Question 2: Obama misspeaks: Are they funny?-Rachel
Obama Referred To An "Inhaler" As A "Breathalyzer" And Then A "Inhalator" Twice. Obama: "Everybody knows that it makes no sense that you send a kid to the emergency room for a treatable illness like asthma, they end up taking up a hospital bed, it costs, when if you, they just gave, you gave treatment early, and they got some treatment, and a breathalyzer, or an inhalator, not a breathalyzer (Laughter.) I haven't had a lot of sleep in the last 48 hours, so. If they had an inhalator, inhaler, I'm still stumbling over this word. You know what I mean. You know what I mean. Then we would save money." (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks At A Campaign Event, Bristol, VA, 6/5/08)
Another excellent question. The short answer is they should be, but they aren't. I say "they" because, sad to say, this is hardly the first or only mistake Obama has made. The single best place I can point you to a general overview of all the gaffes he's made is a page by Michelle Malkin, a writer and contributor for Fox News (but, for you lefties out there, don't let that get your panties in a twist. She's a leftie too; just look at her picture on the "About" section of her site). Most of them are like this one: simple misspeaks or word confusion, like when he forgot what city he was in or how many states there are in the country he's preparing to take charge of.
But there are too many misspeaks that are important and can (or will, or have already) have a negative effect on our country or our country's interests. For example, when he stated that the Afghanistan war was suffering because all the translators were in Iraq, when the Iraqis and Afghanis don't share a single language among the many they both speak. Or when he said that Iran doesn't pose a serious threat to us--pretty ballsy of him to say, considering that they've since test fired a new generation of long range surface-to-surface missles, which can easily reach southeastern Europe (interestingly, the google article dated November 15th has since been taken down. But we don't have an ageda, do we?)
The biggest, most recent and, to me, most interesting misspeak coming from the Obama team these days are all the ones regarding that bad, bad man (who they had nothing to do with, and haven't talked to in, like, forever), Illinois still-governer, Rod Blagojevitch. See, when it came out that he was a bad, bad man, Obama's team's first reaction was, "we haven't talked to him at all. Ever." But then Rahm Emmanuel, Obambi's chief of staff for the transition and beyond, said, "Yeah, we've talked to him tons of times." (Keep in mind, I'm doing this from memory, so those two events may be switched. Either way, it doesn't effect the outcome). Then Rahmmy, a few days after the scandal broke, had to come back on the air and say, "No, I was wrong. Nobody's talked to him EVER." But then Obama came out after that and said he was gonna do an internal investigation, to see if anybody did, in fact, talk to Blago. Then he postponed announcing the results until this week.
The results are out, and the prosecutors of the case have determined that, yes, Rahmmy did talk to Blago (hello, it's called tapping the phone lines, something the investigators had been doing to Blago for the past 5 years and everybody knew it, including Blago), but nothing went down. That's the good news, I suppose. However, why hide it? Why cover it up? Why deny it, retract it, denounce it, then admit it? We know he was in with Blago; both he and Rahm helped him get elected in 2002, and Obama stayed on in 2006. And why wouldn't he consult with Blago? That's his Senate seat, and it's assumed that they would talk about it. So why not say, "yes, my aides spoke with the governor, but to my knowledge nothing untoward happened, and I will be personally looking further into the matter to be sure." That would have settled it for me, and I would have had a grudging admiration for Obama, for proving me wrong in the "he's kinda sneaky and seems dirty" category. But he just proved me right, by acting sneaky and kinda dirty about the whole thing.
So, in short, the misspeak mentioned is, in a way, kinda funny. Like the 57 states thing, or the "My Islamic faith" thing, or the "Pie" bit. Man, that pie video is funny. But these much more serious misspeaks, combined with the shady connections, and the simple fact that he's a product of the Illinois political machine (is he really the only virgin in the prodical whorehouse?), in a word, aren't.
This should be a really interesting four years. And they haven't even started yet!
Next question?
Question 1: Who should McCain pick as his VP to counteract Obama's youthful and idealistic appeal?-Tyler
First, what a great question. As most know, a lot of McCain's future as possible president now hinges on who he chooses as his running mate. For me, I could become a McCain supporter if he chooses the right person. There are a lot of names being thrown out there right now, including some of his former GOP opponents. While I don't know who specifically he should pick (forgive me, I don't get paid to keep track of all this and therefore have a life outside of politics), his running mate needs to have some specific characteristics:
-His running mate should be young. This is because McCain is old and seen as the lumpy old white guy, especially compared to Obama's fresh-faced appeal. This is why Bob Dole lost in 1996 (well among other reasons); because people thought he would pull a Harrison and die a couple days into his first term and his running mate, Jack Kemp, was no better.
-His running mate should be conservative. This is really, really important for McCain because he's not. He is every bit the maverick he's painting himself to be; in many a conservative mind, he might as well have a D after his name. So he has to go really conservative in order to keep a base that has largely already decided against him. This is one place where he can't afford to reach across the aisle.
-His running mate has to be clean as a whistle. McCain has been doing really well so far shooting down any potential scandal that other campaigns have tried to launch at him, but just because Hillary is out doesn't mean the smears won't get worse. And while Obama will continue to have his closet aired out, McCain starts to look better and better as an alternative. But if he chooses someone dirtier than the bathroom Larry Craig was caught in, he might as well concede now.
-His running mate needs to be (or needs to have been) a governor. This is the first time in a long time (if not ever; I can't remember now) that both of the major parties' candidates were Senators. So he needs someone with executive experience, so they can seem to provide a balanced team.
-His running mate can't be afraid to get dirty. McCain is looking more and more like he wants to take the high road to November, and I say good for him. The trouble is, he's forgetting show biz's number one rule: any publicity is good publicity. While Obama may be hammered throughout, his name is still out there and he's surrounded himself with people who can turn that into an advantage. So McCain's running mate has to be willing to give punches, not just be able to take them. The best part is, it can still be a clean campaign. There's so much to hammer Obama on without even touching his personal life (other than change, what does he believe in? Anyone?), that McCain and his Veep should be chomping at the bit for the next few months.
-An added bonus would be if he could find someone who is a "minority:" female, a color other than pasty, handicapped--if he can get someone who will contrast with himself, so much the better. That way, when those four people are up on the stage, Obama doesn't present such a stark (and therefore, appealing) contrast.
So, while I can't give you a specific name of who he should pick (because John McCain would listen to lil' old me to begin with), I can give you an idea of who he shouldn't pick. Jeb Bush is off the table. People are tired of Bushes, just like they're tired of the Clintons. So putting yet another Bush on the table--especially considering that McCain looks like he's got one foot in the grave as it is--will turn people away. He should also stay away from Huckabee. Huckabee made himself into a joke towards the end, and I doubt that people will take him seriously. Finally, he should stay away from any of his buddies in the Senate. There's only one government entity that's got a lower approval rating than the President, and that's Congress.
On the other hand, I would like to offer Obama some advice on this same topic since his top guy on this just left. Under no circumstances can he choose Hillary. I know it may seem like a good idea right now, but he'll only shoot himself in the foot. Hillarians will vote for him in November; they'll feel it's their duty (because, as we all know, they are ruled by their feelings and don't stop to think about their decisions). But Hillary will do nothing but stab him in the back all the way to the general election. After all, if she can't be the next democrat in the highest office in the land, he won't be either. Then she can run again in 2012 and take on the mantle that she feels (again that word!) rightfully belonged to her.
Finally, since I know you want it, I'll give some names I think would be awesome: Condoleeza Rice (hey, I can dream), George Allen (barring the "macaca" incident, the guy's clean as a whistle), Sarah Palin (current governor of Alaska) would rock, as would Deval Patrick (current governor of Massachussetts). And, at last, I've heard the name Pawlenty thrown around, and there's one man (I can't for the life of me remember his name nor what post he holds), who's young, Middle-Eastern, Christian, and conservative. I'd be happy with any of these options, and with Mitt Romney (although I doubt McCain would choose him).
So there you have it. Thanks for the question! Next?