Monday, June 30, 2008

Brilliance. That's all I can say. Sheer, unadulterated brilliance!

From the media uproar at General Clark's comments it's apparent that the media actually agree that getting shot down in a fighter jet does qualify one to be President.

I suppose it shouldn't surprise me that that the media assume great failure to be a leadership criteria. This is the same media that hoisted not one, but two Bush presidencies upon us. Nobody else demonstrates the theory of "failing upwards" to a greater degree than George W. Bush.

With this in mind here are some of the other things that qualify somebody to hold the highest office in the land--

Getting run over by a garbage truck while crossing the street.

Tripping and falling down a flight of stairs.

Marrying and then divorcing Madonna.

Getting beaten and mugged my a street gang dressed as baseball players.

Leading an attack on a Lakota settlement along the Little Bighorn river.


As I think about failure as leadership I'm able to narrow our choices down to three candidates. John McCain doesn't make this list but he is in the top 10.


Wile E. Coyote




Curly Howard



Captain Edward J. Smith

18 comments:

FranIAm said...

Hi! I am here for an unrelated reason. Can you possibly email me?

I just wanted to run something by you and sadly (or happily) the money shot has nothing to do with it!!!

festinalente07 at gmail dot com

Thanks.

Dean Wormer said...

Fran,

Of course. I just fired it off to you. It's a hotmail account so let me know if you don't get it and I'll send from another email.

Dean

Bradda said...

Who did the media make out to be more of a cowboy when neither one was anywhere near a real life cowbow? Reagan or GWB? Tough call...

Dr. Monkey Von Monkerstein said...

Sean Penn for President! He married and divorced Madonna.

pissed off patricia said...

I am tossing my hat into the ring because I survived my first mother in law for 10 years. If you knew what she was like you would know you had to vote for me.

Randal Graves said...

HA!

Okay, POP, what can you promise us citizens?

Spirula said...

And I think this guy should run as McBush's VP. He's certainly qualified, and has done as much good for our country.

Don Snabulus said...

I "like" the way Obama immediately derided the liberal Service Member in order to defend the conservative one. As if Wesley Clark was not entitled to his opinion.

I think Obama should just worry about his own damn self and quit trying to be the spokeman for everyone who holds a liberal opinion that might be a little different than his.

(I am still voting for him, but he needs to stop veering to the right whenever the shots start firing. Sadly, the FISA bill was a big test that he failed.)

Unconventional Conventionist said...

This also qualifies Mr. Magoo to be president which I think would be rather fun.

Westcoast Walker said...

Curly gets my endorsement - the amount of abuse that guy cant take on a daily basis is admirable... nuk nuk nuk nuk!

Liberality said...

I second what Don Snabulus said.

ThoughtCriminal said...

The one relevant portion of McCain's experience that I can think of - his aversion to torturing POWs - has become yet another waffle.

mwb said...

Sorry, while I wholeheartedly endorse mocking Senator McCain on his stands on issues and actions, I can't get behind mocking a veteran who was in a POW camp and tortured.

It only creates a negative connection that if he was a "failure" for being shot down, thus all the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan are "failures" for dying or being captured.

That is a terrible direction to go when trying to support Senator Obama.

Now attacking Senator McCain who his waffling on torture when he was tortured himself and how his waffling undermines the safety of current US troops abroad is a successful argument in my view.

Don Snabulus said...

The "'failure' for being shot down" line was uttered by Bob Schieffer, not Wesley Clark. Clark merely said that it wasn't a qualification for being President. Don't get mad at Clark, get mad at Scheiffer. Get mad at all of the talking heads that are lying about this and, in essence, spitting on Gen. Wesley Clark right now.

The point is that the media is trying to do two things:

1. Turn Bob Schieffer's words into Clark's and smear him with it.

2. Turn the circus from #1 into a defacto swift boat liar attack on Obama.

DON'T FALL FOR IT!!! If you do, you let right-wing word parsing affect your judgment.

Watch for yourself...

via TPM Veracifier

Talk about spitting on a war veteran...

Dean Wormer said...

bradda-

I'd have to go Reagan. They put that guy on a horse like he was a real cowboy. I love Jesse Jackson's line on that btw.

Pop-

Ha! That sounds like a horrible experience that surely must qualify you Madame president.

randal-

Not ours to ask. I'm sure Patricia will be a benevolent dictator.

don-

I think Obama should just worry about his own damn self and quit trying to be the spokeman for everyone who holds a liberal opinion that might be a little different than his.

Well said although Obama seems to be at least backing away from his denunciation and trying to say there are bigger issues.

I'm really worried after these last two weeks that the Obama people who did so well in the primary may have been supplemented by party strategists for the general. Not smart.

unconvential-

Mr. Magoo IS president.

Love your blog btw and am linking.

westcoast-

Curly is invincible!

liberality-

Well I second what you said.

thoughtcriminal-

Yes! The one thing that would be relevant is something he doesn't seem to care about- torture. Great point.

mwb-

Fair enough but what I'm mocking here is the idea that getting shot down qualifies someone to be president of the United States and not his status as a POW or his service in general.

The media noise in response to Clark's sensible statement is absurd.

While I concede that you have a point with regards to soldiers being captured in current conflicts being classified as "failures," I would also add that neither does POW status make them suddenly qualified to hold the highest office in the land.

What's more I have defended McCain's honor when it comes to his time as a POW and the propaganda video he was forced to make with a gun at his head.

To make it clear- I am not questioning his service. I am mocking the idea that something bad that happened to him in the service somehow means he would have good judgement on a strategic level. Clearly he has horrible judgement when it comes to geopolitics and even the military.

mwb said...

Dean, but that is exactly the rabbit hole I don't think supporters of Senator Obama should go down.

Naturally, it doesn't qualify him to be President it and unto itself, but that is not the sum total of Senator McCain's experience. Once you've opened that door as to what experiences "count" it become a debate of the preparatory experience that Senators McCain and Obama have respectively. Is that the direction for the basis of an argument you think is best to engage the Republicans on?

One of Senator Obama's arguments for his candidacy was it is not the experience on paper that matters.

Instead focus on where Senator McCain's experience such as being a war veteran has not served to enhance judgment now and how his actions serve to undermine those things he claims to support. It undermines the value of their argument without broad brushing those in similar circumstances.

When you go after someone's experiences as "meaningless" you have in fact said the same thing about others who have shared that experience causing them to support the candidate more. When you instead argue not about the experience but what they have done, or not, because of it you don't establish that defensiveness that is damaging to your own goals.

It's a critical difference that sadly many Democratic supporters do not seem to get in election years and only serves to drive voters to break Republican at the polls.

Dean Wormer said...

Hmmm.

I see what your saying.

I am truly conflicted when we start talking about military service in particular because the results of the last election have demonstrated republicans don't honor vets or service. I try to be careful when it comes to that.

I think you make a good point with regards to being careful how vets who have been in similar situations percieve issues.

Just the same I think Clark's riff on the comment presented to him was valid. McCain is the one trying to juxtaposition his experience to Obamas. Clark was simply observing that nothing in McCain's experience makes him more qualified to be president.

I also have a very bitter taste in my mouth about how the media allowed the swiftboat assholes and the GOP to savage Kerry's experience in the last election. I would have very little sympathy for the media whining even if I agreed the two situations were identical.

Finally it's McCain's experience in Washington that disqualifies him to be president so, yes, I welcome a comparison to Obama along those lines.

Anonymous said...

HA! Okay, POP, what can you promise us citizens?