Speaking of lies, it’s really the little lies of politics that piss me off. Take this story in which ABC News “reveals” that John Kerry’s campaign has — gasp! — conducted polls about different VP possibilities:
When told about the polling, Republicans said it indicated Kerry was inconsistent in what he says he’s looking for in a running mate.
“If true, this is glaring example of Kerry being for and against picking the best person for the job,” said one Bush adviser.
The adviser went on to contrast Kerry’s selection process with Bush’s decision to choose Dick Cheney as his running mate for the 2000 election. “President Bush picked the best man for the job with zero political calculation or polling,” he said.
“Remember, Wyoming was not exactly a battleground state and had a whopping two electoral votes.”
For one thing, Wyoming has three electoral votes. For another thing — cut the crap. Is anyone really supposed to believe that there was zero political calculation behind the Cheney pick? Is this attack on John Kerry supposed to move any votes? Is there any reason at all to grant the source of this inanity anonymous status? No, no, and no. “No” number three is especially important. If the reporter had said, “look, you can’t go off the record for no reason” then the guy would presumably have been disinclined to say something astoundingly stupid in hopes of gaining some miniscule propaganda advantage.