Buying a term paper
Joe Lieberman and John McCain submit a WaPo editorial supporting Obama's "surge" to Afghanistan. (Really, they criticize those against it more than endorse.)
Anyhow, what struck me wasn't the position of the oped, it was the writing. It's not uncommon for politicians to simply sign their names on something an aide wrote, but this one reads as such an extreme example.
After watching McCain and Lieberman interviewed for a year, tell me which one wrote this.
Just a pet peeve. (and none of the publishing papers ever note this.)
Anyhow, what struck me wasn't the position of the oped, it was the writing. It's not uncommon for politicians to simply sign their names on something an aide wrote, but this one reads as such an extreme example.
After watching McCain and Lieberman interviewed for a year, tell me which one wrote this.
The political allure of such a reductionist approach is obvious....
Loose rhetoric about a minimal commitment in Afghanistan is counterproductive for another reason: It exacerbates suspicions, already widespread in South Asia, that the United States will tire of this war and retreat. These doubts about our staying power deter ordinary Afghans from siding with our coalition against the insurgency.
Just a pet peeve. (and none of the publishing papers ever note this.)
posted by mikevotes at
7:43 AM
4 Comments:
Again, I have to ask why the media still go to McCain for political punditry. He's not a party leader and he's a twice-rejected presidential candidate.
McCain -- like Lieberman -- is a representative of nothing and no one. No one that is except his own ego.
Was Kerry, Gore, or Dukakis pursued for their failed insights?
By
-epm, at 11:35 AM
I keep flashing to the Kerry parallel. (And it's not like Kerry got bashed half as badly.)
By
mikevotes, at 2:03 PM
They're playing to the residual neo-con lobby. Those people are still out there, biding their time.
By
Anonymous, at 4:38 PM
And they do wield money and still some power.
By
mikevotes, at 10:06 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home