Rolling Stone contributing editor Tim Dickenson covers National Affairs and Politics. He released a video summarizing each point because he felt the media was betting the wrong candidate (what’s he reading?! I see just the opposite). View the video first then come back here.

#5. John McCain is a Washington outsider.

I think this is a double-edged sword. How can you be an effective politician if you don’t know how the inside works? The same can be said about Palin, who’s truly an outsider but has no concept of the inside. In essence, the only way McCain can be an outsider again is by having someone like Palin advise him on her perspective of Washington affairs. Makes sense now doesn’t it? Also makes sense why Palin’s had such limited press coverage. Considering that ALL major broadcast news is slanted to certain degrees, would it not be obvious that they would try to mold Palin’s thinking? Knowing she’s a blank slate? But I digress, McCain’s making an effort to show that he’s on the outside. He’s acknowledging that after all these years in Washington, “this pen is old” and a new pen needs to be introduced.

#4. McCain was a “top gun” pilot.

Yes, the word “Maverick” has been used relentlessly but Dickenson uses it again to describe that McCain isn’t the “Top Gun” maverick that he enjoys being called. He starts referring to his academic standing at Annapolis (Naval Academy), graduating 5th from the bottom of a class of 900 students (for the record, Jimmy Carter is the only Naval Acedmy graduate who became president – his rank was 59 out of 820, draw your own conclusions), his antics as a naval pilot (drinking, playing poker, craps, dog track, etc.) and crashing planes deeming him more of a fly boy than a top gun. I laughed when I heard him say all of this with a straight face. Rolling Stone Magazine is telling me that McCain is against the grain, rebellious, outspoken, and marches to the beat of his own drum? OMG, tell me this is not happening! Kinda reminds me of a great Hollywood flick with John Candy.

#3. McCain was the central hero of P.O.W. camps.

Who said he was the central hero? My history books spoke of many tortured P.O.W.’s. I have a brain and know this. Who are you talking to that’s gullible enough to believe this? Of course, by summarizing the facts as it is clearly being done by Dickenson only reaffirms McCain’s allegiance to country first. Where most soldiers went home to live quiet lives after the war, McCain decided to make an impact in politics. This myth is a little far fetched to me.

#2. John McCain is a straight-talking reformer.

I thought Dickenson would spend some time talking about this more than any other of the points. Of course, I had to dig this information because the mainstream media hasn’t elaborated on this point. Is there a reason why? Click here and here to read about The Reformers Institute. What I personally make of this is McCain once again tries to innovate and infuse reform but ends up abandoning the RI because there are too many other influences that would allow this to run squeaky clean. Guilty by association. Sounds like another Keating 5 to me.

#1. John McCain always puts “country first”.

Sounds like most of the failures that have occurred in John McCain’s life has been when he puts his personal interests first. His first marriage, drug abuse past, his attempt to suspend his campaign and work on bailout bill for Wall Street. His attempts to put “country first” fail due to lack of cooperation from team players or just not enough background checks by himself or his supporters. Will he able able to wield enough influence to cause the reform he’s promising? Will his supporters jump ship on him again when he desperately needs them in the critical hour? He can’t even count on the current party’s administration to back him up because everyone’s trying to distance themselves from Bush. On the other hand, is Obama’s playing on the fears of this country to his advantage by selling the same old politics, different day talk? This country is guilty and gunshy of allowing politicians take advatange of our fears.

Someone tell me otherwise. It’s easy to get caught up in defending a candidate but it’s downright annoying to watch journalists take sides and not just endorse candidates but start discrediting the opponent. Again, we know that all these candidates have had a checkered past. That’s been more than obvious. Discuss who’s more qualified, who can follow through, and who can be held accountable. It used to be a parent’s desire to see their child grow up and be President of the US but nowadays, it’s better to be an athlete or entertainer – no accountability to anyone but yourself!

Advertisements