March 26, 2008

"I don't understand why in this industry of politics, I am an airhead."

Says Meghan McCain, who's got a huge WaPo article about her and her blog. She's a nice asset to the campaign. I think in her position it's effectively political to not be political. Talking about mascara and "Project Runway"... that works! It makes John McCain better, doesn't it?

45 comments:

Middle Class Guy said...

"Politics is filled with "fake people..."

That ain't no air head.

MadisonMan said...

It's the name Meghan.

Bob said...

It's infinitely better than calling Americans ignorant, which is Michelle Obama's latest gaffe. She apparently got loose from whatever closet they locked her into.

paul a'barge said...

As opposed to Chelsea, who thinks the blue dress is not anyone else's business.

Middle Class Guy said...

"I don't understand why in this industry of politics, I am an airhead."



Because someone's daughter has to be an airhead; better a Republican. It cannot be Chelsea, as that would unlease vicious attacks by the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy, the Clintons, air head celebrities who fight for the rights of airheads, and probably cause useless and wasteful Congressional and Senate hearings.

Poor airheads who have been the victims of perceived hate crimes would tearfully testify. We would hear about airheads being killed, beaten, and abused. I would bet that a politician or two would come out of the closet and proudly proclaim they are airheads, with their wives stadning stoicly beside them.

New laws would be passed to protect airheads and guarantee they are tolerated and not discriminated against. A new hate crime law would be passed for airheads.

Norman Rogers said...

Ann, you're brilliant as always.

First, let me congratulate you for discovering something that I, myself, have been investigating all morning--to wit, the blog of one Meghan McCain.

Before any liberals get wind of this, her "playlists" are rife with horrible songs and might be used as an issue.

Again, to wit--she put Led Zeppelin's "Whole Lotta Love" on her playlist. Fairly tame, except for:

You've been coolin', baby, I've been droolin',
All the good times I've been misusin',
Way, way down inside, I'm gonna give you my love,
I'm gonna give you every inch of my love,
Gonna give you my love.


Yes, I was shocked as well. Who is she directing this towards? Lindsey Graham? Charlie Black?

Then there's the problem of her having a song by a musical combo called "The Brian Jonestown Massacre" on her playlist post.

For those of you that don't know, the BJTM are a band that use drugs, sing about drugs and make albums specifically marketed to people who take drugs.

I am just saying.

Chip Ahoy said...

They're wise to close off comments and sift the email instead. It would be nothing but trouble otherwise.

ZPS said...

Good Morning to Conservative Ann and all her Conservative Fans!

It's early here on the West Coast...but already I see Ms. Althouse has posted 2 negative items today about Hillary! and Obama! One about how they're both probably trying to steal delegates, and the other about how both of them should just drop out of the race.

And, just in case she thought she wasn't being fair and balanced...she followed those posts up with a nice positive mention of McCain's bimbo daughter and how great she is for the geriatric McCain campaign.

Well, sure. Anything associated with McCain that's under the age of 65 has to be some sort of asset. Good lord did you see him with that old bag of bones Nancy Reagan yesterday? I couldn't hear what they were saying but it may as well have been a commercial for funeral homes, life insurance policies, or prunes. I had to avert my eyes from all the ghoulishness.

If there's anything we've learned from the past 20 years of elections, America always chooses the younger, less ghoulish, less creepy nominee when they step into the voting booth. Bush vs. Kerry, Bush vs. Gore, Clinton vs. Dole, Clinton vs. Bush, Reagan vs. Dukakis...etc.

So, sorry to disappoint you, Ann...there's no way Obama is losing this thing. But, if by some miracle Hillary! is the nominee, we're going into uncharted waters...how do you choose who is more creepy and more ghoulish between McCain and Hillary!?

Well Conservatives, I'm satisfied now that I've written enough to take away the negative, anti-Democratic tone of althouse.blogspot.com.

Bonus!

Hey all you S.A.T. fans...

Fair and Balanced is to Fox News

as

Cruel Neutrality is to ___________

bill said...

For musical background, there's the Thomas Dolby classic Airhead (youtube)

I buy her all the right clothes
and pretty jewels to wear
my friends say she's a dumb blonde
but they don't know she dyes her hair
she thinks the fighting in Central America's easily solved
but what to wear to Bel-Air premieres
is a problem she could never resolve...

Norman Rogers said...

ZPS:

Sit on your dead ass and bitch much?

Middle Class Guy said...

ZPS spewed:
McCain's bimbo daughter…

…that old bag of bones Nancy Reagan… I had to avert my eyes from all the ghoulishness.

…how do you choose who is more creepy and more ghoulish between McCain and Hillary!?

Hey all you S.A.T. fans...


Hate women much? Does the word misogynist mean anything to you? You were beaten up on the playground by a younger girl? Your mother ignored you and locked you in a closet? You never got laid?

We know you never took the S.A.T.s. You had to attend high school to do that. You were probably afraid to do so; afraid the girls.

Freder Frederson said...

So the other day Ann criticized the silly liberals for falling for the "It's Raining McCain" piece of Briar Patch propaganda. Now the WaPo (are we still even buying the line it is a liberal paper) writes a puff piece on McCain's daughter and Ann has just fallen in love with her. "OOH, she's so earthy and so real! She drinks Budweiser just like real Americans! She's just like Billy Carter! Not at all like that stuck-up bitch Chelsea or the Obama kids, who probably have commie flags tacked up in their rooms."

So how is the cruel neutrality goig.

john said...

MCG -

I had always thought ZPS was female, as guys usually don't talk about religion with such a passion.

ZPS hears nothing but the messianic message, and the elevation of BHO to lord and savior of a fallen, hateful and racist people, is a given to him. Or perhaps he is counting on the messiah leading him and the true believers into the days of rapture, leaving behind republicans, to burn (in the red states).

That a messiah subjects himself to the indignities of running for office must be especially galling to ZPS and the rest of the faithful.

Middle Class Guy said...

Freder Frederson...

Well, Chelsea is stuck up. She sounds like some typical rich kid Valley Girl evertime she opens her mouth.

ZPS said...

Chelsea Clinton has been getting some fairly good coverage in the past 24 hours for her blunt reaction when someone asked her how she felt about Monica Lewinsky. She told the guy off, basically, and said, "None of your business!"

Of course, no mention of that here on Althouse.

That vow of Cruel Neutrality shines brightly on the Althouse front page...and yet it's all anti Obama/anti Hillary, all the time! McCain? Oh, his aide was suspended, and oh, some silly women released a poorly produced You Tube video. Meanwhile, his official You Tube campaign video is "goosebump" inducing! Over 25 anti Obama/Hillary posts in the past 10 days...and 1, possibly 2 on McCain.

Maybe being disingenous is part of Ann's schtick? If so...she's performing brilliantly!

Hey everyone, if you're going to put yourself out there and position yourself as a certain kind of observer...why not do it honestly? And if you're going to be dishonest, be prepared to take the criticism.

There's nothing wrong with overt bias...just be forthcoming about it! Isn't that what all the Conservatives complain about, how the media is biased and they try to pretend they're not?

There's nothing worse than when someone, even a semi-obscure moderately successful blogger, proclaims to be objective, but in reality treats every subject subjectively.

Back in the olden days, especially the 19th century, it was the golden age of journalism. Newspapers were harsh, brutal, and told it like it was. Everyone knew what the bias was, and they appreciated it. Ann..if you drop the act, YOU could be the one to take us all back to the golden age of journalism!

Your liberal family, friends, and readers will still love you, Conservative Ann!

rhhardin said...

A hedge fund is a good career choice for Chelsea.

Freder Frederson said...

As opposed to Chelsea, who thinks the blue dress is not anyone else's business.

Ten years later and with her father out of office for almost eight, it isn't--especially Chelsea's opinion on the incident.

Joe said...

In answer to the original question; how about because Meghan's blog is completely vapid. Either she's pretending to be an airhead or is one. I choose the latter since I can't comprehend why she would do the former.

Middle Class Guy said...

ZPS said...
Chelsea Clinton has been getting some fairly good coverage in the past 24 hours for her blunt reaction when someone asked her how she felt about Monica Lewinsky. She told the guy off, basically, and said, "None of your business!"

Of course, no mention of that here on Althouse.



That is because Chelsea Clinton has nothing intelligent to say beyond vote for my mommy. The question was impolite- something I would expect from one of the KOS kids types. It was not unfair or illigitimate. Her response was well handled. That should be the end.

Now can we get back to the real important issues that affect us all;
American Idol, dogs, fashion, the idiosy of celebrities, cooking, bad books, recipes, bad jokes, etc.

P. Rich said...

Warning!!!

Contemplation of the following could cause your head to explode. Or not.

The Question: If children's basic values are shaped by their parents, and Chelsea was reared by Billary, then what might we be able to infer about the real Chelsea? Development of the answer is left (no pun intended) as an exercise for the reader. Apologies to Democrats for the use multi-syllabic words.

Ruth Anne Adams said...

Joe: Take a look at Meghan's March 10th post entitled "Inner Beauty." I don't think it's vapid.

Joe said...

However valid Meghan's "inner beauty" post may be, it's completely unoriginal and totally non-intellectual. If Meghan wants to be perceived as anything other than a pampered airhead who traipses around after her famous father, she needs to write something of substance. What, for example, does she think of the WTO? What does she think of the Heller case? Does she think her father's campaign finance reform bill runs contrary to the first amendment? Would she like to see supreme court justices confirmed who would overturn this same law?

Granted, her job now is to be an air-headed trophy daughter with no opinions about anything of substance and she's doing that well, but she shouldn't then turn around and complain about being treated like an airhead.

(The possible failure to recognize this also lends credence to the suggestion that she's not the brightest bulb on the tree.)

Ruth Anne Adams said...

Joe: It's a blog. Just because she doesn't write about certain things doesn't mean she has no opinion on them. She leaves that to the professional politicians, which seems pretty wise to me.

She seems to have a sunny, grateful disposition. I believe optimists are often mistaken for airheads.

Middle Class Guy said...

Joe said...
What, for example, does she think of...

What, for example, does Chelsea Clinton think of name your issue, or anything else, for that matter?

ricpic said...

She seems like a nice kid. Of course she talks too fast like every other American female twentysomething. But the lefties really oughta lighten up. It's okay to admit that someone on the other side is human. Really, it is.

Joe said...

Let me make this clear; I think both Meghan and Chelsea are handling themselves correctly. The spotlight should be on the candidate and the best thing most family members can do is to speak about the character of that candidate and to offer emotional support. The consequence of this is that even if a family member is an intellectual, if they do their job right they will come off as an "airhead".

Compare Meghan and Chelsea to Michelle Obama and Bill Clinton. The former two have acted with much more maturity than the latter two, who have harmed their spouses campaigns (but may balance each other out in the end.)

blake said...

Joe,

Maybe she's just smart enough to realize that politics is for chumps.

Bullwinkle4Amy said...

All I would add to what I wrote here is that the most salient fact about Meghan McCain is that she is 23 years old. 23, folks. How much did you know about the equivalent of the Heller case at 23?

dick said...

hat I find interesting is that the LLL dems tell Chelsea she is not supposed to talk to the press and the republicans think Meghan is adult enough to speak for herself. I think that is a very good explanation of just how open the two parties are to ideas.

AJ Lynch said...

Yeah Bullwinkle- very good point at age 23, I'd have had to been locked up and hidden if my father was running for high office.

We were terrors- almost criminals in some ways. As a buddy of mine tells his kids, he is not proud of how he behaved back then.

Joe said...

23? You're shitting me right?

At age 23, if you don't have an opinion of Heller, you shouldn't be voting or be involved in any way shape or for with any campaign.

(Hell, at 16 you may not be a political junky who even knows what the "Heller" case is, but you should have formed some opinion on the broader issues with the second amendment.)

Kirby Olson said...

I like Meghan's blog a lot.

It's got an aesthetic take with the aesthetics pushed up front so far that the politics are seemingly secondary and irrelevant to who's wearing what and who likes what music (her mom likes Cream and has a beautiful dress, Chelsea's shoes are cute).

The blog made me proud to be an American.

Thanks so much for linking to this!

In terms of the individual lines of the songs she likes: she doesn't need to endorse the world-view present in each line to like the song.

No one really pays attention to rock lyrics anyway. It's the searing guitar lines, the tricky bass patterns, that people like, until it comes to maybe Bob Dylan, where .01% may actually read his lyrics (they actually aren't any good on the page alone).

Three cheers for Meghan!!

I may even link to her. If I do, it will be my very first link.

Middle Class Guy said...

What does the Heller case have to do with anything? There are probably many older people who do not know about it nor care about it.

She is twenty three, a budding designer, and admittedly not a political junkie. What's the big deal? The only people who really care about Heller are the Pro and Anti Gun advocates.

Using your criteria, should Chelsea know or care about Pearson v. Callahan? Meghan is not campaigning for her father, she is covering the campaign of her father. Chelsea is campaigning for her father, er, her mother, er her father… I get confused which Clinton is actually trying to get back in the White House.

Maggie45 said...

Kirby, I hope you do link to her blog. I discovered it about a month and a half ago, and went back and read every post. To me it showed how her father just doesn't stand up on a stage and "preach"; he attends countless town meetings, meet and greets, and hours and hours of press "gaggles". They are obviously a very close knit family, who really like each other, and that's just wonderful to see these days. I always feel good after reading Meghan.

Revenant said...

Chelsea Clinton has been getting some fairly good coverage in the past 24 hours for her blunt reaction when someone asked her how she felt about Monica Lewinsky. She told the guy off, basically, and said, "None of your business!" Of course, no mention of that here on Althouse.

What's there to say? The guy was a Clinton supporter. If the Clintons don't want to respond to their supporters' questions, well, that's their business. :)

I thought Chelsea's response was interesting, though. Hillary cites her time in the White House as being "experience" that qualifies her for the Presidency -- but the fact that she spent much of that time either lying to the public or falling for her husband's equally transparent lies is "off limits" as a means of assessing her credibility? It is interesting to declare that sort of thing "personal" when Hillary's personal relationship with Bill is being held up as a qualification for office.

Roger said...

I simply do not understand why any politician's child should be a political issue. Obviously I am living in a dream world. And for the record, I thought the "raining McCain" song was hysterical!! A parody of political advertisements and could have been done by Monty Python just as easily!

Middle Class Guy said...

Rev,
The response was interesting. But, the question was, for lack of a better word, tasteless. "Her feelings" toward her father's adultery and her mother's reaction to it is her business and not the public's. She is not running for office. Her feelings about something that is personal to her is irrelevant.

It was a poor question or a poorly worded question. I am no fan of the Clintons, but what is right is right.

Revenant said...

But, the question was, for lack of a better word, tasteless. "Her feelings" toward her father's adultery and her mother's reaction to it is her business and not the public's.

She wasn't asked about "her feelings". She was asked if her mother's handling of the scandal affected her credibility as a leader. That question is not tasteless. It is entirely topical and fair, and if Chelsea finds those kinds of questions "too personal" then Chelsea needs to get the hell out of politics right now. Hillary's handling (or lack thereof) of the Lewinsky scandal was a major part of her much vaunted "experience" as First Lady.

Middle Class Guy said...

Rev,
I apologize. I misunderstood. I was doing three things at once when I heard the comment and did not pay that much attention. I stand corrected.

Joe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Joe said...

Using your criteria, should Chelsea know or care about Pearson v. Callahan?

I'll bet she does know, and care, about it.

You missed my point. I picked a case that raises a significant constitutional question and that is in the news. I also pointed out that even if a person doesn't know the case specifically, they likely have an opinion on the issues it raises.

I simply do not understand why any politician's child should be a political issue.

If the child is used by the politician or the [older] child campaigns for his or her parent.

(I'm reminded of idiot movie stars who work hard to be highly recognizable and then complain when their pictures are taken.)

Sloanasaurus said...

Children can be great assets on campaigns, because they get a lot of press.

Meghan McCain will make John McCain seem younger to young people, because most young people assume their parents are all about the same age, i.e roughly 30 years older than them.

Unfortunately for Obama, he has no family to speak for him other then Michele (his kids are too young), and she doesn't help. Obama could get his 80 year old grandmother to speak but he has already ruined that opportunity.

In fact, I cannot think of another presidental candidate outside Obama with so little family to speak for them. Maybe Bill Clinton?

Daryl said...

It makes John McCain better, doesn't it?

It knocks down the horrible, vicious, stupid, evil, anti-American rumors that Sen. McCain is not well in the head (because of his torture or otherwise).

The man is an upstanding U.S. Senator and he can't be that bad of a father.

Daryl said...

ZPS is a joke. He's whining that negative stories about Clinton/Obama are getting play on this blog. They're getting play EVERYWHERE, because the two campaigns have gone negative on each other. That's true on right-wing blogs, left-wing blogs, centrist blogs, mainstream media, etc.

Sen. McCain is enjoying "time off" from the relentless campaign season. So he's pulling a Fred Thompson and taking it easy. No significant bad news coming out about Sen. McCain -> Nothing for Prof. Althouse to report.

Revenant said...

Using your criteria, should Chelsea know or care about Pearson v. Callahan? I'll bet she does know, and care, about it.

Bet away. I've never heard Chelsea offer an intelligent thought of her own.

I also pointed out that even if a person doesn't know the case specifically, they likely have an opinion on the issues it raises.

I doubt many people know what the case is or what it is about -- or an opinion about the issues beyond "the police should be allowed to do that" or "the police shouldn't be allowed to do that".