Outrage
From a CNN.com story: "During a campaign event in Columbia, Missouri, Biden did not mention his Republican counterpart by name but said, "I hear all this talk about how the Republicans are going to work in dealing with parents who have both the joy ... and the difficulty of raising a child who has a developmental disability, who were born with a birth defect."
...
"Well, guess what, folks? If you care about it, why don't you support stem cell research?" asked Biden, the running mate of Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama.
Those comments brought a sharp response.
"Barack Obama's running mate sunk to a new low today, launching an offensive debate over who cares more about special needs children," McCain-Palin spokesman Ben Porritt said. "Playing politics with this issue is disturbing and indicative of a desperate campaign.""
Apparently it's outrageous and desperate for a politician to assert that his views on a topic are better for a group of people than his opponents. Saying "My support for stem cell research makes me a better candidate for special needs children," is no different in any way from any other policy position. Is it outrageous to say "My support for more money to public schools makes me a better candidate for America's youth," or, "My plan for veteran's benefits makes me a better choice for the men and women of our military?" No, it clearly is not because that is how a politician sells himself to the voter. Yet somehow saying the same thing about this particular demographic is offensive. The idea is patently ridiculous. It's the exact same intellectual dishonesty as calling every criticism of Palin, or previously Clinton, sexist or every attack on Obama racist. Sometimes people have bad policy decisions, and that's all there is to it.
...
"Well, guess what, folks? If you care about it, why don't you support stem cell research?" asked Biden, the running mate of Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama.
Those comments brought a sharp response.
"Barack Obama's running mate sunk to a new low today, launching an offensive debate over who cares more about special needs children," McCain-Palin spokesman Ben Porritt said. "Playing politics with this issue is disturbing and indicative of a desperate campaign.""
Apparently it's outrageous and desperate for a politician to assert that his views on a topic are better for a group of people than his opponents. Saying "My support for stem cell research makes me a better candidate for special needs children," is no different in any way from any other policy position. Is it outrageous to say "My support for more money to public schools makes me a better candidate for America's youth," or, "My plan for veteran's benefits makes me a better choice for the men and women of our military?" No, it clearly is not because that is how a politician sells himself to the voter. Yet somehow saying the same thing about this particular demographic is offensive. The idea is patently ridiculous. It's the exact same intellectual dishonesty as calling every criticism of Palin, or previously Clinton, sexist or every attack on Obama racist. Sometimes people have bad policy decisions, and that's all there is to it.