He would have to change it to Oilers, they'll have to focus group it out first to see how that plays, then when he gets to Tennessee it's going to be a real head scratcher, maybe he'll switch to the Vols.
And now he's lost my vote. Mountain <> molehill. So he mentioned the wrong team at least the gist of the story is consistent and what the heck does this have to do with who he's going to appoint to the USSC or anything else that matters?
It doesn't matter much if it's a simple mistake (i.e. Obama's 57 states verbal slip). It matters a bit more if it's an obvious pander (which I think it probably is). The gaffe that McCain made yesterday that was more obvious and blatant was the one where he was accusing OBama of being soft on Iran for not voting for a Joe Liberman Senate Resolution (Obama was absent that day), that McCain supported.....then it was discovered that McCain was ALSO absent that day and didn't vote for the resolution either.
This is a lot like Obama's Buchenwald/Auschwitz confusion and Clinton's Bosnia sniper fire story. I guess they all suck.
I agree. this is incredibly insignificant. It's only worthy of bringing up because the McCain side that tries to play gotcha with every little thing is now vulnerable to same tactic.
That's ridiculous. In NC we have lots of Cowboy, Dolphin, Patriot, Jet and Steeler fans even though we have had the Panthers for more than a decade. If you are bored, you want to stimulate your mind with a variety of topics
Not in the 1960's you didn't. For a variety of reasons. So your analogy is dead and dusted. Say a prayer for it on the way out.
I don't think it matters that much if its a pander. In the realm of political woppers I don't think this is much of a big deal.
I don't think that's exactly fair. McCain isn't the one playing gotcha, it's just the GOP and right wing bloggers who are doing it.
I don't know about the Auschwitz thing, which could be an honest mistake. It is very similiar to the Clinton Bosnia thing, the Richardson "I was drafted by an MLB team!" thing, and Obama's "Kennedy got me to the US" thing. It's one of those things that just makes you go "what the hell?" Either these guys think they can lie at will, or they've convinced themselves of a false reality - either way, a very bad thing. The fact that they are willing to say these things that are verifiably false is disturbing. People say "it doesn't matter" - but it matters because it gives you a sense of what to expect down the road. In both Obama and McCain's case, this doesn't seem to be a trend as of yet. If it does become a trend, that should be a huge warning sign on either candidate.
I think you are reading way too much into this as a warning sign. Lets face it politicians pander and while that deserves I don't think this means that they are serial prevaricators out of touch with reality. I put this more in line with a being at a bar and telling a girl you are interested in that you like pilates when you find out she does it though you barely know anything about it. If it seems like they can't open their mouths without changing their story yes that would be a serious problem or if they are lying or exagerating about something more major, like say if Obama denied he ever lived in Indonesia, or McCain claiming he wasn't involved in the Keating Five scandal. Something like misnaming the football team that he had decieved the Vietminh with as a POW I don't think qualifies.
The problem is that it wasn't misnaming the team. It was a big part of his story - one that he has repeated many times as being a big part of his Vietnam captivity experience. The detail of what team it was is irrelevant in terms of the value of the story (which is what makes it such a ridiculous lie) - but it was important to him in the times that he's told it. So it's not like he just accidentally changed it or misspoke. It was intentional. So then the question becomes "why"? Is the story any less powerful by mentioning the Packers instead of the Steelers? Absolutely not. So why do it? That's the problem I have with these types of lies - they serve no real purpose and have no real benefit, yet the candidates make them simply because they can. That's disturbing. I also disagree on the pandering - pandering is making promises to different groups to get their vote. Or emphasizing parts of your platform or shaping your answers to appeal to a particular audience. I think it's a very different thing than things like this where candidates just flat out make stuff up. As of right now, these seem like one-time things and could be explained any number of ways for both candidates. But if either of them start showing a pattern of it, it's a real problem, regardless of if it's small things or big things. It shows that people think they are above accountability, and the mentality that gets you to the point of being able to lie whenever it's convenient will also let your lies grow into bigger and bigger lies.
I seriously hope that he just was thinking "football" and "Pittsburgh" and misspoke and the Steelers came out instead of Packers. Otherwise, how can you not know that you will be called on it?
What in the H are you talking about; the Steelers were around in the 60s-- moribund or not. Some people are not just band-wagon fans. There was a time when I could name half of the starters on every NFL team (even the bad ones and/or the ones I didn't particularly follow)-- but that was when I was younger and the NFL had not expanded so much and free agency hadn't even been invented... I don't know how you can make such conjecture with such absolute certaintly-- oh yeah, you're a lawyer!!!!!!!!
