Decades of reporting on the powerful, in and around Washington D.C., brings with it invaluable training. Training which helps focus the veteran reporter's mind like a laser beam enabling him to know, almost reflexively, what's objectively true and what is not. This invaluable training is so invaluable because American's would never know the truth about their government leaders without it.
David Broder is a journeyman reporter for the liberal Washington Post. He's received the invaluable training that is required to chart a proper course in determining what's true and what is bluster in American politics. Broder is Mr. Centrist. Mr. Bi-Partisanship. That most likely would be because of his decades of invaluable training bloodhounding out the unveneered truth. Naturally, because he's so seasoned and wise, he would never take sides in political disputes. When mud is being slung, when gossip and rumor are being whispered, when political lines are being drawn, David Broder can always be counted upon to fly above it all, like a Divine Reporting Angel, seeking out, ala Joe Friday, "just the facts".
Or maybe not.....
Yet, in pointing to those vulnerabilities in her rival, Clinton has heightened the most obvious liability she would carry into a fight against McCain. In an age of deep cynicism about politicians of both parties, McCain is the rare exception who is not assumed to be willing to sacrifice personal credibility to prevail in any contest. Link
David Broder has witnessed it all during his career.....and that's why the veracity of his comments should never be regarded with skepticism. Therefore, when David Broder says that John McCain is "the rare exception who is not assumed to be willing to sacrifice personal credibility to prevail in any contest", then what's left to say? Once the Dean has spoken, no more words are ever needed.
Who it is that doesn't assume McCain is willing to sacrifice personal credibility (flip-flop) to win the presidency.....we're never told. Perhaps the seasoned and crusty expert columnist is speaking, as would obviously be his oh-so-experienced right to do, for all us Americans. Smart, experienced and deep thinking reporters are always telling readers and viewers what the American people want and what the American people need to know. They look after us.
Not only are we told by Broder that John McCain is not "assumed" by Americans to be a flaming flip-flopper who would change his mind in a New York minute, pandering for votes.....but in addition this "assumed" McCain quality is a "rare exception" amongst political hopefuls. McCain, like Broder himself, is unique, one of a kind, oblivious to political partisanship, just like Broder, immaculate in intention and motivation. The straightest of arrows.
That's objectivity. Objectivity that can only be learned through decades of exposure to "unrare" and "unexceptional" politicians, who unlike John McCain, have no integrity and will do virtually anything to get elected.....you know, like Hillary.
Do Americans "assume" Mr. McCain couldn't possibly flip-flop all around on policy issues just to win an election? The only explanation I can come up with for Americans assuming John McCain wouldn't or couldn't "sacrifice personal credibility" (flip-flop) in order to get elected....would be a pristine McCain record of never having changed his mind in order to garner votes. If, for example, several McCain flip-flopping incidents can be, in fact, pointed to....then David Broder's "assumed" "rare exception" characterization of McCain could be characterized by this Reverend as a fart in a windstorm.
With David Broder's vast understanding and knowledge of all things Washington, having his wise finger on the daily pulse of America's political heartbeat, is it even possible that the veteran Dean Of Journalism could be oblivious to many examples of McCain flip-flopping? If many examples of John McCain pandering for votes by "sacrificing" his "personal credibility" are, indeed, out there.....then David Broder would come across as partisan and biased, protective of the GOP candidate....and naturally, that can't be. He's the Dean.
If the great and mighty Centrist journalist, himself, is purposely omitting from his columns the genuine facts about McCain's political posturing through policy flip-flopping....and Americans find out about many, many non-rare examples of McCain doing just that....then Americans might start "assuming" that the serious and profoundly wise journalists, like Broder, are, in actuality, full of sh*t and are simply reflecting their own view from the "unique" position on their veteran knees in service to the establishment powers.
The Reverend doesn't have the unique and vast volume of experience that David Broder does. However, right off the top of my head, I can point to two rather serious examples by John McCain where he "sacrifices" his own "personal credibility" without ever blinking.
1) McCain obviously has flipped on his characterization of folks like Falwell, Robertson, Hagee and similar religious fanatics. Once called "agents of intolerance" by the "rare exception" McCain, when asked during this presidential campaign if he still viewed these fanatics as intolerant agents....McCain responded, "No".
2) McCain has obviously flipped on his immigration position. Previous to running for president this cycle, McCain worked closely with Ted Kennedy in an attempt to pass a comprehensive immigration bill that talk radio fanatics deemed "amnesty" and were successful in stopping. Today, McCain has changed his position on immigration, having "heard the American people" on that issue. In order to capture the votes of conservatives, McCain, far from being a rare exception, followed the well worn path of the flip-flop. Saying anything to get elected, just as any other run of the mill unrare pandering politician would do.
Is David Broder unaware of these examples of "personal credibility sacrifice" by John McCain? Which would be worse? If Broder was unaware, or if Broder was aware?
The crisis facing our nation has been brought about mainly by corporate media and their failure to even try to carry out their designated role of telling Americans what our politicans and our government have done and are continuing to do. Instead, corporate media representatives, like David Broder, have now arrived at a point where they purposely withhold the truth and misinform the public. They have fused themselves with the very people they are supposed to be critically examining.
Not only is McCain not a "rare exception" who simply wouldn't "sacrifice personal credibility" by flip-flopping on important policy issues, he doesn't even resemble that description. Here's another non-unique example....
At the time, working with the Clinton White House, McCain championed a $1.10-per-pack tax increase, insisting that it would prevent illnesses and provide resources for public health programs.
Appearing on “The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer” on April 21, 1998, McCain was asked whether he would give up in the face of objections from the Republican leadership. McCain replied, “Never.”
That was a decade ago. Now, McCain opposes a $0.61-per-pack tax increase, won’t commit to supporting a regulation bill he’s co-sponsoring, and has hired Philip Morris’ former lobbyist as his senior campaign adviser. Link
Perhaps one might think, like David Broder, that when John Straight Talk McCain, says "Never", he really means it. Did Broder know about this incident? Of course he did. Did it phase him in the least provoking him to reconsider his characterization of the Arizona senator? Not one bit.
How can this be explained?
For a rather lengthy un-unique list of John McCain "sacrificing personal credibility", whoring for votes, go here.
About This Blog