly another story where someone moved into an area without bothering to find out if that area was governed by the rules of a "homeowners association." In an era where personal responsibility is a quaint and distant cousin of accountability and common sense, and none of them live around here anymore, there are countless examples where someones "lifestyle" has a conflict with the rules set by the people who got together and agreed upon them.

The former retired U.S. Navy communications officer said he refuses to back down for the American flag.

"Our people are serving today to give us freedom," Watkins said. "To do as we like here within the law of America. It is my right to fly my flag from my pole and until a court of law tells me to haul that down. I will not haul it down. I think about all of the people who have served our nation and all of the lives that it's costs and all of the friends that I've lost."



Actually, the "people who served this nation" also served the people who set the rules for the subdivision. Someone needs to sit down with Watkins and encourage him to grow up and live in the adult world. The explanation would probably go like this:

Your rights don't take precedence over the rights of someone else. They made a rule, and you accepted that rule along with many others when you freely moved in to that subdivision. Where the conflict happened is when you decided to do whatever you wanted to do. You went and bought a flagpole, a shovel, and a bag of quick-setting concrete. You threw your back out putting up a flagpole one day. And then you got a letter telling you to take it down. That's when you dug out that pile of papers that you never read in the first place and had your "oh shit!" moment.

The result was a temper tantrum over the rules. But because you didn't find out what those rules were, you're not expressing your freedom--you're showing everyone how ignorant you are. And when you get caught looking stupid, the easiest thing in the world to do is to pretend to be super-patriotic and indignant and talk about dead Veterans. Well, there isn't a single dead Veteran who died so you could get away with not understanding what your homeowners association rules state with regards to flagpoles and the like.


This association sent Watkins numerous notices and probably tried to work with him. But because Watkins can't live with other human beings, he is using patriotism to win an argument that he lost when he signed the papers accepting the rules of his subdivision.

The homeowners association is not commenting about their rules. But state law said anyone can display a flag in a "respectful manner" as long as it is removable, Local 6 reported.


Watkins, however, has a permanent flagpole in his front yard. So Watkins is not in going to find a solution to the problem by citing the Florida state law, either. The media, of course, loves non-stories like this. It drums up misplaced outrage and allows the mob to rule. The end result is that a hypocritical, immature asshole who can't understand the rules will probably get to keep his flagpole in his yard. And he gets away with it by throwing down the dead Veteran trump card, one that should never get played in the first place.