I don't know what to do with all my anger.
(Originally posted at Near Earth Object)
* * *
Listen, I happen to know for a fact that on January 8th, 2008, there were die-hard Democrats who broke into respectful applause when John McCain came from behind to win the Republican New Hampshire primary. He was the honorable Republican, remember? Way to stick it to Romney, many Democrats felt that day. As I said, I know this to be true.
Fast forward 8 months, and John McCain has proven to be the most disappointing asshat to run for president since...
Okay, fine, this guy is still the biggest asshat.
But still.
Here is what my rage is made of:
- Let me put it this way. LexisNexis shows 40 hits for "McCain" and "lose a war" and "scurrilous" from the past month. Just to be clear:
scurrilous |ˈskərələs|
adjective
making or spreading scandalous claims about someone with the intention of damaging their reputation : a scurrilous attack on his integrity.
(I just discovered, much to my delight that Lexis also shows 4 hits for "McCain" and "asshat.")
- A straw I thought had broken my poor camel's back: when McCain - for no reason other than to be an asshat - decided he would oppose any net neutrality legislation (old news, I know, but it was in the news as a new "plan"). McCain decided there's a national emergency in which the giant telecoms were not making enough money and didn't have enough control over everything, ever. This, I thought, was the height of toolery. But then I read this moments ago.
- From the Politico:
McCain's campaign manager Rick Davis asked Sunday for a meeting with Steve Capus, the president of NBC News, to protest what the campaign called signs that the network is "abandoning non-partisan coverage of the Presidential race."
The piece goes on to describe the campaign's displeasure with Andrea Mitchell for "repeating Obama campaign taking points" on Meet the Press concerning McCain purportedly being aware of the questions Obama was getting at the forum with Rick Warren.
What? What?!? Wait. Just wait. Breathe. Jesus Christ.
I could see them having a problem with this <span style="text-decoration: underline;">fictional</span> scenario:
Mitchell: Dude, David, Chuck, guy from the Atlantic. McCain totally cheated...in church.
Now that would have been awesome if it had gone that way, but in Davis' own letter, they show the Mitchell quote as it actually happened (emphasis mine):
Mitchell: <span style="text-decoration: underline;">The Obama people</span> must feel that he didn't do quite as well as they might have wanted to in that context, <span style="text-decoration: underline;">because what they are putting out privately</span> is that McCain may not have been in the cone of silence and may have had some ability to overhear what the questions were to Obama. He seemed so well-prepared."
Catch that? That's right, she reported what the Obama camp is alleging. Now, if the Obama people who are saying so are doing so maliciously, then they, too, are engaged in asshattery. But this "media is biased against McCain" nonsense hurts me in my neocortex. No matter how much of a buffoon he makes of himself, the story continuously remains focused on how Obama doesn't remind us enough of white West Virginia farmers. Please allow me to devolve entirely into a 10 year old.
It's just...it's just...not fair!!! Why do they get to be bad guys all the time and it's, you know, okay!?!? I mean, he totally impugns Obama's patriotism! And he totally went negative first! I saw it! This is such bullshit! I didn't ask to be born, you know!