Obama ad slams McCain's Computer skills

[Kelly the Dog]

Maybe if he spent less time downloading porn and send spam to everyone to get them to contribute to his campaign, he might understand how the real world works. It isn't behind a keyboard, or in the senate. It's out working a farm, serving in the military, being a journalist. Not serving your whole life in and aroud politics and positions of power to move up the political ladder.

You're absolutely right. What the country really needs is a sexless jarhead farmhand who pens a monthly column for the Nimrod, Idaho Bazooka to be the leader of the free world.

[Chilly]

Net Neutrality is the very first order of business on the Internet for the Obama presidency, by the way.

 

Yes, I know; I have seen his page (and previously said that I prefer a lot of Obama's technology policy to McCain's, though not all of it).

[IDBillzFan]

The fact that you guys have continually harped on the concept of just signing on and sending an email shows me you're not thinking, or responding to what I have been saying. Lets just leave it. It's good to not know how the world works.

Okay. Since we're all ignorant about this topic, instead of saying "Let's just leave it," please explain what it is that we're not understanding. Explain a situation where McCain's lack of computer skills is a pure and true detriment to his being POTUS? What would happen on his watch that demands he have computer skills? And notice I've broadened this beyond "sending email." The topic here appears to be "lack of computer skills," so again, how is his lack of knowledge a detriment to being the leader of the US?

[DC Tom]

In a world that relies heavily on technology, it is imperative that the leader of the free world is relatively up to date with modern technology.

 

Actually...probably not. Most leaders/managers/executives get along just fine not knowing a damned thing about the technologies in the businesses they manage. A president's inability to check email isn't a critical lack of knowledge...just an embarrassing one.

[Kelly the Dog]

Okay. Since we're all ignorant about this topic, instead of saying "Let's just leave it," please explain what it is that we're not understanding. Explain a situation where McCain's lack of computer skills is a pure and true detriment to his being POTUS? What would happen on his watch that demands he have computer skills? And notice I've broadened this beyond "sending email." The topic here appears to be "lack of computer skills," so again, how is his lack of knowledge a detriment to being the leader of the US?

It. Is. NOT. Computer. Skills. I. Am. Talking. About. For about the fifth time. It's an understanding of how the world works.

 

This is just the tip of the iceberg, but it is the beginning of what I am getting at.

http://www.circleid.com/posts/871812_note_...nology_matters/

[Wacka]

What happened was the dummies in the Messiah's campaign thought they had something they could make fun of McCain about. They didn't do the required research (on the internet ) of why he doesn't use the computer. Shows how incompetent the Messiah's campaign staff is. Now the nomal cast if characters (ass kissers) is on here trying to cover up another large gaffe

[Chilly]

It. Is. NOT. Computer. Skills. I. Am. Talking. About. For about the fifth time. It's an understanding of how the world works.

 

This is just the tip of the iceberg, but it is the beginning of what I am getting at.

http://www.circleid.com/posts/871812_note_...nology_matters/

 

Seems like a pretty one-sided and inaccurate view from an Obama supporter. If McCain and his campaign honestly thought technology didn't matter, would they devote as much site space to it as Obama?

 

I think McCain's technology policy is wrong, but I don't think it is due to McCain not caring about technology or claiming "technology doesn't matter" (Why in the hell would the chairman of the FCC argue that technology doesn't matter? It makes no sense). Rather, I disagree with Powell on a number of issues (net neutrality, censorship, etc), but on others I agree with him. I think it is fairly naive to think that the McCain campaign doesn't understand or look at the issues if Powell is an advisor. He's been one of the figures leading the charge on lots and lots of technology issues.

[justnzane]

Actually...probably not. Most leaders/managers/executives get along just fine not knowing a damned thing about the technologies in the businesses they manage. A president's inability to check email isn't a critical lack of knowledge...just an embarrassing one.

 

politicians brag about being in touch with the people, and it is quite evident that McCain is not in touch with the people of this day. As much as I bash Bush, I can at least give him the credit of being able to check the internet, and even uses "the Google".

 

I think this is very symbolic of McCain's perceived lack of understanding of the average American's life. Also, I would find it to be a very poor idea for a CEO to not know the basics of his main product.

[VABills]

You're absolutely right. What the country really needs is a sexless jarhead farmhand who pens a monthly column for the Nimrod, Idaho Bazooka to be the leader of the free world.

Probably be a better leader than a porn downloading, ipod listening, muslim trained community leading politician who has never done a physical job in his entire life.

[DC Tom]

politicians brag about being in touch with the people, and it is quite evident that McCain is not in touch with the people of this day. As much as I bash Bush, I can at least give him the credit of being able to check the internet, and even uses "the Google".

 

I think this is very symbolic of McCain's perceived lack of understanding of the average American's life. Also, I would find it to be a very poor idea for a CEO to not know the basics of his main product.

 

Yeah...as opposed to Obama's deep understanding of the average American.

 

Politicians LIE about being in touch with the people. All of 'em. And the idea that that can be reduced to whether or not a politician can successfully check his email is truly ludicrous. Don't you people have any real issues to discuss?

[Kelly the Dog]

Seems like a pretty one-sided and inaccurate view from an Obama supporter. If McCain and his campaign honestly thought technology didn't matter, would they devote as much site space to it as Obama?

 

I think McCain's technology policy is wrong, but I don't think it is due to McCain not caring about technology or claiming "technology doesn't matter" (Why in the hell would the chairman of the FCC argue that technology doesn't matter? It makes no sense). Rather, I disagree with Powell on a number of issues (net neutrality, censorship, etc), but on others I agree with him. I think it is fairly naive to think that the McCain campaign doesn't understand or look at the issues if Powell is an advisor. He's been one of the figures leading the charge on lots and lots of technology issues.

I didnt get out of it that the author is accusing of Powell thinking technology doesn't matter as much as McCain's lack of knowledge, curiosity and exposure is similar to the last eight years, and the effect is that technology doesn't matter. That little would be done with it. And we as a nation would fall behind other nations who put more stock in it. Which has been my argument here. I'm sure McCains advisors know all about technology and they probably do think it matters. I should hope so. The author did mention a couple items that he thought Powell should consider that he doesn't. But that is just the author's opinion of what is important. My linking of the article (my bad, I should have highlighted it) was more of this:

As chair of the Senate Commerce Committee, John McCain was exposed to a wide range of tech policy issues. On the other hand, he admits he's "computer illiterate." Ask yourself how you'd feel about working for a corporation where the CEO doesn't know how to use a computer. No matter how smart, someone who can't open a web page, type a letter on a word processor, or compose an email message, is going to be fundamentally out of touch with the daily experience of every member of the knowledge economy.

It doesnt matter than he cannot work a keyboard. What matters is he doesn't know what is going on and is out of touch.

[justnzane]

Yeah...as opposed to Obama's deep understanding of the average American.

 

Politicians LIE about being in touch with the people. All of 'em. And the idea that that can be reduced to whether or not a politician can successfully check his email is truly ludicrous. Don't you people have any real issues to discuss?

 

A politician's unfulfilled promise is not as obvious as a pretty visible shortcoming of the other candidate. If the politician is not living in the times of today, then he can not govern as effectively as someone who is living the experiences of the modern times.

 

I see this as a legit issue about McCain being old and out of touch.

[Chilly]

I didnt get out of it that the author is accusing of Powell thinking technology doesn't matter as much as McCain's lack of knowledge, curiosity and exposure is similar to the last eight years, and the effect is that technology doesn't matter. That little would be done with it. And we as a nation would fall behind other nations who put more stock in it. Which has been my argument here. I'm sure McCains advisors know all about technology and they probably do think it matters. I should hope so. The author did mention a couple items that he thought Powell should consider that he doesn't. But that is just the author's opinion of what is important. My linking of the article (my bad, I should have highlighted it) was more of this:

 

It doesnt matter than he cannot work a keyboard. What matters is he doesn't know what is going on and is out of touch.

 

I guess I'm confused. I keep seeing this argument that McCain is "out of touch" with computers and that he "doesn't know what is going on", but the only proof ever offered is that he personally doesn't really use computers, and then I'm told that his personal computer skills don't matter.

 

In my view, saying McCain is "out of touch" or "doesn't know what is going on", while it might be personally true for them, is dishonest. Both Obama and McCain will have to rely on scores of advisors across all issues, people that are experts (unlike them). Portraying McCain as "out of touch" strikes me as essentially a marketing gimmick and part of the "silly season" that Obama was talking about.

 

An intellectually honest approach (that wouldn't win elections) would have been to explain why net neutrality is important, and why it is better than a less regulated internet.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

Interesting topic, now that I better understand the issue of "net neutrality" and remember previous news reports about the issue, it is not all that complicated a general issue. The devil appears in the details.

 

As it pertains to the campaigns the Blue's statement about the intellectually honest approach would be to explain net neutrality and go from there... true, but it wouldn't provoke a discussion like this and then net neutrality could largely be ignored. It is about McCain not using a computer, kind of like the argument since Obama was never in the military how can he know what that is all about? It plays as a campaign factor...

 

Here is excepts from a recent speech from FCC commissioner Jonathan Adelstein and ardent defender of net neutrality. It gives a simple explanation of the need for net neutrality:

Remarks of Commissioner Jonathan S. Adelstein

National Conference for Media Reform

Minneapolis, Minnesota

June 8, 2008

 

Last night, Dan Rather validated all of our deepest concerns and worst fears about how corporate media has abandoned its sense of responsibility. To make a buck, they are transforming real journalism into infotainment. To hear it from a legend, with decades of experience at the pinnacle of the American news establishment – who has seen it firsthand – will be a wake-up call for everyone in this country who cares about the future of our democracy.

 

It also was a special treat having Senator Dorgan here. He has been our champion on media democracy and Internet freedom in the U.S. Senate. When we met last year in Memphis, I told you that if the FCC rolled back media ownership protections, Congress needed to veto it. We are so grateful Senator Byron Dorgan led the Senate effort to kill the FCC’s misguided decision to gut the newspaper-broadcast cross-ownership rule. Now, it is time for the House of Representatives to act and send it to the President’s desk. Even in the event he does not sign it, we have already sent a clear message to any media company thinking of gobbling up newspapers and TV stations in the same city: think again. The winds of change are blowing, and they are going to blow that rule right off the books. …

 

We must open our airwaves to low-power FM stations and minority voices, restore public interest obligations on broadcasters, and protect public access channels on cable that are under siege today. We have got to make broadband affordable and accessible to everyone, even if that means building municipal broadband networks. And, we have got to keep the Internet open and free of discrimination.

 

We cannot let what happened to our media happen to the Internet. We cannot allow a few gatekeepers to control the Internet so they can maximize profits in the service of advertisers. We need to keep the Internet -- of the people, by the people and for the people. “P2P” -- is power to the people. We need to protect that.

 

Just as broadband explodes our ability to communicate and get information, though, we find our government still trying to sneak one past us. Old habits die hard. We have learned about a secretive public relations program operated by the U.S. Defense Department. It recruited, organized and sometimes paid more than 75 retired military analysts to echo the Administration’s themes and messages on the Iraq war and foreign policy. Many of these so-called analysts also worked for military contractors or owned their own military consulting firms. They were granted valuable special access to senior civilian and military leaders, in exchange for their participation in this covert, propaganda operation….

 

 

You are the wind in the sails for those of us in Washington who fight for freedom of the press and on the Internet. Thank you for making the voice of the people – the public interest – heard at the FCC.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Then you know less than zero about what he has been doing, what his experience, knowledge and understanding of it is.

 

Uh, WHAT? You think that BO's been setting up his own web strategy? Riiight.

[Johnny Coli]

I guess I'm confused. I keep seeing this argument that McCain is "out of touch" with computers and that he "doesn't know what is going on", but the only proof ever offered is that he personally doesn't really use computers, and then I'm told that his personal computer skills don't matter.

 

In my view, saying McCain is "out of touch" or "doesn't know what is going on", while it might be personally true for them, is dishonest. Both Obama and McCain will have to rely on scores of advisors across all issues, people that are experts (unlike them). Portraying McCain as "out of touch" strikes me as essentially a marketing gimmick and part of the "silly season" that Obama was talking about.

 

An intellectually honest approach (that wouldn't win elections) would have been to explain why net neutrality is important, and why it is better than a less regulated internet.

I don't see the confusion at all. It's not just about the ability to check your email. It's the ability and the willingness to grasp new technology and skill sets that are necessary in order to function in today's society, and are essential in understanding today's world. I have all the confidence in the world that Obama could read and understand a briefing on just about anything, requiring little hand-holding or detailed explanation from an advisor. That means he'll be able to make more informed decisions. That means the advice he recieves can contain much more detail and be much more valuable.

 

What you're saying is it's OK to have a guy who isn't even personally up to date with a technology platform that has been in existence and in common use for almost two decades. That's freaking scary. I don't want advisors having to take valuable time explaining to the POTUS what email is at a time when a critical decision has to be made. Furthermore, I have zero confidence that the guy would even be able to pick a decent team of advisors. I do not want a leader who is 20 years behind the times.

 

This idea that it's ok to have a luddite as the leader of the free world is almost as scary as that luddite picking a creationist as his running mate.

[finknottle]

I don't want advisors having to take valuable time explaining to the POTUS what email is at a time when a critical decision has to be made.

 

Because that 3AM call might be "Mr. President, the White House servers are down!"

[GG]

Both of these arguments bring up a question: What is the President going to be deciding on where a "rudimentary grasp on technology" as Johnny Coli puts it is going to make a difference?

 

For instance, one of the big technology issues right now, in my view, is net neutrality. Most people, including internet users, just aren't all that concerned or informed about net neutrality. Using the internet doesn't suddenly qualify someone with knowledge about net neutrality.

 

What about internet taxation policy? Would knowing how to buy something on the internet change that?

 

Net neutrality is not a big technology issue. The technology is fairly mundane and market tested. Net neutrality is a stealthy way for Google & other free loaders to raise the cost of internet access to the consumers and still blame the cable companies & telcos for it. Don't talk to a policy wonk about it. Ask an engineer who actually has to manage network traffic and see what net neutrality really means.

[Johnny Coli]

Because that 3AM call might be "Mr. President, the White House servers are down!"

Completely missing the point, of course. Have another brew with McCain while Palin tosses another textbook onto the fire to cook a moose.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

Net neutrality is not a big technology issue. The technology is fairly mundane and market tested. Net neutrality is a stealthy way for Google & other free loaders to raise the cost of internet access to the consumers and still blame the cable companies & telcos for it. Don't talk to a policy wonk about it. Ask an engineer who actually has to manage network traffic and see what net neutrality really means.

 

If that is true and I wouldn't doubt it, it sounds typical.