Friday, September 19, 2008

End of the Week With Sarah and Joe

I'm still stuffed up from the allergy (or a cold, I've given up trying to figger out my physiology) so I'm going to be short and the insane version of sweet. Plus, if I venture an opinion, I'll probably spend all weekend answering pages of retorts. Hell, even as I write this, the shit pours in. Guess I'll have to read that next.

But let's get to Sarah's interview, Part 2, with Hannity. Definitely gave me information. Even with Hannity (and manhood) predisposed to like Sarah, he did give a fair interview.

I did get my answer the the damned "Bridge to Nowhere." She still says she killed it, it was because Alaskans no longer wanted it, she didn't account for the cash. Still annoyed about it.

She did answer the "Troopergate" question well. In other words, she had good reason to do what she did based on what I've read and what she said.

She doesn't come off as nearly as crazy right as the moonbats would have us believe. Sometimes she's almost moderate sounding, kind of like Assface, oops, I mean McCain. For some reasopn, it annoyed me whenever she'd talk policy and have to suck off McCain (in the political sense, Toad, you perv) by talking about how much of a damned maverick he is. Of course that's the job of a VP candidate.

I can't wait until the Biden interview then. I'm sure he'll say something stupid about Obama that will get played endlessly on the right wing blogs. Maybe something stupid about Barack being nice and clean and articulate... Wait, he already said that.

Speaking of the human gaffe machine, Fox News will be doing an hour show on him this weekend. They've already done McCain, Obama, and Sarah (not like that, sickos) and what I saw of the shows was interesting.

But then again, I live for the minutia. And since I've got Friday night football to listen to, followed by wrangling the little shavers as they bounce off the walls all weekend, I'm going to sleep now.

After I read reams of comments.


Dave Miller said...

FYI the CNN shows on both McCain and Obama were also very good.

Beth said...

Allergies (and colds) suck, hope your suffering ends soon.

Dave Miller said...

Patrick, off topic a little here but I am working on a future post.

Is stretching the truth politically lying?

Straight up yes or no.

No Obama or McCain comparisons.

Patrick M said...

Dave, the post itself was a little off topic, so...

Is stretching the truth politically lying?

The honest answer is yes and no.

Yes because the stretching is used to convey something different then the facts would show, and no because the truth is there, but not the whole truth. I did get into some back and forth over lies with Shaw, who has been on a tear about Sarah's "lying" about her record. Yet when Obama does the same factually questionable statements, she fails to see it the same way. I personally reserve lying in the political arena for when a candidate or a official comes out and states something they know to be false at the time.

Let me take some examples:

Sarah and the Bridge - not lying, because she did cancel the bridge. She did a flip-flop because the bridge became unpopular and neglected to return the cash, but she is factually correct. Sort of.

Bill and Monica - I chose this because it's such an egregious and petty lie, and because I don't want to research too far. Clinton stated, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." When he said this he had already stuck his dick in her mouth. That constitutes "sexual relations" in almost every book but the insane.

So the upshot is that I'm hesitant to say a politician is outright lying unless I know the facts to be the exact opposite of the statement. Of course, since I did start my adult life with the 1992 election, my view may be tainted by the Clinton presidency.

As for the morality of the situation, we are talking politics here. I surspect the saints in Washington are seriously outnumbered.

Hope that helps you with your post.