Fox’s Shepard Smith Questions Joe the Plumber on “Death of Israel” Statement
Fox News’ Shepard Smith interviewed Joe “the Plumber” Wurzelbacher on his show yesterday over a statement he made at an RNC event yesterday, that he agreed with a questioner that a vote for Obama would mean “the death of Israel”. It got a little heated:
We’ve had a discussion in two articles on this site over some of Wurzelbacher’s views. The first time it was about the “he’ll bring socialism” reasoning for supporting McCain, which our editor-in-chief Michael van der Galien pointed out was exaggerating Obama’s position. I followed up with an explaination of where Joe might have been coming from when he said that. I gave him some slack there because the American education system is lacking when it comes to explaining the vast array of economic ideologies.
But I can’t do that here. One thing I noted from the interview is that Wurzelbacher essentially dodged Smith’s question. He wouldn’t or couldn’t name a position Obama has on Israel. He then tried to pass it off as “people shouldn’t listen to me.” But that’s exactly what people are doing, and Wurzelbacher has put himself in the spotlight, going out and giving his views on these issues. It’s all well and good to say people should find out the information for themselves, but how he put it makes me think he doesn’t know what Obama thinks about American-Israeli relations. And it isn’t okay to just sweep it all under the carpet by saying “don’t listen to me” when you’re going out telling people why you think McCain is the candidate to support.
Actually, as I write this, I was just reminded of something that may cause me to be able to give him a tiny bit of slack after all. I just remembered of what commenter “midwestmom” said in my article about the education system not teaching about critical thinking:
The failing of the education system is in not teaching critical thinking, how to be constructively skeptical, and how to build a sound argument based on verifiable facts from documented sources. Really, the problem is that people don’t know how to think for themselves. Partly because they’ve not been taught, but partly because it’s work. It’s much easier to choose something from the smorgasbord of ideas in the media. That’s why most people can’t really defend their positions: they didn’t come to espouse those positions through a process of inquiry and reasoned discourse.
And that appears to be what’s going on here. Wurzelbacher chooses something that seems right to him and then goes on it without actually researching the truth. This is a very non-partisan thing; there are voters on both the left and right who will vote without actually researching a candidate’s positions. Yet, if you’re going to put yourself in the public arena, it’s probably a good idea that you have a sound argument for your positions. Sarah Palin learned this during interviews with Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric, and Joe Wurzelbacher showed it yesterday.
On another note…
While I agree with Smith that Obama has made it plainly clear his support for Israel, I don’t agree how Smith handled himself after the interview. It’s nearly analogous to that soliloquy that Keith Olbermann gave after the 9/11 tribute video at the Republican National Convention. I seem to remember that Olbermann got pulled off reporting about the election for that. I think Smith is a good reporter; he just needs to watch himself.
Still, I do wonder how this same segment would have been viewed by some commentators if it were on MSNBC or CNN.
“I don’t agree how Smith handled himself after the interview.”
Did he continue after the clip above ended?
If not, where did he cross the line?
The soliloquy after Joe left the segment. It’s almost like what Olbermann did after the 9/11 tribute at the Republican National Convention.
Like I said, I agree with Smith’s sentiments, but given what happened to Olbermann after his statements, it might be wise to keep such opinions to yourself.
Joe the Plumber? We’re taking advice and commentary from Joe the Plumber?
Ask yourselves why ALL of our politicians are pledging their allegiance to Israel. Doesn’t that seem just a little off?
The post interview quote broken into two sections,
“I just want to make this 100% perfectly clear, Barack Obama has said repeatedly and demonstrated repeatedly that Israel will always be a friend of the United States, uh, no matter what happens once he becomes president of the United States, his words. um,”
This is just clarifying the difference with what the candidate said and what the guest said. That should be done much more often on both sides of the divide.
“The rest of it, man somethings, it just gets frightening sometimes.”
Maybe that was over the line, but I wholly agree. Even if you think both sentences were over the line, I would not call it a soliloquy and it certainly was not at the level of an Olbermann rant. Maybe if he continued on after the end of the above clip, but not as it stands.
Re: “Joe”
I think the best thing for the Democrats is to let him stand front and center and rattle off all of his nonsense. The more he talks the less power the one cogent statement/question he made will have.
Obama is not a friend of Israel. Most in Israel agree that if Obama gets into the White House; the existence of Israel and even the Jewish people might suffer. I am in contact with many people in Israel; and they fear an Obamanation. Although many American Jews vote democrat, they however are uninformed when it comes to Obama. Many Jews in Israel are pleading with Jews in America to vote for McCain.
Obama is dangerous for the security of this nation; and the nation of Israel. He might of said that Israel will be a friend, but he also said that a undivided Israel was a poor choice of words.
Our enemies want this man in office, as well as the UN because of his stance on Israel; he is not a friend of Israel…, he is an enemy of Israel. And if Obama gets into the White House he will lead this nation to turn its back on Israel. G-d, have mercy upon us.