A few weeks ago, Rachel had a great segment featuring "a child's treasury of politicians refusing to answer very simple questions -- very simple questions about their own records." If you missed it, this is well worth your time, in part because I'd like to add a new chapter to the series.
The pattern is amusing, and unmistakable -- we keep running into instances in which Republicans are confronted with simple questions, which they clearly don't want to answer. But instead of artfully dodging the simple questions with vague answers, these Republicans come up with one sad sentence, which they repeat incessantly, hoping the reporter will go away.
I couldn't help but think of "A Child's Treasury of Politicians Refusing to Answer Very Simple Questions" when reading this fascinating exchange between the Washington Post's Jason Horowitz and Alex Wong, the Romney-Ryan campaign's foreign policy director. Horowitz had a pretty simple question: is it fair to say Mitt Romney is a neoconservative?
"[Romney's] embrace of American values and interests and his call for American leadership abroad throughout this campaign is indicative of a philosophy of peace through strength," Wong told Horowitz.
Fine, but does that mean Romney embraces neoconservatism?
[T]hroughout this campaign Governor Romney has indicated that his view on the world is peace through strength, American leadership, in guaranteeing an American century, that this new century continues to be an American century. And that's the governing philosophy of Governor Romney on peace through strength," Wong said.
Got it. So, does this make Romney a neoconservative?
"Governor Romney's embrace of American values and interests and his call for American leadership is a philosophy of peace through strength," Wong said.
Right, but about whether Romney is a neoconservative....
"What I am saying is that Governor Romney has used, has said, that his philosophy is peace through strength.... Governor Romney has indicated that he has a philosophy, peace through strength."
Nine times Jason Horowitz asked whether Romney is a neoconservative. Nine times Alex Wong repeated tired talking points.
This isn't the first time a Romney aide has tried this -- remember Eric Fehrnstrom's unintentionally hilarious interview about immigration and "amnesty" last November? -- but with the election so close, the fact that the Republican candidate's staffers struggle to move past cliches is discouraging.
Leave a Comment:
The knives that come out after this campaign are going to be great! I suggest TRMS attempt to try and book Fehrnstrom or some other muckymuck around November 10th. Get in your bids now, the price keeps going up...
Eric has made 'etch a sketch' millions!
Lebowsky, I don't think that we have to wait til after this campaign is over, the knives are already out, and the sharks have started feeding. The issue is that NO ONE actually knows what Mittens believes, and his flip-flops on every issue is so not in keeping "with where the party" is NOW.
No, I'm getting my popcorn ready, cause this is getting very interesting....
NPR's Science Friday had an excellent segment on this today. (link)
The researchers pointed out that if the interviewer repeats the unanswered question they come off looking like jerks.
Their chief recommendation of the researchers was to place the question on screen in text while the politician is answering. This addresses what is happening- that listeners tend to forget what the point of the question was while the politician is rolling out a fluent non responsive answer.
This should be done by networks covering the debate.
Personally I love reporters that persist in trying to get straight answers from crooked politicians.
Journalist need to bring a lawn chair and a couple sandwiches to their interviews with the Romney campaign aides. The next time they pull this stuff, just make sure the camera has plenty of recording time left- sit down and say, "We can do this all day" and KEEP asking for hours if that's how long it takes. Let's see how long we can make them do this.
Peace and strength don't really belong in the same sentence, one erases the other. War is not the answer, war was never the answer. We can arrive at peace when we conclude that strength no longer works as a means, it is only a means to our own demise. We need to start using our brains. Agreeing to disagree is a start.
Don't you know anything? They have a playbook to follow.
War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength
“Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. ”
Sick: please do credit that master of seeing through the bull manure, George Orwell, with those great quotes.
1984 is a classic of such towering literary proportions that I'm pretty sure Sick was willing to credit participants on this blog (at least, the the non-trolling ones, such as yourself) with familiarity with the source.
FWIW, given Angel's frequently poetically-tinged commentary, I'd be genuinely surprised if s/he weren't already familiar with it as well...
Vulture/Voucher 2012
Proving Two Rights DO Make a Wrong!
;-)
TCinLA The erudite and literate population of this blog (individuals such as yourself) would immediately recognize Orwell, but you are correct credit is due to the prognosticator of our current times Mr. George Orwell, who is as we speak turning in his grave.
Isn't it amazing how exposure to the classics can put things in perspective
Folks, it is always good to attribute your quotes. Even better when we get them right. Long time ago I read a syndicated NYT op-ed writer paraphrase the last line of the Communist Manifesto, in support of a Republican, and attribute the original quote to Ronald Reagan. I almost quit reading newspapers after that.
Here in the UK we have the ultimate example of this on the BBC programme `Newsnight` Jeremy Paxman ask the then Home Secretary Michael Howard, do you have a secretary for the running of the interior USA might be the best example 12 (TWELVE TIMES) times without receiving a direct answer I am sure it is on the web somewhere I think during this election the Romney campaign may break this record
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uwlsd8RAoqI&noredirect=1
Genius, as a fellow brit, I remember it fondly.
Willard was a neocon, before he wasn't, I mean, oh, nevermind!
Please do tell it may clear some things up for a lot of people.
He's extremely paleoneopaleoconservative? Easy for him to say...
Vulture/Voucher 2012
Proving Two Rights DO Make a Wrong!
;-)
Lyin Ryan was just shown on MSNBC speaking about how Democrats are obstructing the recovery, following a diatribe against POB"'s foreign policy. Of course he offered no helpful or explanatory policy input to help ease the problem. The protesters were led out in another example of GOP's free speech ideal.
He must have heard the word obstruct when people were referring to our Republican congress, I guess he liked the new word he just learned and is deciding to use it . This can only mean one thing, he is back to another old stand-by...being a copy cat. Being that it worked so well for him when he ran against Kennedy.
How can you tell if Ryan is lying ?
Government expands to limit , reduce , withdraw , or otherwise eliminate your rights .
That being of course as funny a certain style of humours achievable potential , (que Dennis Miller curtsey) .
Mr Ryan said POB 'has not lifted a hand to help the unborn.' I believe that would be sexual assault considering where the unborn reside.
FTW! (And, come to think of it, that would explain a lot about other Rape-Public-CON attitudes - paging Governer Ultrasound!)
Vulture/Voucher 2012
Proving Two Rights DO Make a Wrong!
;-)
They will do this as long as they are allowed to get away with it (i.e., until they are voted out of office).
Funny thing ... just the other day Don Lemon on CNN had a Republican "operative" on and he genuinely wouldn't give up on the question he was asking about Libya and the guy started to laugh, move in his chair and you tell he was actually furious that this young upstart was trying to get him to talk about something he obviously didn't want to talk about. It was VERY revealing and should be used as a primer for media questioners..
The dismissal of the media by the right wing is so condescending. The idea that people who watch these interviews will think "ok, good answer" is indicative of the low regard these candidates have of the electorate. More importantly, it typifies the nonsense that their positions are made up of. I find them beneath contempt.
As She Who Must Be Obeyed keeps saying, "their ignorance is bottomless." Every day you think that they had to have finally hit bottom, they demonstrate the truth of that statement.
They refuse to answer on the grounds of self-incrimination. Gotta love that Constitution!
Question- Who paid for this movie? With the super pac's pulling their money from ads in some states, and romney trailing, "did the republicans, buy, change, and show this movie to the people in the arab states"? This, was expected by romney, and that is why he jumped the gun on this! The only way he could gain in the poles, was to creat, this problem! To look for people who dtstributed this movie, I believe, in right in the midle of the republican party! Again the only way, romney could make statments like this, before the riots began, is that he knew it was comming!
Aside from reading minds here , were faced with renting an empty room occupied with the ominous spectre of a certain boundless sense of worth . The tangible dread that is followed by the evidence proving , finally , that an affair with Pepe Le Peu is eminently preferable to a freeloading aristocrat .
We could use the perspicacious wit of Trollope to aid in the skewering of the self indulgent , unaware giants of delusion and hypocrisy . Also lumbering ...
I think the question of neoconservatism needs to be preceded by the definition of the term. I don't know exactly what it means and I imagine many who listen to the answer have no idea, either. At least give the question some context and focus on the answer as it relates to the context. Keep demanding an answer until the Republicans either answer clearly, or refuse to appear for any interview. Of course, this will not happen in this climate of MSM-complicity with lying. We are approaching the sea-change in our political discourse, and I can hardly wait.
Exactly, I agree.
What percentage of the population can readily define Neoconservatism? They can't friggin define themselves as they with each decade disagree with the previous... blow bags I say.
Let's stick to the simple facts. We have a large group in this country that will vote for a Rebublican even though this is for them, like taking a bite out of their own flesh. They don't comprehend the basics.
Romney as a neocon? Maybe this explains his comments re: Russia. He's stuck in a time-warp.
Many can't even properly define conservatism. It's clear to me that most of those who proudly declaim themselves to be the "true conservatives" of our time are in fact extremist right-wing disciples of fascism.
Vulture/Voucher 2012
Proving Two Rights DO Make a Wrong!
;-)
Neoconservatives defined. Short version - The US should control middle eastern oil by military means. See section 3.2 for their most chilling statement.
Plus, read section "Signatories to statement of principles". Those names should run a chill up your spine.
The Willard/Lyin' Ryan Show/Debacle bounces merrily along, completely oblivious to the ground giving way beneath their feet...(kind of like the football field in The Dark Knight Rises).... each village idiot bolstering the other. Where does their campaign staff order their word salads from? Sarah Palin's handlers, or Dick Cheney's toadies?? I can see John Bolton from my balcony!!!...and isn't that a young Kevin Bacon from Animal House screaming out "ALL IS WELL....ALL IS WELL....ALLL is WELLLLLLLLLLL!" Gotta love it!!
When I see that picture above of the GOP ticket....Dumb and Dumber is just too easy... let's go all Dostoyevsky on them....."The Brothers Idiot"? "Crime and Punishable"? "The Possessed"? All of the above????
Wait....see? A Russian!!!....Willard must be right!!
I think Siri would be more responsive as an interviewee.
This reminds me of Dana Carvey's SNL potrayal of Bush 41.
"Stay the course." .... "Thousand points of light" ... "Stay the course."
By the numbers: 'Are you better off?' (from CNN.com)
By Caitlin Stark, CNN Library - updated 3:57 PM EDT, Thu September 13, 2012
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/13/politics/btn-are-you-better-off/index.html?hpt=po_t1
9.4 million -- Number of people unemployed in August 2008.
12.6 million -- Number of people unemployed in August 2012.
6.1% - U.S. unemployment rate in August 2008.
8.1% - U.S. unemployment rate in August 2012.
3.4 million -- Number of job openings in the U.S. as of July 31, 2008.
1.6 million -- Number of long-term unemployed (jobless for 27 weeks or more) as of August 2008.
5 million -- Number of long-term unemployed (jobless for 27 weeks or more) as of August 2012.
6.1% - U.S. unemployment rate in August 2008.
8.1% - U.S. unemployment rate in August 2012.
3.4 million -- Number of job openings in the U.S. as of July 31, 2008.
3.7 million -- Number of job openings in the U.S. as of July 31, 2012.
1.6 million -- Number of long-term unemployed (jobless for 27 weeks or more) as of August 2008.
5 million -- Number of long-term unemployed (jobless for 27 weeks or more) as of August 2012.
Federal Reserve plans more stimulus
Another round of Stimulus won't create jobs
Above data came from CNN? It can't be reliable, right? They're not FOX news.
As is usual someone has to follow...republicans around the blogs ironing out "wrinkles". Here are the straightened out implications: