John McCain and the Mystery of the Interwebs

At the risk of pointing out something completely obvious, you’re reading this on a computer, or some other computerized device (PDA, cell phone, wherever you might find an RSS reader or a web browser). While you’re reading this, hundreds of millions (if not billions) of people across the world are also on their computers, or using their various gadgets to access the Internet. It’s become a staple of our civilization, and a vital part of this country’s economy and culture.

And John McCain has no idea how to use it.

Over half a year after admitting that he doesn’t know how to use a computer, McCain has learned very little about the device that’s become an absolute necessity in America. He says he “understands the importance of the computer,” and that he’s “learning more and more every day.” He reads his email… when his staff shows it to him. He now uses a computer “almost every day,” and goes to “various web sites,” including his own (he didn’t specify his Senate web site or his campaign web site) and “the various media.”

I apologize for the constant use of quotes, but I feel the need to be specific when talking about his claims. It’s like describing my grandfather learning to go online.

That’s a start, and I’ll give him a little credit for it. Unfortunately, he has a long, long way to go. He still doesn’t email, he’s the only individual among his Senate staff and his wife that doesn’t have a Blackberry (which, at this point, has become a vital gadget for any job that requires a lot of management and communication), and he “isn’t a tech freak,” a status that apparantly comes with text messaging people. He says he prefers to use the telephone, and part of me is vaguely sure he uses either a rotary phone or has his own operator with an old-timey switchboard.

His latest anti-tech offense is a slap in the face of bloggers and online journalists of all stripes. When discussing online campaign coverage, McCain’s campaign spokesman Michael Goldfarb denigrated the New York Times. He compared the newspaper’s editors to bloggers “sitting at home in his mother’s basement and ranting into the ether between games of Dungeons & Dragons.”

The New York Times, along with every other major print publication currently on the market, has some form of blog, whether it’s a network of freelancers or a scratch pad for editors to post content between print issues. If you don’t have a blog, you’re missing out on a massive audience of readers who spend a great deal of time in front of the computer, and rely on the Internet to get their news.

According to a recent study from Pew Research, 55% of all Americans have broadband Internet access. Of those, 47% regularly read their news online, and 15% regularly read personal blogs. If you’re a media outlet and you don’t have a blog, you’re missing out on an obvious and relatively cheap way to expand your audience.

I didn’t take offense at the Dungeons & Dragons jab, mostly because I play regularly. However, it’s pretty easy to be insulted by the implication of the statement, an implication that’s been obselete for several years. According to another Pew Research study (from 2006, so the numbers have probably gone up since it was written), 12 million Americans keep a blog. Of those, 38% are students, 37% have a college degree, and 38% are “knowledge-based professional workers” (white collar) . They’re no longer a minority of geeks and social misfits, tinkering away on their mysterious computer systems, typing in strange and complex digital languages that only computer science majors understand. Anybody can blog and read blogs.

This anti-tech, blog-hating shit might have flown 20 years ago. It might even have been tolerated a decade ago. But the Internet is now a vital part of American life, and computers are in nearly every home. We work on computers, we play on computers, and we get our information from computers. I really don’t like the whole “elitist” insult that has been thrown around, but what else do you call a man who refuses to learn how to adequately use a tool that nearly everyone in the country works with every day in some way, shape, or form?

I don’t expect John McCain to build his own computer. I don’t expect him to learn Linux, or code his own web page, or even make his own blog. I do, however, expect him to get some understanding of computers and the Internet. Stop treating it like some mysterious force of technology that only the learned can use, and really get wrists-deep into e-mail and web browsing. My grandparents know how to use computers that much, and they’re older than McCain is. It’s not hard anymore, and treating it like a complicated enigma is not something I want to see in someone who aspires to be the leader of the most technologically advanced nation on the planet.

- Will

The Anthrax Man

The 2001 anthrax scare may go down in history as the most important moment everyone forgot about. When it happened, it reinforced the fear Americans had that terrorism was looming overhead, that 9/11 wasn’t simply a one-off event, and it easily catalyzed the “war on terror” as we know it today. Yet somehow it fell through the cracks.

After the death of a prime suspect in the attacks, a man working for the US Government no less, the story’s made a return. Glenn Greenwald, doing his typical spectacular job, lays it out in stunning, if depressing, detail. But it seems like it went like this:

  1. Pat Leahy, Tom Daschle, and a few members of the liberal media get the famous anthrax letters, with the message “Allah is great” written on them.
  2. The anthrax is sent to a lab in Maryland for testing, who determines the chemical had bentonite in it.
  3. Media draws the conclusion that it had to be connected to Iraq, as Iraq had used bentonite in the past, not to mention the sophistication of the substance that precludes standard terrorists.
  4. War in Iraq.
  5. Suspect in Anthrax case pops up, one Bruce E. Ivins.
  6. Ivins, just before the Justice Department comes after him, kills himself.

Okay, that’s our timeline. Now let’s also keep a few other facts in mind:

  • All of the people who got the letters were well-known liberal/Dem targets.
  • Ivins was a demonstrable religious nut who often wrote to his local paper about “abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide or capital punishment.”
  • Ivins, it turns out, works at the lab in Maryland that sent out the message that the anthrax had bentonite in it (which, it turns out, was false).

Now, I may be a bit unfair in assuming Ivins’ guilt, but let’s just assume for the moment that he was the man behind it.

I thought it was pretty odd at first (“at first” meaning back in 2001) that it was Daschle and Leahy getting these letters. You’d think that the pansy-like Democrats wouldn’t have been targets, the terrorists would go after Bush, Cheney, or other Republicans in order to really give ‘em a scare. Why bother with the blues?

Now we’ve got a potential answer. Sending the anthrax to the Democrats sent the message to them that terrorism really is a danger. Bush and the Republicans, not to mention many Democrats, were already quite pro-war. Sending them a fake-Iraqi-terrorist-attack would only reaffirm their resolve. Go after the Dems that would vote against an Iraq invasion and now you might get somewhere.

So this Ivins guy cooks up some anthrax, jots down some terrorist-sounding notes, and sends them to a few Democrats and members of the liberal media, implicating Iraq by being the ones to “test” it and further cementing the event as a reason to invade. One hell of a devious plan.

Granted, if he’s innocent (we’ll have to wait and see), then that theory falls apart.

John McCain’s campaign has gone off the deep end.

Okay, I hate to dip into the “McCain’s attack ads are going out of control” well again, but this is starting to drift into the central area of Crazytown where the normal tracks don’t lead and you’ve gotta get there on foot. Check this new ad:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nVQaHpOnO8]

Let’s all just take a moment to let that sink in.

Now that we’ve had time to reflect, what actually happened in that ad? Well, he ripped a few quotes out of context, mocked Obama for “anointing himself” (apparently a presidential candidate shouldn’t think he’s qualified to lead the world’s last superpower), and ends with “is he ready to lead?” The ad doesn’t go into a single policy point, it doesn’t even answer the damn question. You just get a whole bunch of fancy music, a clip from The Ten Commandments with Heston, and then “is he ready to lead?” at the end. That’s all.

I’m sorry, but What. The. Fuck.

First off, if you take off the last five seconds, the thing almost looks like a tongue-in-cheek pro-Obama ad. Like something a supporter would pop out to playfully jab at how he’s turning into a larger-than-life figure. Hell it doesn’t even mention McCain until the very end in the box on the bottom of the screen.

That makes two ads now where McCain just flails his arms and “criticizes” Obama for being popular and a good public speaker, but does nothing else. I’m not sure who McRage hired for these ads, but he needs to tell them that it might be a better strategy if he’d start telling people who they should vote for if Obama’s a bad choice. For that matter, they might want to get cracking on explaining why he’s a bad leader, not just posing the question.

The response from Obama’s camp is correct, this is juvenile and desperate. It’s only August and McSame’s already showing that he’s blowing gaskets.

What's new?

Got a hot tip?
Drop us a line!

Donate to the Razor

Subscribe