Why Candidates' Spin Is Spun
Weekly commentary by CBS Evening News chief Washington correspondent and Face the Nation host Bob Schieffer.
David Brooks, the conservative New York Times columnist, ended his Friday essay on Rudy Giuliani's campaign this way:
"Someday, Rudy Giuliani will look back on this moment and wonder why he didn't run as himself."
It was the last line in a column about how Giuliani has, shall we say, shifted his emphasis on immigration since he became a presidential candidate.
To me, it was not so much a column about one candidate but modern American politics and what it has become.
Telling people what they want to hear to win elections is nothing new.
But advances in technology have taken it to new levels. Because computers and polling have made it so much easier to gauge public opinion, candidates race to tell us what we "want" to hear.
They load us down with spin, tip toe around issues, and give us tortured explanations of how a change in their position really wasn't a change at all - that somehow what we thought they believed back then is just the opposite of what they believe now.
My bet is not many people believe any of it because frankly, we're not that dumb.
What annoys me is these candidates must think we are.
E-mail Face the Nation.
By Bob Schieffer
Copyright 2009 CBS. All rights reserved. David Brooks, the conservative New York Times columnist, ended his Friday essay on Rudy Giuliani's campaign this way:
"Someday, Rudy Giuliani will look back on this moment and wonder why he didn't run as himself."
It was the last line in a column about how Giuliani has, shall we say, shifted his emphasis on immigration since he became a presidential candidate.
To me, it was not so much a column about one candidate but modern American politics and what it has become.
Telling people what they want to hear to win elections is nothing new.
But advances in technology have taken it to new levels. Because computers and polling have made it so much easier to gauge public opinion, candidates race to tell us what we "want" to hear.
They load us down with spin, tip toe around issues, and give us tortured explanations of how a change in their position really wasn't a change at all - that somehow what we thought they believed back then is just the opposite of what they believe now.
My bet is not many people believe any of it because frankly, we're not that dumb.
What annoys me is these candidates must think we are.
By Bob Schieffer
Recommended
- Who decides Oscar winners? White men over 60
- Top Twelve Most Patriotic Songs Ever
- American dystopia more reality than fiction
- Obama only goes after leaks that don't benefit him
- Who Lives The American Dream?
- The Decline and Fall of the American Empire
- The hunk factor and the 2012 elections
- Not Your Homeland
I watched last Sunday morning 11-25-07 and was appalled once again by the attitude displayed by guests regarding how much the war in Iraq has changed for the better. One of the authors of a book said something like "last year we averaged four dead U.S. military personnel a day, but now it is only one a day.".
Talk about spin in a major way. Only one - wow - as long as it is not someone you care about, including yourself. This attitude reminds me of the 60s when we were told X million American deaths in a nuclear exchange with Russia was acceptable casualties - only if you or someone you care about are not in the X number would it be an acceptable number.
Even you, CBS''s Face The Nation - allows this kind of stupid spun attitude to be spewed out from your house.
Dante Vignaroli
710 39th Street
Des Moines, Iowa 50312
Home Phone: (515) 274-4297
Email: dantev@netins.net
How anyone in their right mind could vote Republican is an example of how the dumbing down of america really has taken effect.
Except Ron Paul.
The Dems on the other hand are just as bad in some cases for not stopping the burning of the constitution by the White House.
Lets hope Obama and Ron Paul run as independents so we can have real change in America.
Maybe Lou Dobbs will shake it up as a third party candidate if he runs.
Lets just hope a quality Third Party Candidate does emerge to save us all from more of the same political spin and lobby-ists control that got us here in the first place.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I agree we need change. Unfortunately Ron Paul is one of those "party switchers just to get votes" I was referring to in my earlier post on this article.
He is will either be another stay the course republican or an untrustworth deceptionist.
When a politicians lips move, they are most likely lying.
Re: The Chevron "human energy" campaign.
We know that Chevron profited prior to the latest invasion of Iraq, by giving kickbacks to Saddam in exchange for business favors-
%u201CChevron settles Iraq kickback charges%u201D
%u201CChevron Corp. has agreed to pay $30 million (U.S.) to settle charges it made illegal kickbacks to Iraq for oil purchased in 2001 and 2002 under the United Nation''s oil-for-food program.%u201D
www.thestar.com/printArticle/276611
And we know, of course that Chevron has made a fortune from the illegal invasion. But I am wondering about this %u201Chuman energy%u201D campaign. By "human energy", is Chevron talking about the energy that it expends to torture, murder, and rape people, in their efforts to maximize profits:
"Chevron is one of the largest foreign investors in Burma and is the only remaining major U.S. corporation with a significant presence there. In 2005, Chevron bought the company Unocal weeks after the latter settled a lawsuit accusing it of assisting the Burmese military junta in the torture, murder and rape of villagers during construction of a pipeline."
www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/12/1454252
...or are they proposing the idea of squeezing oil out of humans, directly?
Posted by guysdigdirt
He is legit.
He%u2019s a legitimate Libertarian, which is exactly why I would not vote for him.