The MSM and the bloviating teevee bobbleheads have been acting this way for years, this is nothing new.  Obama’s campaign should understand that and be dealing with it.  We’re in the general election cycle now.

I figure that Obama was mainly there to deal with rumors of his being insufficiently Christian, and not so much to stump, per se.  If so, I’m guessing he did okay (although “guess” is the operative word here—I don’t know the mindset of people to whom his religious affiliation isn’t really, really obvious).

McCain was not only stumping, he was pretty much entirely regurgitating phrases from his stump speech.

. . . John McCain didn’t roll over and play dead . . .

How can you tell the difference?

you’re belittling a man who has been successful throughout his life,

This is not actually true, but that’s neither here nor there.

Apparently you’re praising McCain to the high heavens and saying that the didn’t “roll over” because what he did was…. spend the entire time reverting to canned recitations of his stump speech during a Q&A;session. I’m not really sure how this helps your case for what a great guy John McCain was.

And, given what we know now, I don’t think that talking about how great Bush was compared to Gore is a particularly compelling line of argument.

Misguided?  Self-centered?  Historically ignorant? Your fears too easily manipulated?  Easily distracted by clever tricks?  Yes.

Stupid?  No…

At a certain point there’s little difference in straining to explain the distinction. “Stupid” is not a clinical diagnosis. Plenty of the things you describe in the first part are symptoms of what we colloquially call “stupid.” And while those symptoms might explain his problems in a bit more detail, “stupid” also suffices as a shorthand.

That’s been a huge problem of the Bush presidency—it has forced us to avoid saying that something is “stupid” when that used to be a perfectly good word to describe what’s going on. He seems to get very defensive and gets fearful that MikeEss is going to call him stupid, as though this is some major sin. But why? Perhaps his persecution complex depends on knowing that people call him stupid. In that case, it’s probably not a good idea to feed into it, but it’s hardly wrong to say that. When does “ignorant and easily manipulated” end and “stupid” begin?

Al Gore’s campaign began the meme that George Bush was an idiot, and y’all lapped it up—and then he came on and beat you.

If by “beat” you mean “cheated and manipulated to steal the election from the guy who got 2 million more votes,” then I guess that counts as “beat.” 

Most people don’t think that cheating is a valid way to win, but I guess you guys don’t care if you win fairly as long as Bush got into office and starts the giveaways to his oil buddies.

On the contrary, it’s Obama’s election that would be amazing.  That would represent the first time in 40-years that intelligence won over an image of arrogant posturing, that substance won over superficiality, that thoughtful action won over the politics of constant, irrational, manufactured, manipulative fear…

That is so true.

“Subtract California, and Mr Bush won the plurality of votes.”

If your hypothetical involves subtracting an entire state from the nation, then it is hardly something to hang your hat on.

I prefer to give mine full credit for intelligence, courage and nerve.

I think we have different standards of intelligence. Rank, willful ignorance and allowing oneself to be easily manipulated does not make one intelligent, even if one can send an e-mail and use a computer (is that a subtle dig at McCain?). By your standard, perfectly “intelligent” people are Scientologists even though they’re believing stupid, stupid things. As I said, it seems to feed into your persecution complex to call you “stupid,” but it really has corrupted our discourse when we’re somehow not allowed to call a spade a spade.

I don’t admire the used car salesmen because of his “intelligence, courage, and nerve” required to outwit his customers. That’s because I have somewhat different standards of intelligence. If said used car salesman keeps telling me how evolution isn’t really science and how human-caused global warming is a hoax, I’m going to think the guy can be described by the colloquial term “stupid,” even if I might dress it up in talk about how he’s easily manipulated, incurious, willfully ignorant, etc.

It’s hard to credit many activists on the right with much when they are some of the least informed people around. I’m supposed to “credit” them for their ability to mindlessly repeat talking points? I have to conclude that you’re simply an “intellectual value system.” You can think that this is equivalent to calling you stupid or not, because you seem really hung up on that particular word, but it describes the phenomenon.

I have to conclude that you’re simply an “intellectual value system.”

“I have to conclude that you simply lack an ‘intellectual value system.’ ”

I don’t know how that sentence got messed up.

Dana:

Are you really surprised that John McCain didn’t roll over and play dead, or that Barack Obama, who really doesn’t have that much experience politically, might not perform as well as you anticipate at every opportunity, in every forum?

False premise.

Bad conservative. No cookie for you.

It has been my impression that some of my friends on the left simply think that conservatives are just plain stupid.

It’s not that we think conservatives as a general class are stupid, Dana, it’s that we think you personally are stupid, and you’re just not smart enough to tell the difference.

Why not say that you believe that people who think like you do are smart, and people who hold different opinions, opinions such as mine, must be irretrievably stupid?

In light of the above, I reject your assertion that you (personally) are capable of generating opinions of your own.

Regardless, I think that y’all misunderestimate your opponents,

Not so. You won’t find any of us underestimating the GOP’s ability or desire to lie, cheat, steal and manipulate their way into an election victory.

while I prefer to give mine full credit for intelligence, courage and nerve.

Well, that’s very magnanimous of you. It’s also, in light of your very first comment in this thread, demonstrably untrue.

Dana used the phrase “my friends” twice but, conspicuously, did not say “seriously” even ONCE.

I have to question Dana’s conservative credentials in light of John McCain’s serious, engaging, serious, friendly, very serious performance last night.

PS John McCain is likable and serious unlike Obama who is elitist and jokey

Obama had to make nicey-nice with Rick Warren because if he didn’t, we’d have a barrage of stories about how he was dismissive and disrespectful of an important evangelical leader, a troubling sign that Democratzzzzz… sorry, trailed off there.  But you know that that’s what would have happened.

While y’all are deciding whether or not California is important, can we Mainers try out Canadianism for a bit? Might be a nice change, living in a country not in perpetual wars or run by criminals…

many are plenty bright, but just mean and/or selfish.

I consider myself “plenty bright.” When it comes to the visual arts, however, I really don’t have much of an instinct for understanding it, and I haven’t studied much of it. I suppose if I started pontificating about my opinions about painting and cinematography using a set of scripted talking points that were completely wrong, people would be well within their rights to call me “stupid” when I spouted off a bunch of ignorant opinions about it and refused to back down in the face of evidence against my claims.

I know plenty of intelligent conservatives—some of them merely have different interests than I do, and obviously, our interests conflict, which is why I choose one party and they another. However, modern Republicanism in many ways requires you to become stupid if you are not, already, because being part of the Republican “club” requires you to call climate scientists liars perpetrating a hoax, be against evolution, claim that going to war in Iraq in 2003 was an important, necessary thing requiring us to stay forever, and lash out in hostility and claims of betrayal whenever anyone speaks out against the use of torture.  So if you didn’t start out stupid, you will rapidly become so as you absorb the bizarre talking points of your right-wing peers and adopt them in order not to be socially ostracized. The republicans that avoid this journey into stupidity end up having a few narrowly focused interests that they realize are only served by adherence to the Republican party (high-income people like their tax cuts, and it’s hard to blame them for their party choice if that’s the only thing they’re concerned about) or end up arguing that the Democrats should become the center-right party of balanced budgets, low-regulations, and against public subsidies, because the Republicans have clearly fallen too far off the edge of rational thought, and there aren’t any other 3rd party options.

“louise, go for it.  We Californians won’t say a word.  I can’t speak for Virginia though (that’s where Dana lives)…

Damn it.  Way down by NC, right?  Please?

I wish we could see more debates between Obama and McCain. This was a great opportunity to actually compare the two candidates on several levels. Although I think they both did good jobs in presenting their points of view, John McCain came across as the more seasoned, experienced, and decisive of the two candidates. When it comes to leadership and solving the numerous problems facing this country, John McCain stood head and shoulders above Obama.

How many John McCain points did you get for that, Howard?

McCain on message? If the question was: tell us about the time you were captured by the viet cong. And now Senator McCain will tell us about the time he was captured by the viet cong. Oh come on John, please tell us once more about the time you were captured by the viet cong.

And then there was his comment about what it means to be a christian. It means I’m saved and forgiven, every day. So much for christianity being about having a debt to discharge. So much for accepting the responsibility to make disciples. And of course if Jesus was here he would be serving the interests of the rich and twisted?

You’ve got to be joking.

You don’t know the real deal when you see it.

Oh yeah, one more thing, John McCain is mentally and socially ill and unfit to serve in the capacity of president. He needs a couch and some pills.

When it comes to leadership and solving the numerous problems facing this country, John McCain stood head and shoulders above Obama.

McCain said what the right wingers wanted to hear, he has no idea how to resolve the issues facing America today. It’s easy to say…defeat it, then dismiss any explanation as of how but go on a tirade of stories that are unconnected to the question. He did that every time he gave an answer.

“That would represent the first time in 40-years that intelligence won over an image of arrogant posturing, that substance won over superficiality, that thoughtful action won over the politics of constant, irrational, manufactured, manipulative fear…”

I don’t know, I think Jimmy Carter and Clinton did that in ‘96, ‘92 and ‘76…

I think what Howard is saying on behalf of a large percentage of American voters is that he is much more comfortable with a politician’s vernacular or manner in front of an audience or a camera that employs familiar devices, however dishonest, incorrect, common or dated.  He would rather be comfortable than be bothered by someone different or by specific issues or facts. 

Jesse hinted at this tendency among the American electorate by commenting on Noonan’s recent article about “place” a few days ago:  we expect something of our politicians that is bland, that does not confront or challenge, that is familiar and yes, hoaky.  In the past this was rooted in “place” like the south or the midwest or the northeast; now it’s “American” which is a false idea of our “good, hard-working” citizens.  It’s good marketing, folks!  Hence, Biden and Richardson are unpolished because they say what they are thinking or Bush and Reagan are all American and upright because they know/knew what code words and phrases to use.  Fortunately, this is fairly generational, the older voters less willing to be made uncomfortable by character or authenticity.

If this weren’t the case, Obama would be out there saying, so what if I am Muslim, or yes, the media would all be agreeing when someone notes that being a POW does not qualify one for POTUS.

The great disaster of this is that Democracy only works when the electorate is educated (and engaged) enough to connect this act or deceit to their wallet, their personal rights, the future of their children or the health of the planet.  (Every third world government knows that education should be the last thing on their priority list!)

Carry on your trolling Howard.  It is easy for those of us who work to learn more about the important issues - or have them thrown at us on a daily basis - to forget about those Americans who have an equal vote but refuse to clearly see its ramifications.

Subtract California, and Mr Bush won the plurality of votes.

And if you subtract Texas, then Bush loses.  What’s your point?

Again, Republicans win by lying, cheating, and gaming the system by getting their buddies to decide court cases in their favor.  I’m not surprised that you defend this behavior, but at least be honest about what you’re supporting and don’t pretend you won fair and square.

I keep thinking of the scene in one episode of “The West Wing,” where Martin Sheen is running against handsome-but-shallow James Brolin. “Let me tell when I decided to kick your ass,” Martin Sheen says genially…

We watched it and it was infuriating.

McCain wasn’t even answering the questions presented. His response to the “adoption emergency bill” was “we adopted!” His response to whether or not whether or not teachers should have merit-based pay was that we need vouchers and charter schools. And there were no follow-up questions like, maybe “now, to actually answer the question, Senator?”

A follow-up question would have been nice, as well, when McCain started talking about how embryonic stem cell research was necessary, even though he was “wildly optimistic” about adult lines from skin cells. I would have pointed out that just ten minutes earlier, he had very distinctly said that a baby’s “right to humanity began at conception.”

Obama’s abortion response was disappointing. I would have completely turned the question around, the “40 million babies aborted,” I would have said “I’m glad that 40 million women who’ve needed the service were able to have it done safely and legally, and not enact legislation that would have endangered or criminalized one in four American women” and THEN gone on to talk about proper sex education, pre-natal care, health care, etc… not this glib “pastor and husband” nonsense which was basically saying “well, if women are getting the proper male permission to abort…”

Agreed, Mighty Ponygirl… all I can think is that Obama’s playing more to a “middle of the road style” and it is disingenuous.

How the hell can they say he’s the most liberal senator, when so many of us are saying he’s acting too conservative???

Bleah.

louise:

How the hell can they say he’s the most liberal senator, when so many of us are saying he’s acting too conservative???

Because that’s just how far to the right our political discourse has gone in this country. Obama is the most liberal senator only in comparison to the rest of the Senate. On a more objectively defined scale, he’s just ever-so-slightly left of center on most issues.