Nobody likes a campaign commercial, they flood the screens and they are always the same. Then I stumbled upon these here, and thought, wow, now that is something different!
No real change in negative, boring political campaigning there, pretty shameful too might I add. However the democrats opted to step somewhat above the fray with this response...
One of the best responses to a negative campaign I think I have ever stumbled across. If this is what to expect from the Democrats leading up to November, one can only hope that it changes the tone of all future political campaigns around the world. It's time to stop with the negativity and make people accountable to their failures!
I've held back for a while, for no particular reason, on blogging in relation to the US presidential race, but time to change... As the candidates are falling into place, YouTube is becoming even more popular a channel for conveying political opinion...
I was mildly amused at McCain's comments re- Obama's Experience (see entire article here.)
CHICAGO (AP) - Republican John McCain accused Democrat BarackObama of inexperience and reckless judgment for saying Iran does not pose the same serious threat to the United States as the Soviet Union did in its day.
McCain made the attack Monday in Chicago, Obama's home turf.
"Such a statement betrays the depth of Senator Obama's inexperience and reckless judgment. These are very serious deficiencies for an American president to possess," McCain said in an appearance at the restaurant industry's annual meeting. My reason for such amusement, well, obviously Mr McCain believes that singing about bombing a sovereign territory dictates experience and sound judgment, something the rest of the world continually wishes an American president WOULD possess.
And because I have really enjoyed posting video this week, I through in this Robert Greenwalddoozy, on the aforementioned Senator...
I have recently been reading The One Percent Doctrine by Ron Suskind which tells the interesting tale of the Cheney Doctrine. In essence the doctrine can be boiled down to one sentence, "if there is a 1% chance of something negative happening to America, then America must do whatever it takes to prevent that from happening." A chilling notion that barely meets any standard burden of proof, I mean there is at least a 1% chance of me having a drink tonight (OK it's much higher than that) I guess it's more a 1% chance of me NOT having a drink tonight, that doesn't mean the university tavern should close... (Terrible analogy I know)...
I wasn't overly concerned until I watched former undersecretary of defence (US) Douglas Feith being interviewed on The Daily Show. I've embedded both parts of the "uncut" (if it was uncut, I fail to see why there is two parts) interview, it seems to confirm Suskind's argument, especially towards the end where Feith proclaims something along the line of "Imagine what the pundits would be saying if we didn't invade Iraq and something happened..."
As Jon so eloquently puts it, I'm not entirely sure that you can invade a country based upon a "hypothetical"...
