Conservatives mock Political Correctness as an attempt to banish unapproved thoughts and utterances. Well, it seems conservatives have their own list of forbidden statements.
Looked what happened when Wesley Clark opined that McCain is not qualified to be president by virtue of the fact that he was shot down while riding in a bomber over North Vietnam. What should have been taken as something too obvious to require stating was instead treated as an accusation that McCain didn't "serve his country." (Actually he didn't. But he did serve the hack running the White House at the time.)
Poor Wesley Clark -- nother PC victim. Even Barack Obama had to distance himself from the comment. Many more things could be said about McCain, such as: There's nothing heroic about dropping bombs on the infrastructure of people that never lifted a finger against you. If he had not invaded North Vietnam, he would have skipped those unpleasant years in the Hanoi Hilton. But then, he wouldn't be running for president now, would he?
Tuesday, July 01, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
This really shouldn't be so hard to say. It's so fucking obvious.
I've heard this type of nonsense called "patriotic correctness."
I've made similar assertions on various military blogs and have been met with horror at my blasphemy. This even on anti-Bushite blogs. Sometimes the comments have been deleted.
I just don't understand how being the only candidate who actually has surrendered to the enemy once his million dollar machine was destroyed makes this guy a great presidential candidate. And while I am horrified by the hell he went through in prison I don't see how having suffered through that kind of torture makes for a good candidate either. Seems more likely to have caused deep-seated psychological problems.
Politics is about the silliest thing there is. As Joan Walsh reports on Salon.com, the Clark "controversy" began on "Face the Nation" on Sunday. Clark said that McCain's command of a squadron in peacetime was not the executive experience he claims it is. Then this exchange took place:
Interviewer Bob Schieffer: I have to say, Barack Obama has not had any of those experiences either, nor has he ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down. I mean--
Clark: Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president.
Schieffer: Really?
I agree with Walsh's comment: "I think the most fascinating part of the exchange was Schieffer's 'Really?' which teed up the whole MSM outragegasm over Clark's words. Really, Bob, it's true: Riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down are not, by themselves, qualifications to be president."
I don't think you make a qualified connection between Clark's words and political correctness as form of censorship. Political correctness is a practice of semantics-- limiting a groups choice of words to force one to deal with a limited number of symbolic words that hamper expression. Clark's comment can and probably should be seen as an attack on the value of McCain's service in terms of leadership. Perhaps you should read Clark's speech at the 2004 national convention and see how he equated Kerry's service in the military and his ability to lead the country as President. After doing so, you should have an idea of the ire his recent attack fosters in conservatives.
I have no intention of vouching for Clark. I'm sure he's as much a hypocrite as anyone else in politics. But the point stands: say anything negative about John McCain in connection with his military "service" and you will feel the wrath as though it were a form of blasphemy.
Politics is not silly. Politics is war by different means.
Politics is deadly serious. From the halls of global power down to youth baseball, politics is the prerequisite to power.
If you join the fray, you better come to play. And HARD.
Post a Comment