Monday, September 29, 2008

Define Victory

So, the first presidential debate was last Friday and everyone expected McCain, riding in on his suspended-campaign-I'll-save-the-economy horse, to implode. Or explode. Or both. He actually may have imploded a few times accounting for the inability to turn his head to the left and make eye contact with Obama. Actually, it just may be an aversion to turning his head to the left.

Just based on performance, I'd say it was a tie. Both candidates had the moments of sounding like the knew what they were talking about and could actually make a difference in Washington. If you do a fact check, Obama won. That is the measure that I think is most important. The candidate who told the truth the most was Obama. McCain still plays old school, such as when he claimed Obama didn't support the troops because he voted against funding. I wasn't a fan of the debate format - although I appreciated the audience having to remain quiet - but it did allow Obama to respond to McCain's lies. He countered McCain by showing that based on McCain's definition, John didn't support the troops either. Both have voted against funding because they disagreed on attachments to the funding, namely timeline or no timeline for withdrawal.

John McCain doesn't want a timeline. We're there until the job is done and our troops can come home in victory. However many are left of them, will be able to raise their heads high because no one will be shooting at them. The question I wish had been asked is "What defines victory?" Obama wants to bring the troops home in a measured withdrawal that would take over sixteen months. He wants to turn Iraq over to the Iraqi government. Isn't that victory? McCain doesn't want to leave until all the fighting stops - or until all the bad guys are killed. That's the battle that could take 100 years. That where you have to ask if it's worth more American lives and trillions of more dollars that we have to borrow and then not spend on our own country.

Basically, John McCain wants to keep us in Iraq because he wants us to look good. He doesn't want to correct a mistake. He doesn't want a repeat of Vietnam where, by his standards, we should have stayed and could still be there. That, my friends, is not victory I can believe in.


On Friday, I asked...

"A battery charge has been dropped against Jose Cruz of West Virgina who was accused of doing what?"

14% said "aggravated laughing"
- It was the added, "Why so serious?" that pissed off the cops.

15% said "aggravated gum chewing"
- Well, he did chew like a cow. A very angry cow.

No one said "aggravated littering"

71% got it right with "aggravated farting"

According to The Associated Press, according to a criminal complaint, Jose Cruz passed gas and made a fanning motion toward Charleston, West Virgina patrolman T.E. Parsons after being taken to the police station for a breathalyzer test. Cruz denies fanning the gas and says his request to use a restroom when first arriving at the station was denied.

An assistant says Magistrate Jack Pauley signed a motion to dismiss the charge last Thursday.

Having had an older brother who often used farts as a weapon, I say they should throw the book at this guy. And them give him the gas chamber. Or, at least, the dutch oven with his new prison cell mate.


Anonymous said...

Congratulations on your move. Please watch this video ... it's long, about 10 minutes, but it's worth it. It's not right wing propaganda; it is the facts ... albeit with a cheesy 80's soundtrack.

Joe Janes said...

I found the first five minutes of that piece interesting. I don't think either democrats or republicans are guilt-free on the current state of the economy. After that, I think the video dives into the guilt-by-association angle the republicans love to play and overstates people's involvement with Obama, particularly Raines.