Set Outrage Meter to 11: Liberal Blogger Questions McCain’s Military Service and Patriotism
John Aravosis asks: Honestly, besides being tortured, what did McCain do to excel in the military?
It’s not “nice” to ask the question, but it’s actually a pretty good question. Yes, we all know that John McCain was captured and tortured in Vietnam (McCain won’t let you forget). A lot of people don’t know, however, that McCain made a propaganda video for the enemy while he was in captivity. Putting that bit of disloyalty aside, what exactly is McCain’s military experience that prepares him for being commander in chief?
And who better to pose the question than War Hero John Aravosis?
The temptation to become Outrageously Outraged is understandable, and I salute those who give free rein to their anger. Feel free to do so in comments, in fact.
Nevertheless, let’s not lose sight of the fact that it helps Republicans for the public to focus on Aravosis’s question.
Aravosis, in addition to being a punk, obviously doesn’t understand this.
But it’s true.
Anybody who went what McCain went through and lived to tell about it, raise your right hand. Oh, that’s right. Better luck with the next meme.
fat tony (601b8d) — 6/30/2008 @ 12:37 pmMeanwhile Obama is more qualified to be Commander-in-Chief because he…………..
{/got nuthin’}
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 12:38 pmLet’s hope it doesn’t get so bad that they wear some sort of prop at the Democratic National Convention mocking his captivity.
You know, like the purple band aids worn at the Republican National Convention making fun of Senator Kerry’s purple hearts.
jharp (9b1a32) — 6/30/2008 @ 12:45 pmharpy is as mendoucheous as always.
JD (75f5c3) — 6/30/2008 @ 12:49 pmYeah, because six years in captivity is the same thing as a self-inflicted wound during a four-month deployment…
Hey, harpie, whatever happened to the “military service is utterly crucial” arguments being made four years ago with John Forbes Kerry-Heinz-Kerry?
Which branch did Obama serve in again?
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 12:55 pmDidn’t you hear? Harpy also served in ‘Nam, and has the tatts to prove it.
Dmac (ea35f7) — 6/30/2008 @ 12:58 pmharpy, what drugs do you not do?
My God, if all the Democrats are this stupid, our country is in grave danger.
PCD (5c49b0) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:01 pmIf the Far Left wants to attack McCain’s military career, I say, let ’em. It will only remind the moderates who will decide the election of McCain’s heroic service compared to Obama’s blank slate.
aunursa (1b5bad) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:02 pmNot if he’s 43. He would have been in third/fourth grade when Vietnam ended.
Assuming he wasn’t kept back a year or two…
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:02 pmD’oh!
I should read the entire post before commenting. I would have realized that Patterico made that very point.
aunursa (1b5bad) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:04 pmDo we even know if he’s over 12?
Dmac (ea35f7) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:08 pmBoy, is this jharp guy a loser or what?
I feel bad for having insulted the losers of the world just now.
Andy (09ab51) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:09 pmI have a suggestion for the wingnuts to put themselves above all this.
“A lot of people don’t know, however, that McCain made a propaganda video for the enemy while he was in captivity. Putting that bit of disloyalty aside”
Clearly wrong and it’s fine to point that out.
But one better.
“what exactly is McCain’s military experience that prepares him for being commander in chief?”
Answer the question as thoughtfully as honestly as possible. Maybe it’ll start a trend.
jharp (9b1a32) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:10 pmI got grandkids that age, and even the youngest can do the Ctrl+C/Ctrl+V tango…
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:11 pmTurning it around, what exactly is Obama’s military experience that prepares him for being Commander-in-Chief?
Answer the question as thoughtfully and as honestly as possible. Maybe it’ll start a trend.
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:13 pm#14 was addressed to Drew @ #11
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:14 pmjharpy is not one of ours.
Indiana (75f5c3) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:16 pm“Boy, is this jharp guy a loser or what?”
I don’t know you tell me.
I have a nice house, wife and two kids.
Work when I want and make a nice living.
Play golf when I want which is often.
Have a nice fishing boat and go fishing when I want.
Have a nice yard and work in it when I want which is often.
The hell of it is I’m doing more to help you living poor and voting rich types than your chosen leaders.
You tell me, what has George Bush and the GOP done for YOU?
jharp (9b1a32) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:17 pmI call BS. Where do you get off asserting that the people here, or the people of Central Indiana either live poor, or vote rich? Explain that, please. Enlighten us.
JD (75f5c3) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:19 pmBut in one of the posts about Heller you said you were a woman, jharp.
So are you a lesbian, or a liar? The former is fine, the latter is… expected.
chaos (9c54c6) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:20 pm*instantly raises hand* All in favor?
AYE!!!
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:21 pm“Answer the question as thoughtfully as honestly as possible. Maybe itll start a trend.”
The American people typically value military service in their leaders, not because it shows the leader to be a knowledgeable war strategist, but because it shows courage under pressure.
McCain’s story is one of the more stirring examples of that in existence.
I hope Aravosis’s idiotic questioning of McCain’s service causes the story to be told again and again.
Patterico (709102) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:24 pm“But in one of the posts about Heller you said you were a woman, jharp.”
I believe someone referred to me as a woman and I did not refute it.
I did not say I was a woman.
And if I said something that led you to believe I was woman it was not my intent to deceive.
I’m a heterosexual man. And 47. Not 43 as someone else mentioned.
jharp (9b1a32) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:25 pmWhat has George Bush done for me – Nothing – except protect our freedom. Nothing, except not screw up the economy. Unlike the freedom we earn as appeasers, Unlike the economy we would have under a more socialist system. Name one freedom we gain as being appeasers, name one country with a better economy than the US _ yea right – cuba, france.
Joe - Dallas (7f7d3e) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:27 pm“The American people typically value military service in their leaders, not because it shows the leader to be a knowledgeable war strategist, but because it shows courage under pressure.”
Good answer. Though Wes Clark has claimed McCain’s service is such that it does not qualify him as a knowledgeable war strategist.
Myself, I don’t know if it does or not.
My objections to McCain are threefold.
The war, health care, and tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. And before anyone goes bonkers I favor tax cuts. Middle class ones.
jharp (9b1a32) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:31 pmWe were talking ages, harpie. Not IQs.
{Sorry, couldn’t resist.)
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:31 pmjharpy – Baracky threw Wes Clark under the back of the bus with the rest of the people he does not know.
JD (75f5c3) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:37 pm“What has George Bush done for me – Nothing – except protect our freedom.”
Do you mean freedom from having the government wiretap you? Or the freedom to be thrown in jail without charges, or a lawyer, or any hearing whatsover?
“Nothing, except not screw up the economy.”
Do you mean like running up $4 trillion in deficits that has destroyed the dollar and caused oil prices to go through the ceiling?
“Unlike the freedom we earn as appeasers”
Please share with me who has threatened our freedom? Other than George Bush.
“name one country with a better economy than the US”
What do you mean by “better economy”?
jharp (9b1a32) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:37 pmjharpy – Do you even know what data packets are, or do you just prefer to call it wiretapping in order to be as disingenuous as possible?
JD (75f5c3) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:39 pmObama — “That’s not the Wes Clark I knew.”
aunursa (1b5bad) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:42 pmPlease share with me who has threatened our freedom?
Still stuck on September 10, 2001?
aunursa (1b5bad) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:45 pmCount me among the punks.
What’s your outrage based on? That a non-vet is asking the question? That someone is asking whether McCain’s time in uniform (outside of his captivity) was anything special compared to his contemporaries? That McCain’s time in captivity was such that it dwarfs anything and everything that McCain has done since then? Or that someone is asking whether McCain’s military service is in itself a qualification for President?
Yes, McCain showed tremendous character while in captivity. Yes, McCain’s military service was nothing special before and after his captivity. And so what? As the slogan goes, what has he done for us lately? Let’s see: the Keating Five, pro-amnesty, anti-tax cuts (I have yet to be convinced he has sincerely changed his position), anti-first amendment, gang of 14, etc.
Given the choice between a brave POW with those positions and some draft dodger who, 40 years later, is on the ‘right’ side of the issues, I’ll go with the dodger every time.
steve sturm (a0236e) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:45 pmSteve: What exactly is Obama’s military experience that prepares him for being Commander-in-Chief?
Answer the question as thoughtfully and as honestly as possible. Maybe it’ll start a trend.
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:49 pmTalking about military qualification, which one does this Bush possess actually? Does he have any real military experience to share? No. Does that mean he couldnt have made a good president? No. Being an ex war hero does a president make. A lot of great presidents were never really in the army at any time. We salute all our war veterans notwithstanding. John McCain would be wise not to keep trumping that before the public or risk being “swiftboated”. Just an advice.
love2008 (1b037c) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:52 pmOne thing McCain never learned from his military service is that he’s supposed to defend the country from invasion, not lead the invasion.
I remember arguing with these warmongering liberals ten years ago when they were all beating the war drums to get us to ally with bin Laden against the Christians in the Balkans. They used to hold McCain up as the greatest foreign policy genius the world has ever seen and the final arbiter on decisions of war and peace.
j curtis (c84b9e) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:55 pmThe most important thing about McCain’s military career is the fact, when offered early release because of who his father was, he chose to stay in spite of a high probability that he would die. That is honor under the most stark conditions imaginable. That’s how Hemingway defined courage. I disagree with a number of McCain’s positions but you sure know what you are getting with him.
As for Obama, how long did it take him to throw his grandmother and Rev Wright under the bus when they became inconvenient for him ? Don’t forget that there were collaborators in the Hanoi Hilton. Nobody said much about them after they all came home but courage was not automatic. How long do you think it would be before Obama would have been appearing in propaganda movies with Jane Fonda ?
I think the stuff that Clarke said is going to harm his candidate but it seems to be catnip for moonbats like harp.
Mike K (f89cb3) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:55 pmBut if this is the case, you have absolutely zero credibility asking about anyone’s military service, since you claim to be basing your support on the ‘rightness’ of the positions taken.
You can’t have it both ways – asserting that McCain’s service doesn’t qualify him while supporting the man who has absolutely no service whatsoever. Following this to its conclusion, you are then asserting that McCain’s military service actually disqualifies him for that position, which is clearly at odds with reality.
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:57 pmI don’t think McCain has ever said that military experience alone prepares him to be commander-in-chief. I’d be we willing to concede that it might, and to assert that this experience may matter more than anything else when it comes to this job in this period in history. But McCain hasn’t said this.
But if we’re asking, can we not agree that distinguished combat military experience at the officer level is helpful — or potentially helpful — to understanding and fulfilling he responsibilities of commander in chief? Surely it is not required, but all other things being equal, doesn’t it stand to reason it can be helpful and important?
But the left’s implicit argument seems to be that it is a disqualification, at least in the case of John McCain. The left would like to shift the grounds of the argument to debate why John McCain thinks he is entitled to the presidency by dint of his military experience (an entitlement McCain has never claimed). This is a typical if nifty bit of leftist moral inversion, as well as classic projection (for the left realizes it would be arguing this exact entitlement if it had a candidate with McCain’s record).
But let’s flip the question.
What is it in Obama’s non-military experience that prepares him to be commander in chief?
Why don’t we just talk about the full panoply of qualifications for this job, of which command-level military experience is certainly one?
So, what has Obama ever “changed” in his life? When has he faced an intractable problem, found a solution or led others to find one, united disparate interests, and accomplished “change”? This is his campaign slogan, after all, isn’t it? Shouldn’t a man who campaigns on the issue of change both describe what he means by it and then demonstrate some experience in practically achieving it? Like Mitt Romney did when explaining how he changed the Olympic Committee? Aren’t we owed the former, and shouldn’t we demand the latter?
It seems to me that lacking qualifications to one’s own chief claim, the natural impulse of an insecure candidate would be to try to undermine or even demolish one’s opponent’s chief qualification, even if the opponent makes no definitive claims about it.
rrpjr (fb0748) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:58 pmYou are deliberately lying, lovey, and it does not become you.
If you can’t make an argument without making stuff up, maybe you need to grow for a few decades before trying to talk with the grownups.
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 1:59 pmDrumwaster: (1), none, absolutely none, (2), Obama’s lack of military experience is not the issue of this particular squabble, and (3), you miss my point: military service provides but a hint – and not a very good one – as to how someone might perform as President, especially for someone like McCain who served at a relatively low level (Clark was a general, should we make him President), a very long time ago, and who has a long track record of opposing policies I am in favor of.
steve sturm (a0236e) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:01 pmThe other aspect to McCain’s service that I find remarkable is that although he returned to the United States physically broken he did not spend the subsequent years bitter toward the country and government which kept us in the questionable conflict to begin with.
“What did McCain do to excel in the military?”
How about he managed to stay alive and lived to tell. That in itself is profound. That to this day he continues to serve, even moreso.
And that Aravosis even had to ask the question tells me all I need to know.
Dana (a61bbb) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:08 pmCount me in the group that doesn’t think McCain’s military service counts for or against him.
Though his bomb, bomb, bomb Iran and his 100 year occupation of Iraq I am vehemently opposed to.
jharp (9b1a32) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:08 pmWell, beside the captivity, there was this: the 1967 Forrestal fire.
And in general, the McCain Wikipedia entry is a good place to start.
Kevin Murphy (805c5b) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:10 pmYet more lies from harpie…
I’ve farted more honest comments.
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:10 pmThe point being that McCain understands that things can go wrong.
Kevin Murphy (805c5b) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:12 pm#39
love2008 (0c8c2c) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:14 pmPlease Drumwaster, does George Bush the second have a war history like John McCain that I am not aware of? Was he ever involved in a real military combat? Please I stand to be corrected if any. Maybe the grown ups know more about his war experience than i do. Please share it.
aunursa,
“Please share with me who has threatened our freedom?”
“Still stuck on September 10, 2001?”
If you’re using this that the 3,000 dead lost there freedom it’s true.
But 4,100 lost their freedom because George Bush invaded the wrong country.
So King George is a bigger threat than the 19 Saudis. (using your logic)
There is no threat to our freedom just as Iraq is no threat.
Are there terror threats? Certainly. And there always will be just as there has always been. As a matter of fact the man responsible for 911 is still free and issuing threats.
jharp (9b1a32) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:15 pmLovieluvsurkel is right. Bush’s dad was the real war hero as were JFK and Bob Dole, but Clinton risked being called a draft dodger and showed the courage of his convictions by protesting the Vietnam war over in Europe. Lurch was a really big hero, enduring 4 months on the front lines and earning all those purple hearts, including the life-threatening one of rice shrapnel in his ass before he reluctantly put in for transfer home so he could courageously expose his mates for the evil baby killer Genghis Khan types they were. And he spent a Xmas in Cambodia while Nixon was or wasn’t and had a magic hat to boot.
madmax333 (ae788c) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:18 pmAll Dubya did was fly those TANG jet fighters,which knowledgeable people know are no safety risk at all. Ok, so he did volunteer for ‘Nam but obviously was just playing games as the great Dan Rather and Mary Mapes showed W’s cowardly frat boy side. Funny how the left makes fun of w sitting in a classroom for several minutes when algore himself said that he was in rather deep shock at the same time and could not function. Maybe Bush’s leadership at time of 9-11 and the overall war on terror gives a clue of his meddle as compared to Kerry’s medals which he either threw away or not.
Obama was a community activist in dangerous Chicago and could have been assaulted by one of the homey gangs there or, even now, assassinated while pumping gas at a station, a risk of which his own loving america and proud for the first time wife pointed out to you racists.
jharp
The 4100 soldiers who died all volunteered. Maybe they hoped that they would avoid having to actually serve in combat (e.g. national guardsmen looking for benefits), but they did volunteer.
The folks in the twin towers just died at their jobs. I hope you never have to choose between jumping 100 stories or burning to death. Some of them did.
Kevin Murphy (805c5b) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:21 pmThat isn’t what you said, lovey. You said that he didn’t have one. (“Does he have any real military experience to share? No.”) That was a lie. And particularly offensive given the Democrats’ history with offering up veterans as office-seekers. (Dukakis, Billy Jeff, Al Gore, Lurch, and now Obama)
I do know that Bush spent more time learning how to fly those fighter jets than Lurch spent in Vietnam. The only reason Bush’s request for a transfer to ‘Nam was because the war was scaling back and there were the newer jets in use – a type that Bush wasn’t qualified on, and one that would have taken more time that Bush would have spent “in country” getting up to speed on.
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:24 pmWhat would have been the right country? Iran? Syria? Or are you still advancing Obama’s “let’s invade one of our allies!” meme?
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:26 pmI’m looking forward to Aravosis outing more republican gays with Mike Rogers this election cycle. That was sweet unprincipled blackmail from the left and showed Aravosis for the total hack and liar that he is. Between 2004 and now, he’s 360 degrees around this military service issue.
I’m still looking for his condemnation of Jane Fonda for her propaganda films and comments about career Vietnam vet John Kerry’s ordinary service.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:27 pm#43
The next time he got in a jet, he was shot down and became a guest at the Hanoi Hilton…
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:30 pmGeorge Bush invaded the wrong country.
What would have been the right country? Iran? Syria? Or are you still advancing Obama’s “let’s invade one of our allies!” meme?
——————————————-
Maybe Darfur or Tibet or perhaps North Korea.
I’m still looking for my Free Tibet. It was half off last week.
I’ll even take some free Mumia.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:30 pmDrum,
“George Bush invaded the wrong country.”
“What would have been the right country?”
I misspoke. He shouldn’t have invaded any country.
I should have said and George Bush made the biggest strategic and economic blunder in US history by invading a country that had nothing to do with 911 and wasn’t a threat to the US.
Thanks for catching that.
jharp (9b1a32) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:33 pmsteve sturm,
You realize that McCain was in the navy from his entrance to Annapolis in 1954 to his retirement in 1981 at the rank of Captain, an O-6 just below Flag Officer level, and was a squadron commander. 1981 was not all that long ago, and an O-6 is nothing to sneeze at unless you’re wearing stars. As for Wesley Clark, that question appears to have been asked and answered.
Pablo (99243e) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:37 pmBy your definitions, this would have included Afghanistan. Because they weren’t a threat to the US, either, right up until the evening of September 10, 2001.
No threat at all, right?
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:37 pmYou are still avoiding the question I asked you the other day. Since your attention span seems to encompass the length of a commercial break, I’ll repeat it:
Since you repeatedly assert that Iraq wasn’t a threat, how did the first Gulf War end – conditional cease fire or peace treaty?
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:39 pm“I have a nice house, wife and two kids.”
(I live in a van down by the river, my offspring live in another state and my wife just said that “Harpy’s not the man/woman/entity I thought I knew”).
“Work when I want and make a nice living.”
(I make fraudulent Hummell figurines which sell for big bucks on EBay)
“Play golf when I want which is often.”
(there’s a miniature golf course across the river, it’s got 18 holes, and you can play another round for free if you hit a hole – in – one in the clown’s beanie)
“Have a nice fishing boat and go fishing when I want.”
(I have a 30 – year old dinghy, which I take out on the river when the toxic waste run – off’s not at Hazidmat Suit, Level 5)
“Have a nice yard and work in it when I want which is often.”
(There’s a layer of sludge outside the van from the recent floodwaters where I planted some daises, where I hope to be buried someday)
“The hell of it is I’m doing more to help you living poor and voting rich types than your chosen leaders.”
(I volunteer at the local soup kitchen – and by “volunteering” I mean that I go by and pick up whatever’s on the menu that day. Doesn’t that count as “help?”)
Dmac (ea35f7) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:47 pmDmac, that made me laugh. It also threatened my computer, since coffee on a keyboard is not optimal.
Thanks, sir. Top notch. Thanks for keepin’ it real, qdpsteve style!
Eric Blair (d7a9a9) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:52 pmPablo — I suspect that John McCain could have gotten his star(s) had he wanted them. Achieving the rank of Captain in the Navy is a big deal. I’m friends with a guy who is trying to make the decision right now whether he wants to put in the time and effort it will take him to make Captain, or retire out where he is right now as a Commander.
Given McCain’s career and his family history, in Reagan Defense Department there is no reason to think that McCain would not have made Admiral had he wanted to do so.
WLS (68fd1f) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:53 pm27 years of active duty, and because of his injuries courtesy of the NVA, he can’t raise his arms above his shoulder – probably a factor in not making Adm, since his injuries put a halt to his flying career; and, because of his history, they found billets for him that his physical condition did not make prohibitive.
As to Gen. Clarke, this is the guy who was prepared to start a fight with the Russians in the Balkans. He was a failure in his last command, and was relieved by his superiors. Some speculate that his fourth-star was only because of his state-of-birth (Arkansas).
Another Drew (8018ee) — 6/30/2008 @ 2:59 pmCommander (O5) is a good goal to make for an average officer after a career, and are usually Squadron-level COs in Naval Aviation. (They also command almost all of the fighting ships in the Navy.) Captaincies aren’t handed out to just anyone, since that is advanced enough to command an air wing or CV.
Less than 5% of all officers make O6 or higher.
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:03 pmAnother factor for retirement:
Another Drew (8018ee) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:03 pmA messy divorce, and then a new love interest, and a political opening in AZ.
Probably just didn’t feel he had anything more to prove in the Navy – plus, it’s not bad being wealthy, and a Congressman.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/202212.php
“Continues to boggle my mind what a difference 4 years can make to the conservatives.
1996: Bob Dole is a war hero! Clinton is a draft dodger! WORSHIP THE WAR HERO!
2000: Forget the war! Ignore the potential Vietnam-era AWOL-ness of our candidate, and his complete lack of foreign policy knowledge! He’s got integrity!
2004: So what your candidate actually fought and was injured in the same war during which our candidate was so very much NOT AWOL! We mock his service and question the legitimacy of his injuries! Have a purple band-aid to wear at our convention!
2008: Only a certified war hero can lead this country! WORSHIP THE WAR HERO!”
http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/attacking_mccains_military_rec.php
Clark’s take on this is serious. Aravosis is being cheap. I don’t think of McCain as much of a politician or a thinker, and I don’t think being a prisoner of war counts towards leadership. In that the McCain camp is running on hot air. But I wouldn’t mock the suffering itself.
JAR (864b31) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:04 pmWhat was Lurch’s highest rank again? LTJG?
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:04 pmWesley Clark, super genius.
He’s going a great job of getting Republicans and others who really don’t like McCain all that much to get a chance to really embrace him over an experience for which Obama has no equal.
I’ll assume that Wes Clark will be relegated to one of those low level staff positions from which all the Obama gaffes seem to emanate.
Neo (cba5df) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:05 pm66…
Another Drew (8018ee) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:05 pmNo, I think he climbed all the way to Ass-Hole (see: Senate testimony)!
Didn’t Dan Rather get fired for propagating this lie?
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:06 pmTo the best of my memory, when George H.W. Bush was running against Michael Dukakis, Doonesbury‘s Garry Trudeau actually dedicated several days’ worth of strips to suggest that status as a war hero was undeserved, and that he was just a lousy pilot. I cannot find those strips in any of the Doonesbury collections compiled every couple of years, but I remember what I read. I will do the best I can in the next few days to see if I can find them.
L.N. Smithee (b048eb) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:09 pmPablo: I wasn’t demeaning McCain’s service or rank, plenty of officers never get even that high. But his rank was well below that of those with some mighty big responsibilities, and we don’t go automatically deeming their service as a qualification to be President.
steve sturm (a0236e) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:11 pmjharp wrote: I’m a heterosexual man. And 47. Not 43 as someone else mentioned.
Really? You’re old enough to be going gray and you’re still acting like a punk kid? Holy cow!
I thought maybe you were Levi’s long-lost twin. Maybe you are Levi’s father!
L.N. Smithee (b048eb) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:12 pmNot “gray” so much as “shiny flesh tone with comb-over”
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:17 pmObama would never make it through basic training let alone 6 years as a POW, 23 years of military service, aviator school and Annapolis, and 25 plus years as a politician.
I’ll take McCain’s military experience over a bike-riding, arugula-eating, 152 pounder that’s never been in fistfight or a girly scratch fight, and has zero, zilch, nada, none, nothing as background experience. He has Oscar worthy speechwriters and he copies the oratory skills of MLK – and the left has wet dreams that they have finally found their messiah.
BTW – what military history courses has Obama taken? I’m a tad concerned about his basic training in how to Negotiate With The Enemy. I mean, it would be nice if he at least attended a military strategy course and at least got an A for Negotiating. Or maybe that’s coming in the Next Big Script.
Enlightened (af3db1) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:20 pmjharp: You know, like the purple band aids worn at the Republican National Convention making fun of Senator Kerry’s purple hearts.
Two questions jharp will ignore because the answers get in the way of his snide attacks:
L.N. Smithee (ecc5a5) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:23 pmThe Politico reports that Wes Clark’s Facebook entry says:
DRJ (fdd611) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:27 pm“Wes Clark knows that John McCain is largely untested and untried when it comes to national security matters.”
Hah. I would dearly love to see how Barack Wussein Obama would fare in a one-on-one questioning session with Mookie Sadr for instance.
And then McCain cleans the mess, which is usually the course of action when idiots that negotiate leave messes for people that act.
Enlightened (af3db1) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:31 pmYou know for someone effectively fired by Bill Clinton, Wes Clark sure has a high opinion of himself.
As for jharp, I’m continually astonished at jharp’s insistence on demonstrating the breadth of his own incompetence.
For example, jharp illustrates his complete ignorance of history with this utter stupidity: “George Bush made the biggest strategic and economic blunder in US history ”
That kind of stupidity take hard drugs and intentional ignorance.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:41 pmWesley Clark has made these comments on more than one occasion, so he clearly has given them some thought before uttering them. Let’s recall that his last couple of promotions were politically driven and took place over the advice of the Secretary of the Army and the top general in the Army. He was relieved of his command as NATO commander for issues related to his “character and judgment”. He had pushed for the actions that led to NATO’s role in the war in Kosovo and when his “enlightened advice” failed miserably, he pushed for a ground invasion involving 200,000 American troops that would have led to a direct confrontation with the Russians.
Clark was roundly loathed by his commanders, peers, and subordinates. Yet, this is who the Obama campaign reaches out to for establishing bona fides on foreign and military policy issues.
For a candidate lacking in personal experience, one must judge him on the advisors and associates he turns to for guidance. Once again, Obama demonstrates how unqualified he is to be President. Imagine who will be in his Cabinet if elected.
in_awe (bc82df) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:44 pmDRJ wrote: The Politico reports that Wes Clark’s Facebook entry says:
Tough talk from a guy whose record is reminiscent of Dr. Strangelove‘s fictional General Jack D. Ripper.
L.N. Smithee (ecc5a5) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:47 pmI’ve long been troubled by Wes Clark’s air campaign targeted specifically against Serbia’s civilian population in the Kosovo campaign.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:48 pmBut that is what the Left counts as a “good” war. Lots of “those people” killed in long range bombing attacks over civilian territory, where no American interests are at stake, and where no exit strategy is needed (the US wipes out everything and everyone and then goes home afterwards for appletinis – cv Vietnam, Somalia, etc.)
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:52 pmDrumwaster, yep. And no thought at all about the fact that Wes Clark specifically targeted civilian targets with no military value at all.
As for McCain, I thought this line on Glenn Reynolds’ blog was spot on: “Well, he served in Vietnam… and then he married a rich woman and got elected to the Senate. Are the Democrats now telling us these things don’t make for a good candidate?”
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/30/2008 @ 3:56 pmharpy and jar – I am going to go on record and question your patriotism. You have demonstrated none. Couple that with your aggressive ignorance, and overt lies, and you are the perfect storm of moonbattery.
Levi’s parents? Interesting …
JD (5f0e11) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:11 pmDrumwaster wrote: But that is what the Left counts as a “good” war. Lots of “those people” killed in long range bombing attacks over civilian territory, where no American interests are at stake, and where no exit strategy is needed
When a Code Pink spokeswoman (I believe it was ringleader Medea Benjamin) made her first appearance on the Sean Hannity radio show to debate reformed leftist David Horowitz on the occasion of its very first media event protesting the Iraq war — which was camping out in tents in front of the White House gates — Hannity asked her why she and her fellow protesters weren’t out on in front of the White House when Clinton went to war in Kosovo without UN approval.
There was a few of seconds of dead silence, and then the Pinkette could be clearly heard whispering to someone nearby, “Why didn’t we protest when Bill Clinton…” BUSTED!
L.N. Smithee (ecc5a5) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:16 pmSPQR wrote: As for McCain, I thought this line on Glenn Reynolds’ blog was spot on: “Well, he served in Vietnam… and then he married a rich woman and got elected to the Senate. Are the Democrats now telling us these things don’t make for a good candidate?”
Apparently, you have to marry TWO rich women.
L.N. Smithee (ecc5a5) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:18 pmsteve,
Again, Captain is not an insignificant rank by any stretch of the imagination. Plenty of officers never get that high, and it usually puts one in an executive position such as a squadron commander in McCain’s case. He was also the Navy liaison to the Senate, and was about to be promoted to Rear Admiral when he decided to retire from the Navy and run for Congress. His 27 years in the Navy were far more than his POW experience, which started after he damned near got killed in the USS Forrestal fire.
Yeah, he wasn’t Patton. But he wasn’t Beetle Bailey either.
Pablo (99243e) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:19 pmAnd was hellbent to start WWIII for no particularly good reason. Because of the judgment! Wes has been tested, and he, uh, failed.
Pablo (99243e) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:22 pmSPQR wrote: Drumwaster, yep. And no thought at all about the fact that Wes Clark specifically targeted civilian targets with no military value at all.
You mean those bridges in Belgrade? There could have been bad guys on those bridges!
L.N. Smithee (ecc5a5) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:23 pmI still don’t see how being tortured makes you qualified to be commander-in-chief. It doesn’t give you good judgment about military issues, nor does it mean you can be trusted when you talk about military issues. John McCain provides a striking case in point. He’s been horribly wrong about a number of major issues, and sometimes it sounds like he’s just hallucinating.
Example #1: McCain favors closing Guantanamo–and that’s bad military judgment. One major reason he’s given is that there are innocents being detained in Guantanamo. By that idiotic logic, we should be shutting down a lot more than just Gitmo. (Maybe every prison in the country should follow McCain’s example. And as another blogger pointed out, how about Ft. Leavenworth?) Is McCain’s argument the product of a mind that’s developed good military judgment? I’m thinking hell no.
Example #2: McCain predicted that the Iraq war would be quickly, easily won with few casualties–and that was bad military judgment. And then, during the war, specifically on April 9, 2003, McCain said that “the end is very much in sight.” All this and more came from the guy who had all that military experience that was supposed to give him such good military judgment. And he was dead wrong.
Example #3: McCain said you could safely walk the streets of Iraq–which obviously wasn’t true, because he had troops, helicopters, and gunships protecting him when he went. He also said (this year, no less) that General Petraeus was going around almost all the time in an unarmed Humvee–which was complete fiction. I don’t know where McCain pulled that from; I assume I’ll need a doctor with a flashlight to show me.
So where does the Right get this idea that McCain is somehow untouchable on the issue of the military because of his Vietnam War experience? He’s been wrong about a number of major military issues. Where is the evidence of the good military judgment he supposedly developed? So he was right on the surge; big deal–he was wrong on the war! I don’t see any reason to believe that McCain would more often come up with the right answer to a military question than an idiot with a coin to flip. As Ben Smith said at RedState, McCain may just be the example of “a stopped clock being right twice a day.” http://www.crosstabs.org/stories/archived/the_wages_of_being_john_mccain
I can’t stand even looking at (much listening to) Wesley Clark, but the man is right. McCain’s experience has not qualified him to make the decisions a commander-in-chief must make. And I’ve never heard a McCain supporter give me a direct answer to the question what, specifically, McCain would do better than Obama.
But if you think he’s got any good military judgment, why do you think he felt the need to lie at that debate earlier this year where he told that lie that he had “a plan” to win the War on Terror?
But I don’t endorse Aravosis’s allegation of disloyalty on McCain’s part for participating in propaganda against his will. McCain served more than honorably in Vietnam. (But, I would add, very badly in Washington, D.C.)
Alan (0cf397) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:24 pmMcCain got a hell of a lot higher in rank and responsibility than John Kerry. It is hilarious how flexible Democratic standards are.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:25 pmAddendum: I meant I’ve never heard a McCain supporter give me a direct answer to the question what, specifically, McCain would do better than Obama on military issues.
Alan (0cf397) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:25 pmAlan, some of your examples are pretty ludicrous. Such as Example #2 where you are clearly taking a cheap shot out of context given that the military operations of the invasion were pretty clearly about over in early April.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:28 pmI suspect, Alan, that the answer somehow involves “I wouldn’t sit down to tea with terrorists and bomb out allies…”
But I could be mistaken…
Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:30 pmIt was – in less time than it took Janet Reno to take over a compound in Waco, and fewer casualties than the last Spring Break weekend…
It has been the cleanup and maintenance of stability that has been so costly. But it would have been even MORE costly if we hadn’t done it – something these “oh, we’re winning, so we’d better hurry up and surrender” types don’t get.
Millions of Iraqis walk those same streets every day. The reason they don’t get all the fooferaw is because they aren’t candidates for the most powerful office in the world.
But they still walk them safely every single day.
But since we are worried about danger spots for Americans, the murder rate is higher in Compton than in Baghdad. Should we pull out?
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:32 pmIt doesn’t. Did someone say that it does? ‘Cause they’d be wrong.
Pablo (99243e) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:32 pmI was hoping Wesley Clark might be Urkel’s Veep, but apparently he blew that one too. The dude is a shameless self-promoter and all-around asshole. Maybe Chuckie Hagel has a shot now with Urkel?
madmax333 (ae788c) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:33 pmGoing back to Eisenhower, how many generals or admirals were on ticket as candidate or running mates? All I can think of is Curtis LeMay, Geo. Wallace veep mate and that Vietnam era war hero admiral (who looked shell-shocked) with Ross Perot. Clark couldn’t carry any of their jock straps.
Kudos are the great job you dudes are doing on the self-aggrandizing Harpy loon. He just keeps on coming back for more. Guess he’s one of those masochists or just plain loco, smitten by the urkel kool-aid acid test.
Adm Stockdale was the Reform party VP – and did not deserve the ridicule he got. Dennis Miller had a brilliant rant on the subject.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:35 pmGeorge Bush invaded the wrong country?
He shouldn’t have invaded any country…(Afghanistan?)
You know, it gets a bit tiring to hear this barking Tourette’s Syndrome on the Iraq war…but, this bit about not going after the Taliban is pretty unique among the Cowardly Lyin’ crowd.
State sponsored terrorism was a BI-PARTISAN concern and Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and others were put on notice after more than 3,000 of our countrymen were murdered by state sponsored cretins.
Since Bill Clinton, Sandy Berger, Madelaine Albright, William Cohen….ALL….EVERY ONE OF THEM…said that there was no greater threat in the world than Saddam Hussein when it came to state sponsoring terrorism…they voted in regime change and lobbed bombs at him….I would think that this mental defective notion that this was George Bush invading Iraq…would be cured with medication.
It isn’t, but we hold out hope that one day it may be. There was a vote, several countries joined us, the UN had passed resolution after resolution. The WORLD believed that there was a danger.
Then again…the treasonous live in a world of their own making.
cfbleachers (4040c7) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:35 pmSen. McCain will not surrender, so he has that over Baracky.
Racists.
JD (5f0e11) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:35 pmSPQR, why is it ludicrous to point out that McCain completely misconceived the way this war was going to go? A president has to make military decisions, and a huge factor (probably the biggests) is, “How do I think this war will turn out?” You can’t pretend this doesn’t matter.
Scott: wrong about tea with terrorists. McCain is no different than Obama on that issue. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/126207 As for not bombing allies, if I recall correctly, what Obama said was not that we should bomb Pakistan, but that we shouldn’t take it off the table. I don’t think a president should take anything off the table, especially with regard to an “ally” that’s arguably hiding bin Laden and dicking us around.
Alan (0cf397) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:37 pmGen. Clark has assumed his position under the back of Baracky’s bus. It is getting crowded back there.
JD (5f0e11) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:38 pm1) Because it isn’t true.
2) Because he wasn’t in charge of any portion of the planning.
3) Because it isn’t true. (This part bears repeating, since you are repeating a known lie.)
Next!
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:38 pmOh, it’s a known lie that McCain was wrong to predict that we’d have few casualties and get the war over fast? You can split all the hairs you want and pretend that the cleanup isn’t part of the war, but don’t call me a liar just because I (probably along with most people) don’t agree, jackass.
Alan (0cf397) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:40 pmAlan – What about Baracky’s extensive military and foreign policy experience suggests that he would do a better job at evaluating such a situation?
JD (5f0e11) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:41 pmI’m not a fan of Obama. I’m voting for Barr.
But at least Obama isn’t running on experience. McCain is. And that experience isn’t worth jack, because McCain’s military judgment is garbage.
Alan (0cf397) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:42 pmRight, which is why the only person in the entire Congress to vote against it was Barbara Lee.
I think harpy just misses Saddam.
Pablo (99243e) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:42 pmalan – Please offer some proof that someone, anyone here suggested that being tortured was a qualification for President. You are not entitled to your own facts.
JD (5f0e11) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:45 pmYes. Because we DID have few casualties, and we DID win the war quickly. Saying otherwise is a lie. You have said this twice, despite having the error pointed out after the first such assertion.
Thus, you are repeating a known lie.
What would that make you, I wonder?
It isn’t splitting hairs. The Marshall Plan was part of the cleanup in Europe, and took many years after the official hostilities had ended. Yhat didn’t utterly eliminate the threat to our soldiers in Europe, either, and there were deaths every year. But no one is claiming that the Marshall Plan was part of WW2.
I called you a liar because you repeated a lie, and asserted it to be true, despite having the facts shown to be diametrically opposed. THAT is why I called you a liar.
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:46 pmAlan, are you proud of how you misrepresent stuff? Does your personal ethics allow this behavior of yours? I’m curious because I can’t understand people who practice as you do.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:46 pmWhere does it say in the constitution that a president must be a war hero or a veteran to qualify? Granted, John McCain is a great war hero. But how does that qualify him to be a great president?
love2008 (1b037c) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:50 pmIt doesn’t say that in the Constitution. It says that in every Democratic Presidential campaign advertisement in the last few cycles. (“Bush was AWOL”, “Reporting for duty”, etc.)
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:55 pm“Does your personal ethics allow this behavior of yours?”
You’re operating under a false assumption – that he actually has any ethics to begin with. Why people continue to come on here and make harebrained statements with absolutely no substantive sourcing to back them up continually amazes me. Maybe they’re just masochists, who knows?
Dmac (ea35f7) — 6/30/2008 @ 4:56 pmDrumwaster, well said.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:00 pmThe campaign to overthrow the Hussein gov’t of Iraq lasted just a few weeks, and suffered very few casualties.
Another Drew (8018ee) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:02 pmWhat you are carping about is the occupation, and rebuilding of a defeated nation.
As a Conservative, I have carped over the manner in which the occupation unfolded. For one thing, we were too nice to those taking actions against us. The Rules of Engagement were for shit. Paul Bremmer (a career State type) was a disaster, and I wouldn’t put him in charge of neighborhood watch.
Now, what part of that was McCain responsible for?
IIRC, he was on-board for the actual military invasion and overthrow (remember how the MSM proclaimed a “quagmire” just 48-hrs in?) – but was critical from the get-go over the occupation (if he and Don Rumsfeld were charter-members of the Book-of-the-Month Club, they would never be on the same page – just water and oil).
His prescience on the occupation should be a qualification for the Presidency, just as his confinement in the Hanoi Hilton is not – it’s just a marker denoting his character. If there is one thing that the Clinton years should have taught us, it is that character matters.
John McCain has it; Bill Clinton didn’t; Obama is still an empty suit!
Being President takes more than military experience. It takes leadership, courage, enterprise, ability to read situations and know how to respond to them. It also takes judgement, instinct, sacrifice, problem solving skills, people skills, intelligence, strength, navigating skills, patriotism and integrity. The list continues…. It takes more than military prowess.
love2008 (1b037c) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:05 pmlovey…
Another Drew (8018ee) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:07 pmPlease explain Barrack’s qualifications in each of those catagories that you have specified.
I don’t think anyone disagrees with you love2008. Over that last 2 and a quarter centuries, we’ve had ex-generals as great presidents and mediocre presidents. We’ve had civilians as great presidents and mediocre presidents.
But in 2004, the Democrats tried to convince us that setting foot on Vietnam was the prime qualification – even had a multi-media show at the convention about it. Isn’t it early for the Democrats to be abandoning that theme?
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:08 pm“But how does that qualify him to be a great president?”
It doesn’t – but for anyone to suggest that giving your life voluntarily for your country is of little consequence borders on asshattery of the highest order. Let’s just say this, at least -McCain is fully aware of the consequences of war for our all – volunteer army. The O – Man thinks that showing weakness (by making a sit – down with terrorist nations a de facto reality, with no preconditions) is, in fact, a strength of foreign policy – we’ve already found out what that gets us with the immortal Jimmah Carter. Once the Soviets got a good look at him, Brehznev basically opened the floodgates – the Soviet proxy wars in Angola, El Salvador and Nicaragua, and the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan.
All of this was confirmed when Yeltsin released the troves of archives of the KGB and Politboro meetings from earlier eras. It also confirmed that Kruschev thought that Kennedy would fold like a house of cards regarding the Cuban Missile Crisis, mostly due to Kennedy’s weakness shown in private meetings conducted only months earlier. This is the fear that many of us harbor about Obama, and his behavior so far has not alleviated those doubts. There is a reason why so many of our enemies are big faves of Obama, they think he’s a lightweight and can take him. Not so with McCain – they’re scared sh-tless of him, and that’s what I want in a leader. Peace only comes from strength – that’s a given.
Dmac (ea35f7) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:08 pmAll the things that a military career will give you. Ask any veteran.
Funny how Barry doesn’t fit any of those adjectives, innit?
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:09 pmMaybe Obama can trot out some of the citations and plaques he received when he served as a “community organizer”. They should match up nicely with McCain’s Distinguished Flying Cross, Legion of Merit, Silver Star, Bronze Star, Purple Heart, Air Medal and Navy Commendation Medal. Obama is the most unqualified major party candidate in the history of this country, he’s only there because he’s black or whatever.
Ned Kelly (c4e42b) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:11 pmI will give Obama this, he has more class than Wesley Clark. But given my opinion of Clark, that is not going to change my opinion of Obama much.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:12 pmmadmax333 wrote: Maybe Chuckie Hagel has a shot now with Urkel?
In his new book, Hagel says that if it were up to him to decide on new busts to carve into Mount Rushmore, he would add the following three figures: Dwight David Eisenhower, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, and…his mother.
I’m not making that up.
L.N. Smithee (0931d2) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:13 pmWho said that there is a Constitutional requirement that one be a war hero or a veteran to be President? Who said that there is any requirement, Consitutional or otherwise, that one be a war hereo or veteran? How do you believe that Obama bests McCain on any of the criteria that you named?
Person No. 85 (a1522a) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:25 pmThat AMERICAblog is hilarious!
Person No. 85 (a1522a) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:31 pm#117
love2008 (1b037c) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:34 pmI am not talking about Obama. My point is that it takes more than military experience to lead a country. That is why the office of the president is placed above the armed forces.
And SPQR, #118
I agree with you that it is wrong to drag something as honourable as ex war veteran into politics and trying to use it as a leverage. It is always a bad step. It backfired on Kerry. McCain should be well advised against doing the same. Wont like to see all that glory bloodied in the messy waters of politics.
Love2008, so the whole “Where does it say in the constitution that a president must be a war hero or a veteran to qualify?” was a strawman argument, no?
Person No. 85 (a1522a) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:39 pmOh, so I lied? Okay, go watch McCain himself and tell me I’m a liar again. I guess you’ll have to accuse McCain of lying too, since he expresses clearly contradictory positions here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioy90nF2anI
No substantive sourcing? Up yours.
Alan (0cf397) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:43 pm#127
love2008 (1b037c) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:45 pmEverything doesnt always have to be about Obama you know.
Alan, so taking comments out of context is the kind of dishonesty we can expect from you? Great, noted.
The youtube clip is just as dishonest as you are.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:46 pmSo someone who has less than military service is even less qualified? Thank you.
Next customer!
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:50 pmlove2008 wrote: Being President takes more than military experience. It takes leadership,
courage, enterprise, ability to read situations and know how to respond to them. It also takes judgement, instinct, sacrifice, problem solving skills, people skills, intelligence, strength, navigating skills, patriotism and integrity. The list continues…. It takes more than military prowess.
Let’s count them down, shall we?
Leadership: No bill authorship, plenty of “present” votes. That leaves us with “Community Organizer,” which means whatever you want it to mean because no Obama supporter bothers to explain it (this is a recurring theme).
Courage: See Leadership.
Enterprise: Gotta hand it to him on this one. Nobody has been able to raise so much money without a tangible idea.
Ability to read situations and know how to respond to them: OK. He’s done pretty well knowing when to throw people under the bus when they start hurting his image.
Judgement: No way. Chose racist firebrand preacher Rev. Jeremiah Wright as his conduit to “street cred”; served on a board with two unrepentant domestic terrorists (Ayers & Dohrn); finagled deal with well-known (and now convicted) crook under indictment (Tony Rezko) to sweeten his home purchase.
Instinct: See Wright, Ayers, Dohrn, Rezko.
Sacrifice: After graduating from Ivy League colleges, he and his wife sacrificed big-bucks careers as professionals to “serve the public (although they ended up making big bucks anyway).” But oh, those student loans!
Problem solving skills: See Ability to read situations…
People skills: All right, he gets this one. Anybody who has people thinking he might be otherworldly has to have them. Of course, this says more about the followers than the followed.
Intelligence: Nobody gets into an Ivy if s/he isn’t intelligent. That includes George W. Bush, too.
Strength: Sorry. I don’t see it anywhere. See Leadership.
Navigating skills: I don’t even know what you mean by that. Maybe if he took on Kerry as a running mate, he could learn how to windsurf.
Patriotism: See “Ability to read situations…” The guy whose political director said he was “friendly” with with the flag-treading Ayers said he would forego wearing a flag lapel pin suddenly decided he would when Hillary refused to lay down and die. Now, he’s redefined patriotism in his own image so his can’t be questioned, but I have yet to hear of any condemnation of Gen. Clark’s remarks.
Integrity: It is to laugh. Even some lefties are waking up after he reversed himself on public financing (see Ability to read situations…)
It takes more than military prowess… True. But it takes WAY more in other areas than what he’s got.
L.N. Smithee (ecc5a5) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:51 pmUm…..
He had the chance to leave. North Vietnam wanted to release him because his father was powerful and this would hurt US morale. McCain said he’d go when all other soldiers released before him went.
That’s heroic. Period.
And, of course, as to the main question, McCain’s experience as a military leader and as a military combatant is highly likely to help him understand what war costs and what war can gain, and also how to run one. It’s an important trait.
–JRM
JRM (de6363) — 6/30/2008 @ 5:57 pm“That AMERICAblog is hilarious!”
Some time ago he had a really really good when he busted the gay hooker from Talon news asking questions at the White House press conerences.
Some question about soemthing like “how can you deal with democrats that are so detached from reality”
Guckert Gannon or something like that. And Jeff I think.
Ended up he was a male prostitute. Wonder what ever happened to that guy and what the hell he was doing in the whitehouse.
jharp (9b1a32) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:05 pmHe was doing his job as an accredited reporter, vetted by the same WH Press Office that vetted Helen Thomas. Was it because he was lobbing softball questions, or is it that no gays are allowed in the White House?
BECAUSE OF THE GAY PORN COCK OF LIES! (to quote Jeff Goldstein)
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:16 pmHave you noticed that jharp wants to revisit issues upon which liberal bloggers had their asses handed to them many years ago?
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:17 pmHe’s slowly losing his way through the first Bush term. Any week now, he’ll have caught up to the rest of us, and be getting his ass handed to him on current events.
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:21 pmGeneral Clark has serious character flaws. As an officer of th United States Army, he apparently didn’t learn anything. He brings up his service and compares it being at the Hanoi Hilton. I am sorry but there is no comparison. Senator McCain stood his ground as best he could as a P.O.W. General Schwarzkof publicly stated that General Clark had several character issues. From military officer to military officer, this is a serious observation. Officers value character and integrity above all. Apparently, General Clark is living up to his character flaws. B. Hussein Obama served where by the way? He led what? Some groups in Chicago? O ya, that’s the same as a Navy squadron. B. Hussein Obama has no idea what it means to serve! He is a traitor surrouned by traitors! Hey General Clark, I have an idea, why don’t you lead a squad of Marines on mission in Iraq! How long do you think you would last before they would frag you! General Clark, you are a traitor! Just like John Kerry! I am so glad I was out of the armed forces before you were in command! A true military officer has no interest in power. But you apparently do. I hope your comments are broadcast every day until election so B. Hussein Obama NEVER makes it to the White House.
Jarhead (9a7f4a) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:22 pmYou really had him, Drumwaster, with the Protein Wisdom reference. Jeff Goldstein kicked ass on the Gannon thing and jharp brings it up?
Clueless.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:22 pmJarhead, its funny, Wesley Clark reminds me of another US general who was a weasel without character – WWII’s Mark Clark.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:23 pmObama? Huh? Who spoke about Obama? You made a ridiculous/strawman argument and didn’t have the intellectual honesty to even address it, so why should anyone take you seriously?
Person No. 85 (a1522a) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:30 pmNobody should have criticized John Kerry’s service, and nobody should criticize John McCain’s.
Tlove (4a03a6) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:30 pmSPQR–
Any quotation is by definition taken out of context. The question is whether the quotations, in context, mean something different or create different inferences than when McCain’s statements were taken out of context and put in that video. Only if the answer is yes would the video be dishonest. You say that it is. You have no evidence that it does; you just assume that the context contains something that clears it all up and exonerates McCain of the charge of dishonesty. Based on no evidence. So, you accuse the video of dishonesty, based on no evidence. That makes you the dishonest one, the one with nonexistent personal ethics.
But if I’m wrong, show the world how dishonest that video is, by showing how the context in which McCain said those words negates the inference that I’ve drawn from them. Go ahead, shithead. Back up your accusation of dishonesty. Or you can admit that you were making an unsupported assumption to defend McCain because you can’t say anything substantive to defend his blatant flip-flopping… which in turn would undermine the basis for having any faith in his military judgment.
I don’t remember you being such a jackass in prior postings on other issues. What I said wasn’t dishonest at all. You may hate it, but that’s no excuse for the demagoguery and dishonesty you’ve put on display here. Even about an issue for which you have as much passion as this one.
Drumwaster: As to the pre-video statements I made… would you say that a woman whose husband was killed in Iraq any time after “Mission Accomplished” shouldn’t be considered a war widow, since you think the war ended years and years ago? And what do you think of calling the current stage of the war a “cleanup” when the vast majority of the casualties took place during the cleanup and not the war? Seems kind of dishonest to me to say that, in the context of the present conflict, it’s just a “cleanup” and not a war. But that’s just me, and my arguments are meaningless because I’m a big fat liar for not standing with you on this war. Jerk.
Alan (0cf397) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:32 pmAlan, you were the one to present quotes out of context. Trying to shift the burden away from yourself is a cute trick – not.
Your memory seems deficient. I’m equally a jackass on all threads.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:34 pm#141
love2008 (1b037c) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:34 pm*sigh*
Bud Day can say whatever he damn well pleases.
Pablo (99243e) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:35 pmjharp: Was that typo-laden statement supposed to be responsive to my admittedly-nebulous statement? Something about a male prostitute, not sure, but I guess you think you were making a powerful argument.
Person No. 85 (a1522a) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:36 pmAfter seeing what assholes you guys can be, I’m starting to hate jharp a little less now, since he mildly irritates you. You’re really the same except for your politics. You avoid inconvenient counterarguments (I don’t see any defense of McCain’s lie about Petraeus here…), you engage in blatant demagoguery, you make idiotic statements you can’t and don’t defend (accusing the video of being dishonest without having any evidence of the relevance of the “context” from which McCain’s statements were taken)… You’re just a bunch of Michael Moores and Michael Medveds here.
Alan (0cf397) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:36 pmAh, Love2008, you can’t even be bothered to make an argument. Sigh.
Person No. 85 (a1522a) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:37 pmTlove, the Swiftboat Vets mostly criticized John Kerry’s stories about his service and his actions after he left Vietnam with respect to his anti-war rhetoric. To the extent that they were not fans of his actual service, well – they had patrolled the same waters.
I’ll tell you something interesting. In the late ’80’s, I worked with a guy who had been in PBR’s during the Vietnam war. And he once pointed out the Massachusetts politician John Kerry to me – this was about 20 years ago – and told me how hated the guy was in the brown water community. I had no idea who Kerry was then.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:38 pmSPQR: The burden is on me? Let me see if I understand this… I take statements McCain has made… you accuse me of dishonesty, which in turn implies that the statements really mean something other than what they say, because the context changes the meaning of the isolated statements… and it’s my burden to show that the statements actually reflect what one would naturally think they mean? No. It’s not my burden to present transcripts of everything McCain said when I quote McCain as saying contradictory things. (Not that I even quoted him, but never mind; that’s a technical issue not relevant to our dispute.) If you’re going to take the position that a presentation of McCain’s statements–his own words–doesn’t reflect what he thinks, then that’s your burden to prove.
By your stupid logic, if I quote from Jesse Jackson’s “Hymietown” speech and say that he’s an anti-Semite, I haven’t carried my burden unless I show the entire context, meaning (presumably) a copy of the whole speech and a detailed narrative description of the socioeconomic conditions prevailing at the time the speech was made. Moron. If you’re going to accuse someone of dishonesty when they provide someone else’s own words, that’s your burden to show.
Alan (0cf397) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:41 pmI don’t know Alan, but to the extent he represents my frustration with the BS that exists on both sides of the aisle, I’m down with that.
Person No. 85 (a1522a) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:42 pmSo, Alan, you are saying you can’t show McCain’s comment in context because your claim would fall apart.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:43 pmNo, because there are such things as “combat zones” and “hazardous duty” without a war going on.
Anyone who loses their life after willingly putting their name on the line that is dotted gets my vote for “hero”. That includes some people who have never worn our country’s uniform. (Just as a for instance, I include first responders in that list – police, fire, paramedics, etc.)
I’d say it was a hell of a war, and a rather messy clean up. The Global War on Terror is not now over, nor is it likely to be over for a very long time. But Iraq is no longer in the “enemies” column, and that its a win.
Second you are ignoring the relative number of casualties compared with outcome.
To date, we have lost less than 1/10 the number of people lost during the “police action” (not a “war”) in Vietnam, and less than half of what we lost in a single day on a single beach during the last time we faced a threat to world peace like the Islamofascists. But you seem to think that trying to keep terrorists from killing civilians is a hazard-free job.
Why would you think this? Is the only source of data you have the “Bush hates America” crowd? Have you seriously given this subject no thought whatsoever?
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:43 pmPeople are commenting on wartime. Both are heroes who actually fought for this country – whether they criticized the war, made propaganda videos for the other side or whatever. Unless they used political favors to weasel their way out of service or committed atrocities beyond the scope of soldiers’ duties, it’s not our place to criticize them. That’s all I am saying.
Tlove (4a03a6) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:44 pmSPQR–Why should I answer your questions when you won’t answer mine?
I love how you’re making up this “context” that exonerates McCain, and accusing me of dishonesty for not proving you wrong. I might as well be accused of dishonesty if I don’t prove that Christopher Walken isn’t from Neptune, or that dinosaurs don’t dance. Just because you make up some stupid fantasy doesn’t give me the burden of disproving it.
Alan (0cf397) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:48 pm“you seem to think that trying to keep terrorists from killing civilians is a hazard-free job.”
Where the hell did that come from, idiot? I repeatedly said that it’s part of the WAR. That’s obviously inconsistent with thinking that it’s hazard-free. You just came up with a cute phrase for a stupid idea and ascribed the idea to me, without even bothering to think about whether it even remotely resembles anything I said.
Alan (0cf397) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:53 pmI haven’t read the whole thread, but there are some people who aren’t worth trying to converse with (e.g., love2008). If someone is only concerned with trying to score partisan points, it’s a waste of time.
Person No. 85 (a1522a) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:55 pmHow dare you not read the whole thread! That’s as un-American as staying anonymous!
You bastards!
Tlove (4a03a6) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:57 pmI know, I’m a jerk! 🙂
Person No. 85 (a1522a) — 6/30/2008 @ 6:59 pm“I’m starting to hate jharp a little less now”
For all and please, let’s not hate anyone. We can all hate some policies but let’s leave it at that.
And though I’m glad you hate me less but I wish you didn’t hate me at all.
After all, we don’t even know each other.
jharp (9b1a32) — 6/30/2008 @ 7:22 pmI now hate you less still for having said that.
Alan (0cf397) — 6/30/2008 @ 7:41 pmAs a Nam vet who “celebrated” the Tet “cease fire” in Hue with the Fifth Marines I say F*ck: John, JFK the coward who ran out on his men after 0.3 tours (3.5 months – Naval tour was 13 months), Bill the draft dodger and “Gen” Clark.
an old esJarhead
PS f*ck Rand Beers while we still have a h*rd on!
Rod Stanton (21a270) — 6/30/2008 @ 7:43 pmTrust me, “hate” has nothing to do with it. You barely rise to the level of “dismissive contempt”.
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 7:49 pmContempt is a synonym for hatred. http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/contempt
Looks like Drumwaster was lying again. Or being stupid again. Not sure which.
Alan (0cf397) — 6/30/2008 @ 8:05 pmTlove,
Nobody should have critisized Kerry’s service? Look up the defintion of officer in the dictionary you bozo! Kerry came back and gave FALSE TESTIMONY in front of Congress about his fellow servicemen! Lying like that is beneath the rank of an officer! It is beneath a US Navy Sailor! He gave comfort to the enemy! If any of his lies were true, why didn’t he report it to his commanding officers as the USMJ requires him? He served a candy ass tour and got a paper cut and proceeded to throw his medals out. I question any man who enters the armed forces only to disobey the USMJ, and code of honor that exists in the military. If he was witness an unlawful order, he was required by his rank and the UCMJ to disobey that order and report it to his commanding officer. The military has a chain of command and you do not violate that chain of command. Kerry is a traitor in Benedict Arnold sense! Wesley Clark is also a traitor with low character. While I do not agree many of Senator McCain’s politics, I acknowledge he served faithfully and did his best not to break under that HORRIBLE torture that was far worse than the paper cuts Kerry got! Wesley Clark got shot. Instead of insulting the Senator’s character, he should look in the mirror at his own as he is nothing but a politician. Gen Norm Schartzkoff, a highly respected officer, publicly stated that Clark had character issues. This is enough to discredit Clark. During World War II, Clark would have been tried under the Sedition Act and branded a traitor, just like Kerry! When you enter the military, you give up your right to protest so others can have their rights. I am fed up with these traiterous people who leave the military and proceed to turn the very people they served with! 99% of us serve and go on without ever badmouthing our countty or our fellow service men. Traitors like Kerry and Clark are that 1% who brag about their service and smear the very people they served with. As I said before, Kerry & Clark should lead a platoon of Marines on sweep and clear mission. How long would it be before they would be fragged?
Jarhead (9a7f4a) — 6/30/2008 @ 8:06 pmFunny, the actual definition of the word is as follows:
con·tempt /kənˈtɛmpt/
[kuhn-tempt]
–noun
1. the feeling with which a person regards anything considered mean, vile, or worthless; disdain; scorn.
2. the state of being despised; dishonor; disgrace.
And “hate” never enters into it. (Imagine that.) Guess that means YOU were lying by attempting to put words into my mouth. I said “contempt”, and I meant “contempt.
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 8:10 pmApparently your logic is that contempt doesn’t mean anything other than the words listed there. Any problems with that logic?
1. The word “dislike” isn’t listed there, either. By your logic, “contempt” doesn’t mean dislike. But of course contempt does mean dislike–a particularly strong form of dislike, but dislike nonetheless.
2. Just because the word “hate” isn’t listed there doesn’t mean that “contempt” doesn’t mean hate. This is the dictionary, not the thesaurus; the dictionary doesn’t list every single word that “contempt” means. The thesaurus always lists more words.
3. The definition of “contempt” given by the dictionary makes it pretty clear that “contempt” means hate.
4. The definition of “hate” given by the same dictionary you cited makes it even more clear that “contempt” and “hate” are synonyms, just like the thesaurus says. Here’s the definition of “hate”:
–verb (used with object)
1. to dislike intensely or passionately; feel extreme aversion for or extreme hostility toward; detest: to hate the enemy; to hate bigotry.
2. to be unwilling; dislike: I hate to do it.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hate
Looks like I caught you lying again, scumbag.
Alan (0cf397) — 6/30/2008 @ 8:17 pmdont know if anyone has pointed it out and there are way too many comments to read thru. but mccain hasnt used his military credentials as his basis for his run. its part of it but he has never “reported for duty” so while it is part of his package he presents its just a part w/ lots of other experience to go with it.
and i say that as a mccain hater who will never vote for the man.
chas (12a229) — 6/30/2008 @ 9:07 pmChas, McCain’s political ads are bursting at the seams with footage of him from the 1960s and 1970s. He milks the Vietnam thing for more than it’s worth. In fact, in one of the primary debates, McCain was asked why he’d be the best candidate to govern this country’s economy, and he answered by invoking his experience as a POW. It was then that I gained a level of contempt–hatred–for McCain that I previously thought impossible: he was trivializing his own experience by using it to cloak his jaw-dropping economic illiteracy.
Alan (0cf397) — 6/30/2008 @ 9:16 pm*yawn* You actually called me a bozo. Are you finished?
TLove (4a03a6) — 6/30/2008 @ 9:19 pmNope. I see a different denotation with “contempt” than I would with “hate”.
Hate means I actually care about something or someone. Contempt means I don’t. I used the word very specifically, and in accordance with its actual definition (which I did post), not is any tortured sense of “synonyms mean exactly the same thing, even when they don’t”.
You are attempting to put words into my mouth in order to proiject some emotion onto me, so that you can score a point.
Trouble is, I didn’t use the word, I didn’t feel the emotion, and you are deliberately asserting a falsehood.
It doesn’t mean dislike. It means contempt. (Gosh, is this too tough for you to follow?)
That is EXACTLY what it means. Contempt means one thing and gate means something else.
Watch, I’ll show you.
hatred
ha·tred /ˈheɪtrɪd/
[hey-trid]
–noun
the feeling of one who hates; intense dislike or extreme aversion or hostility.
contempt
con·tempt /kənˈtɛmpt/
[kuhn-tempt]
–noun
1. the feeling with which a person regards anything considered mean, vile, or worthless; disdain; scorn.
2. the state of being despised; dishonor; disgrace.
See the difference, scumbag? “Intense dislike” versus “scorn”.
Now why are you trying to claim I said something I didn’t?
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 6/30/2008 @ 9:20 pmOh, it’s a known lie that McCain was wrong to predict that we’d have few casualties and get the war over fast? You can split all the hairs you want and pretend that the cleanup isn’t part of the war, but don’t call me a liar just because I (probably along with most people) don’t agree, jackass.
Comment by Alan — 6/30/2008 @ 4:40 pm
Hey, can you tell this to my dad?
Because when he was drafted during ‘Nam, he was sent to Germany, and they had the O club bombed by insurgents. Couple of people died.
That was slightly more than five years after WWII ended….
Foxfier (15ac79) — 6/30/2008 @ 10:57 pm“but mccain hasnt used his military credentials as his basis for his run”
You have got to be joking.
It’s all he’s got and he’s been using it daily.
As an aside it’s too bad he didn’t win in 2000. I think he’d have been OK and at the least better than the worst president in US history.
jharp (1e383d) — 6/30/2008 @ 11:23 pmjharp –
Link?
Not to your moronic idea that W is somehow the “worst president in US history”–but to not a day passing without McCain “using” his military service.
Foxfier (15ac79) — 6/30/2008 @ 11:50 pmHey, harpy – thanks for proving me right…again.
L.N. Smithee (910937) — 7/1/2008 @ 12:01 amI’ll say it again: A dictionary doesn’t list every single word that’s part of a meaning. For example, the dictionary’s definition of “hawk” doesn’t use the word animal, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hawk, yet clearly a hawk is an animal–so just because the dictionary doesn’t come out and say it doesn’t mean it’s not part of the meaning. Likewise, just because the dictionary doesn’t list “hatred” as part of the meaning of “contempt” doesn’t mean that contempt isn’t hatred. Any idiot knows it is.
“Hate means I actually care about something or someone. Contempt means I don’t.”
I didn’t see that in anything you posted from the dictionary. I guess that means it’s okay for you to read secret meanings into words, and then cite the dictionary for a totally different point, with no sense of shame or contradiction.
“[Contempt] doesn’t mean dislike. It means contempt. (Gosh, is this too tough for you to follow?)”
Can you like something and have contempt for it at the same time? No. Can you be neutral about something and have contempt for it at the same time? No. So by process of elimination, “contempt” entails dislike. Is that too tough for you to follow, you moron?
“See the difference, scumbag? ‘Intense dislike’ versus ‘scorn’.”
Since I don’t hallucinate, no, I don’t see the difference. Scorn is intense dislike. It’s not consistent with admiration, and it’s not consistent with neutral feelings. Again, process of elimination. Still with me?
The dictionary defines scorn as “open or unqualified contempt; disdain.” http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/scorn It defines contempt in the manner you quoted; it defines disdain as “a feeling of contempt for anything regarded as unworthy; haughty contempt; scorn.” http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/disdain So scorn means contempt or disdain, while disdain means contempt or scorn. All entail dislike. It doesn’t say that in the dictionary, but, for the umpteenth time, there are a lot of words that are part of a word’s meaning that aren’t listed in the dictionary.
Contempt clearly means dislike, because contempt means, inter alia, “the feeling with which a person regards anything considered mean, vile, or worthless,” and clearly that feeling is one of dislike because you can’t like or be neutral about something that’s the object of contempt as that word is defined the way you prefer.
And it’s not like contempt versus hate is the difference between dislike and intense dislike. You admit that contempt means scorn, and scorn means “open or unqualified contempt; disdain.” http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/scorn
Furthermore, contempt, as you noted, means, inter alia, “the state of being despised; dishonor; disgrace.” One who is the object of others’ contempt is thus “despised” by those others. And what the hell does despise mean? The dictionary doesn’t use the word “hate,” but it doesn’t need to–it says that “despise” means “to regard with contempt, distaste, disgust, or disdain; scorn; loathe.” http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/despise If you’re going to draw a distinction between that and hate, you’re nothing short of Clintonian. “Loathe,” by the way, is another incredibly obvious synonym for “hate.” “Loathe” means “to feel disgust or intense aversion for; abhor.” http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/loathe
Contempt, loathe, abhor, despise–all words that any idiot could tell you mean “hate,” all of them synonyms for “hate” or “hatred,” yet all words that the dictionary doesn’t explicitly say mean “hate.” So what? There are a lot of things those words mean that the dictionary doesn’t list; that doesn’t mean the words don’t carry those unlisted meanings.
You’ll notice that I’ve repeated myself a lot. The better to get it all through your thick skull.
Alan (0cf397) — 7/1/2008 @ 1:05 am“…who better to pose the question than War Hero [x]?”
Patterico, you must have a short memory since that question never was raised when there was a feeding frenzy on Kerry.
Psyberian (9f6817) — 7/1/2008 @ 4:58 am#177 regarding “patriot/war hero” sKerry Lurch. How long has it been since he promised Tim Russert that he would release his complete military records? Have the Swift Boaters allegations ever been disproved? And did his discharge get altered (upgraded?) during the Carter administration or not? Was he at all truthful in his Winter soldiers testimony?
madmax333 (0eb845) — 7/1/2008 @ 5:48 am.
Care to support this assertion, harpy?
JD (75f5c3) — 7/1/2008 @ 5:52 am174, Harpo, do you have anything to support your statements other than rantings from Daily Krap?
PCD (5c49b0) — 7/1/2008 @ 5:59 am“And who better to pose the question than War Hero John Aravosis?”
In fairness, Aravosis may have picked up a few mushroom bruises in orgies by the piers in New York.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 7/1/2008 @ 9:42 amWesley Clark said:
Michael Ejercito (a757fd) — 7/1/2008 @ 9:48 amJust because he spent some time around sailors during Fleet Week doesn’t quite do it…
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 7/1/2008 @ 9:49 am#182
The irony is overwhelming…
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 7/1/2008 @ 9:49 amHeyyyy…that’s not nice. Like I said, we shouldn’t be criticizing either man’s service.
TLove (b8e7b4) — 7/1/2008 @ 9:50 amIt isn’t criticizing Kerry’s service (I don’t criticize it, I make fun of it) to point out Clark’s rank (no pun intended) hypocrisy.
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 7/1/2008 @ 10:00 am#132
love2008 (0c8c2c) — 7/1/2008 @ 10:08 amNice work LN Smithee. Have been laughing all day.
Like I have said on this thread, it is a big error for any of these war heros to tout their war experience and valor for political leverage. It opens things up that should have been better left closed. It reminds me of Hillary’s “Bosnia” war experience. No one challenged it the first time she brought it up. But when she kept saying it at every stop in an effort to boost her national security prifile, she was checked out and boom it exploded in her face. Kerry was a distinguished american war hero until 2004 when he was investigated and swift-boated. McCain should learn from their mistakes and not make too much out of his war credentials or its going to get really messy. Gen Clarke has just fired the first shot. There will be more blood.
love2008 (0c8c2c) — 7/1/2008 @ 10:24 am188, hey, Lovey, touting war experience is exactly what JFK did. You got a problem?
PCD (5c49b0) — 7/1/2008 @ 10:29 am#189
love2008 (1b037c) — 7/1/2008 @ 10:52 amMy post is very clear. i dont see what your problem is. Like I said, touting ones war credentials for political advantage opens it up for attacks. Unless you want to read other meanings into what i said.
I think it advanatages McCain to have people attack his military service. Clark just fired the first shot and the only one bleeding is him. The wheels on the bus go round and round…
Pablo (99243e) — 7/1/2008 @ 11:05 amlove2008 wrote: Nice work LN Smithee. Have been laughing all day.
Nice snippy quip in lieu of an actual response. But if that’s your way of coping with the harsh truth that Obama’s nothing more than the world’s coolest empty suit, who am I to judge?
L.N. Smithee (ecc5a5) — 7/1/2008 @ 1:43 pmlove2008 wrote: Like I have said on this thread, it is a big error for any of these war heros to tout their war experience and valor for political leverage. It opens things up that should have been better left closed. It reminds me of Hillary’s “Bosnia” war experience. No one challenged it the first time she brought it up. But when she kept saying it at every stop in an effort to boost her national security prifile, she was checked out and boom it exploded in her face.
You’re wrong. The MSM was sitting on archived video evidence that Hillary and Chelsea’s landing in Bosnia was nothing like they described it, and they were just biding their time while she was still a viable candidate for the Dem nomination, not wanting to damage her candidacy just in case.
They finally aired the telltale video when she resisted backing out of the race in favor of Obama, who was on the brink of wrapping up the majority of electoral votes.
L.N. Smithee (b048eb) — 7/1/2008 @ 2:08 pmWhen we speak about John McCain and his service we need to look at the long shadow that it throws. If John McCain is elected (from my mouth the G-ds’ Ears) we will have one of the few active politicians who has Children serving their country in the Military.
paul from fl (4dd8c4) — 7/1/2008 @ 2:29 pmMcCains oldest boy is a Midshipman in Annapolis. With that free education comes a duty to serve your country. You know, like put your life, in some way shape or form, on the line.
2. Just because the word “hate” isn’t listed there doesn’t mean that “contempt” doesn’t mean hate. This is the dictionary, not the thesaurus; the dictionary doesn’t list every single word that “contempt” means. The thesaurus always lists more words.
1.)If you tried arguing that contempt and hate were analogous words with a linguist they’d laugh in your face. Contempt includes a sense of disdain and superiority that hate lacks.
2.)The fact that a word is listed as a synonym for another does not mean that they have interchangeable meanings. It means that they share a general sense. Ire and fury are both synonymous with anger and yet have entirely seperate and distinct meanings.
Taltos (4dc0e8) — 7/1/2008 @ 2:38 pm…Then we need to thank his younger son who is serving as an Enlisted Marine. Who has his life on the line too. So, when we speak of John McCains service to his country and the depth of his commitment to Americas foreign policy, I think it’s fair to say that he has and will do due diligence in making those decisions.
paul from fl (4dd8c4) — 7/1/2008 @ 2:40 pmIf McCain tells me that we may have to stay in Iraq I know that he doesn’t make that statement lightly or with thought to the impact it may make on his personal life.
So, don’t compare John McCain to any of the spoon-fed Democrats they put up against him, John McCain , and by his example, his family has paid and are willing to pay a dear price for this country.
Being American and voting for a Democrat is like being a Chicken and voting for Col. Sanders…..yeeeesh
#193
love2008 (0c8c2c) — 7/1/2008 @ 4:43 pmThey finally aired the telltale video when she resisted backing out of the race in favor of Obama, who was on the brink of wrapping up the majority of electoral votes.
What!
love2008 wrote: What!
C’mon, love, you’re not stupid. You think nobody at ABC, CBS, and NBC thought, “Say, you know, we had reporters covering Hillary and Chelsea landing in Bosnia, and Sinbad is supporting Obama and saying she’s full of it. What say we just show the tape, and settle this?”
L.N. Smithee (0931d2) — 7/1/2008 @ 5:00 pm#198
love2008 (0c8c2c) — 7/1/2008 @ 5:45 pmI dont doubt that they had the tape. What I find far reaching is your explanation that it was released because Hillary refused to concede to obama and it was released to end the fight. You actually believe they thought that one tape would have pushed Hillary out of the race? Come on LN, you are not stupid!
Let me get this straight. Some dumb ho can go on Fox News and talk about Obama’s ‘terrorist fist jab’ and nobody bats an eye. Meanwhile, a retired Army general questioning how being a POW qualifies someone to be the President is apparently the greatest insult a Republican has ever heard. That about right?
Anybody still buying into the liberal media myth after watching this circus over the past few days?
Levi (74ca1f) — 7/1/2008 @ 11:46 pmHo? Based on what, her being a female?
Levi, you find new ways to be a disgusting idiot every day.
Foxfier (15ac79) — 7/2/2008 @ 12:44 amFar be it from me to support JSMcC, but I don’t think people are saying “POW == Presidential.” What they are saying is that character counts, and his POW experience shows something about his character.
What the Democrat Party is saying, on the other hand is, “Never mind about John Kerry. Service to country is *not* something to be proud of. Using community service to fatten the wallets of cronies is.”
steve miller (e5eca4) — 7/2/2008 @ 12:51 amI see Levi’s racism is on display again.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/2/2008 @ 8:08 amLevi wrote:
Your slur aside: “Nobody”?
Speaking only for myself, you’re wrong. It’s about two things.
First: A retired Army general transforming himself into a partisan political whore (or should I say “ho?”).
Nothing that Clark said about Kerry’s service qualifying him for POTUS in 2004 doesn’t apply just as well to McCain in 2008 (if not make McCain MORE qualified). And you know Clark would have been defending McCain against attack from Republicans had he agreed to be Kerry’s running mate. But because McCain has an “R” next to his name and not a “D”, Clark dismisses the standards by which he deemed Kerry fit for CIC, and raised them to a new standard that neither Kerry nor McCain could meet. On the other hand, he ignores the fact that the guy he IS endorsing for President has NO military experience, no executive experience, and no track record to recommend him for the White House.
Second: It’s about Barack Husseinfeld Lightworker Obama, the guy who was supposed to be above the partisan sniping, saying one thing and doing another by being slow to condemn Clark, his highest-profile brass toady. Yeah, that’s integrity. That’s leadership. That’s honesty. That’s “change.” That’s Obama.
BTW – your status as the site’s favorite whipping (or, more accurately, whipped) boy is being challenged by jharp.
L.N. Smithee (e1f2bf) — 7/2/2008 @ 12:07 pmSPQR wrote: I see Levi’s racism is on display again.
No, not racism, sexism. E.D. Hill, who made the mysterious “terrorist fist jab” remark, is a white woman.
Ms. Hill, FWIW, has magnificent gams. I don’t know why she’s named “E.D.” when she’s the cure. 😉
L.N. Smithee (a0b21b) — 7/2/2008 @ 12:25 pmMs. Hill, FWIW, has magnificent gams. I don’t know why she’s named “E.D.” when she’s the cure.
Comment by L.N. Smithee — 7/2/2008 @ 12:25 pm
Dude….win!
Foxfier (15ac79) — 7/2/2008 @ 2:04 pmED Hill is every bad name in the book. But that isn’t the point. The point is she and others can get away with openly opining about how much of a terrorist they think Barack Obama is, and a retired general that happens to be a liberal supposedly isn’t allowed to wonder why being a POW makes you automatically qualified to be the President.
Levi (74ca1f) — 7/2/2008 @ 4:28 pmWhat do I give a shit?
Levi (74ca1f) — 7/2/2008 @ 4:29 pmLevi – Try to get Clark’s narrative right at least. He was talking about McCain’s overall service, not just the POW part. That retard Aravosis was focused on the POW part.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 7/2/2008 @ 4:42 pmHamas, Kim Jong Il, Bill Ayers, Jeremiah “God damn America/The US of KKK” Wright, Tony Resko, ad nauseum.
“Birds of a feather”, dontchaknow… (Shorthand for “A man is known by the company he keeps”.)
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 7/2/2008 @ 4:54 pmAmusing how fast the Democrats ditch a theme. In 2004, four months in Swift boats in Vietnam was a qualification for President important enough to have a multi-media show at the Convention, now six years in Vietnamese prison camp having the crap beat out of you while pieces of crap like Obama’s buddy Bill Ayers was trying to bomb the United States isn’t.
Funny how that works. One might think that the Democrats are dishonest.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/2/2008 @ 5:17 pmLevi wrote: The point is she and others can get away with openly opining about how much of a terrorist they think Barack Obama is, and a retired general that happens to be a liberal supposedly isn’t allowed to wonder why being a POW makes you automatically qualified to be the President.
Yet again, I say: Try to keep up, Leev.
Here’s what I wrote again. Tell me which part of it you dispute:
BTW, Levi, you are a perfect illustration of what Clark and the Obama campaign intended to do to slime McCain.
You just furthered a bastardized version of Clark’s actual statement. He didn’t say anything untoward about McCain’s POW status ; that was that douche Aravosis talking. Funny how you melded a blogger’s slimy accusation with a dishonest remark from Obama’s most decorated sock puppet.
When it comes to insidious bullschtuff, that’s infinitely more damaging than E.D. Hill’s “terrorist fist jab” remark, which is easily dismissable. So how does it feel to be akin to a “dumb ho,” Leev?
L.N. Smithee (b048eb) — 7/3/2008 @ 11:27 amAhh, if only Barack I-Polished-That-Knob-So-Carefully-That-Now-I-Am-The-Ruler-Of-the Queen’s-Navy Obama would attack McCain’s military service.
nk (16accd) — 7/3/2008 @ 11:46 amWhats up?
futurama-leela439 (43f374) — 7/19/2008 @ 4:12 pmfuff fuff
furfural structure furfural structure
I can give the link to very useful site.
See you.
Whats up?
futurama-leela384 (43f374) — 7/19/2008 @ 11:03 pmfuruba hentai furuba hentai
gabriela sabatini biography gabriela sabatini biography
I have an information on this theme as well!
Dont forget me.