Friday, February 22, 2008

You Are All Missing The Point

Not you, reading now. That is just what I wanted to shout at my teevee when I finally found time tonight to read this mythical John McCain article (which turned out to be kind of... eh...). I guess you could call it reporting. WaPo's was marginally better. See, I think we worry so much about what other people are doing with their genitalia that often we can't see the forest for the trees.

I know everyone with a copy of O'Reilly's Culture War or Hannity's... well, whatever the hell he called that latest lump he shilled as a "book" believes to the very core of their soul that The New York Times, Ye Olde Grey Lady, is a commie-pinko rag just waiting to undermine the republic with government handouts and (gasp!) civil-rights, but I'm not sold myself. Don't get me wrong, I'd love for them to be the Fox News of liberalism, but my one eyebrow is still raised from all of that Judith Miller "Hey Let's Start A War, That'd Be Fun" reporting of Aught-3. So while I'd love to welcome the Times to our subversive socialist agenda, I'm just not quite convinced.

Notwithstanding, today's revelation that some people once saw John McCain talking to a woman that wasn't his wife -- twice! -- wasn't very impressive. But hidden amidst the innuendo and journamalism was a very important bit of information that has been water-boarded into submission by headlines like CNN's "New York Times, Smear or Vicious Smear?!" Ready, here it comes...

SHE WAS A LOBBYIST!

I don't care what they did with each other's hoo-haws, if anything. (In fact, that's creepy, he's 104, don't tell me that stuff.) What I care about, and what all voters should care about, and what the media is supposedly employed to care about is that here is Mr. Straight Talk, Mr. I-Don't-Take-Money-From-Special-Interest Himself cavorting about the country in a leer jet in a verified orgy of lobbying. And let me tell you, I doubt she was there for the Geritol Spritzers.

That's what the headlines should have read, and that is what the Times should have focused on.

But that's just me.

3 comments:

  1. Only girls have "hoo-haws." Are you calling McCain a girl?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Touche!

    I should've said I don't care what they do with their "hoo-haws" and "gee-gaws."

    Thanks for keeping us honest.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I thought it was "hoo-hoos" and "ha-has."

    ReplyDelete