ARC's 1st Law: As a "progressive" online discussion grows longer, the probability of a nefarious reference to Karl Rove approaches one

Sunday, May 13, 2007

Tim Russert is an Ass

As the sun is rising here on the glorious Central Coast of California on this Mother's Day, I made the mistake of turning on Meet the Press.

John McCain is not my candidate, but in his appearance this morning I have to say he handled Russert's relentless gotcha with aplomb.

McCain was exceptionally strong in his defense of the Iraq war. He reminded me of Lincoln in the darkest days of the Civil War when the Democrats loudly argued for peace with the Confederacy. The Democrats in that time ran a very popular general who had lead the largest Union Army, George B. McClellan, for president which sounds kind of familiar. Lincoln did not falter and neither did McCain.

I was surprised at McCain's performance. Just the other day in a comment here I referred to him as a flake. He was no flake this morning. He is known for being emotional and for having a short fuse. He showed none of that this morning.

Russert found every possible way to try to make McCain look like an equivocating fool. One quote after another, totally without context of course, was hauled out and McCain was forced to provide context Russert should have provided. Russert knows how to keep one on the defensive, it's his forte. But it is also outrageous.

Maybe next Sunday morning I will sleep in.

Your Co-Conspirator,
ARC: MontereyJohn

Comments (6)
Bob Palumbo said...

I suppose this is one of the quotes taken out of context that was to make McCain look like a fool:

MR. RUSSERT: Let me show you the kinds of things that are often said when soldiers are overseas, like this: "There's no reason for the United States to remain. The American people want them home. I believe the majority of Congress wants them home. Our continued military presence allows another situation to rise, which could then lead to the wounding, killing or capture of American fighting men and women. We should do all in our power to avoid that. What should be the criteria is our immediate, orderly withdrawal. And if we do not do that and other Americans die then I" "say that the responsibilities for that lie with the Congress who did not exercise their authority under the Constitution. For us to get into nation-building, law and order, etc., I think, is a tragic and terrible mistake."

You hear those kinds of words, right?

SEN. McCAIN: Sure I do. Americans are frustrated and saddened by the enormous sacrifice we've made and the gross mismanagement of the war. Now, my response to that statement is and what happens after we leave? Listen to all of the experts who will tell you that we can have a situation in the region which will, in, in the long run, entail far greater casualties, far greater dislocation, far greater threats to our national security than trying to give this an opportunity to succeed. That's what the--my response to that heartfelt statement is.

MR. RUSSERT: Well, those are your words from 1993 about Somalia.

Well your right, "Mission Accomplished". Grandpa McCain looked like a fool. I find that sad as I would have voted for McCain in 2000. I wouldn't vote for this McCain.

I have no problem with a Man being questioned about his own words and positions. Particularly on Nation Building. Least We forget, George W. Bush assured us in the 2000 campaign that He too was against Nation Building.

Guess that was "out of context" because 9/11 had not happened yet?

Think how stupid a 'Yes' answer sounds to that question sounds once examined past it's knee-jerk utterance.

Monterey John said...

Yep, he said that alright... about Somalia.

And if we had it to do over again in Iraq, those words would probably be sound there too, at least in my opinion. But, we don't have it to do over again. As Powell said, we broke it, we bought it. Now we are paying for it and we have to do so until it is reasonably fixed.

The is no fair comparison between Somalia and Iraq.

St Wendeler said...

If only we did break it...

Monterey John said...

Saint, old buddy, you're kidding, right?

My dear old Dad, born and raised in Mexico, tought me a wonderful Spanish expresion, "se rompio." That translates, "it broke itself." Like Bart Simpson, "I didn't do it, you didn't see me, you can't prove it."

Of course we broke it. The question is, should we have broken it. Therein is the argument.

St Wendeler said...

But we didn't break it... I don't think you could compare the invasion into Iraq with the march of Sherman to Atlanta or Ike's drive to Berlin.

Puh-lease.

Monterey John said...

Saint, Ike didn't go to Berlin, the Russians did. Ike stopped at the Elbe. And boy oh boy, did the Russians break Berlin.

As for Sherman, of course he broke Georgia. That was the whole point. He set out "to make them howl," and howl they did and for many years afterward.

Again, the issue is, should we have broken Iraq?

It is a rather academic point now. It's broken, and the task at hand is putting the pieces together better than they were before we came. It HAS to be done or the consequences will be with us for decades to come.

Should we have overthrown Sadam with all the resulting difficulties, ie. broken Iraq? Maybe, maybe not. How many angels dance on the head of that pin will be debated for years to come.

My judgment is that we should not have done it. I felt that way in 2003 and I feel that way now. But that opinion and $7.50 will get you a late' at Starbucks.

But as Richard Nixon might have said, you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.

If we cut and run I fear for our future.