NYT tries to demean McCain’s experiences
I’ll tell you what, if the New York Times is trying to drive me more solidly into the McCain camp, they’re doing a great job – and what they’re telling veterans about our service, I won’t be alone. Matt Bai writes “The McCain Doctrine” in the upcoming Times Magazine.
Bai begins by pointing out that McCain happens to be the only Senator who served in Vietnam who also supports our efforts in the Middle East – as opposed to Kerry, Webb and Hagel – so that makes his opinion suspect. Bai neglects to mention that the other three are bald-faced opportunists who consistently subscribe to the politically expedient position at a given moment. Not that McCain doesn’t do the same, but at least as far as national security, McCain has been consistent. Kerry, Webb and Hagel have been cheap whores on national security.
Since none of these three would say anything to Bai against McCain, Bai went to Max Cleland – the guy who says he lost his last election because his patriotism was questioned by President Bush.
“McCain is my friend and brother, and I love him dearly,” Max Cleland, Georgia’s former Democratic senator, told me when we talked last month. “But I think you learn something fighting on the ground, like me and John Kerry and Chuck Hagel did in Vietnam. This objective of ‘hearts and minds’? Well, hello! You didn’t know which heart and mind was going to blow you up!”
So the Battalion Signal Officer who blew himself up with an errant grenade inside the protection of a fortified fire base on his way to have a few beers with buddies claims he had some special experience that a guy who was in a POW camp for five-and-a-half years couldn’t have when it comes to national security. I’m not in the habit of disparaging veterans’ service, but people who start throwing crap need to understand it flies both ways.
Of course, Bai doesn’t go into that much detail about Cleland’s injuries – probably because McCain is the target, and Cleland has already proved himself to be a crybaby when people bring up the actual story of his injuries. Checking on the details of Cleland’s injuries, I found this on Wikipedia about Cleland’s political defeat;
Voters were allegedly influenced by Chambliss ads that featured Cleland’s likeness on the same screen as Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, ads that Cleland’s supporters claim questioned his commitment to homeland security. The ads were removed after strong bi-partisan protest from prominent politicians including Republicans like John McCain and Chuck Hagel.
So McCain stuck up for Cleland against the ads that were run against Cleland, but Cleland is unwilling to return the favor apparently and stabs McCain in the back by insinuating that McCain’s experience, flying planes at 15,000 feet and then locked in prison makes him retarded on the war in Iraq.
Bai goes on to recite the fact that after McCain returned from the war, since he was locked away the only way McCain could learn about the war was from books – but that’s the same way that all of these dippy professors became such experts on the war since they dodged the draft and avoided service in Vietnam. So how did that influence McCain differently?
The Vietnam veterans say McCain didn’t experience the war the same as they did and that’s why he differs from them on this war, but McCain did experience the war the same as the so-called intellectuals who sat out the war on hairy-legged hippie chicks and McCain differs from that class, too. You can’t have it both ways, Bai.
Maybe the truth is that McCain’s experiences, the physical and the intellectual experiences, have made him the only one in the two groups that might be right. But, of course, Bai would say that, would he?
Nope, Bai goes off on a tangent after an interview with McCain in which McCain gives him reasons for NOT using US military force in places like Zimbabwe and Burma. So Bai encapsulates “The McCain Doctrine” as;
In other words, to paraphrase Robert Kennedy, while most politicians looked at injustice in a foreign land and asked, “Why intervene?” McCain seemed to look at that same injustice and ask himself, “Why not?”
Well, what’s the problem with that? “Why” and “why not” intersect at the same point regardless from which direction you reach that point.
The article is eight pages of irrelevant crap, typical Leftist navel-gazing that borders on the Jay Rockefeller bit on McCain;
Rockefeller believes McCain has become insensitive to many human issues. “McCain was a fighter pilot, who dropped laser-guided missiles from 35,000 feet. He was long gone when they hit.
“What happened when they [the missiles] get to the ground? He doesn’t know. You have to care about the lives of people. McCain never gets into those issues.”
Except this time, Bai claims that because John McCain was insulated from the war because of his good fortune to have been captured and stuffed in a jail cell for over five years he just doesn’t understand warfare and politics.
h/t The American Pundit and Hot Air.
Jonn we didn’t have laser guided missiles during the Viet Nam war. I knew I had seen the info before so looked it up.If memory serves me right we did do a lot of carpet bombing.Here’s the link.
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/rockefeller-smears-mccain-feigns-apology
Typical Slimes hit piece.
The Slimes showed their true colors by giving moveon.org that cut-rate discount on their full page “General Petraeus Betray Us” ad.
So, Georgia’s own one-armed bandit has been resurected to slam McCain, huh? Well, if anyone would care to check, John McCain was shot down in an A4 Skyhawk. “A” being the key, as it’s the designation for ATTACK aircraft, which does so by it’s characteristic low flight capabilities. And, no, we didn’t have laser-guided bombs in VN.
I don’t like NYT or McCain, but right now I’ll back McCain every step of the way against NYT. What a bunch of creeps.
No low is too low.
[…] Join me, why don’t you, in your hatred of NY Times… here. […]
Well, I have to say Obama has a much stronger background in military operations. After all, he once played basketball in a Marine T shirt.
Well, I for one am not convinced that McCain’s Vietnam experiences have made him any more knowledgeable when it comes to national security.
The conflicting stories of his tenure in a POW camp notwithstanding, his steadfast commitment to intervening overseas is question numero uno on my list. If anything, his time in a POW camp has increased his appetite for foreigner’s blood.
Anyone who asks “why not?” on the question of intervention is either mentally unstable or has no concept of unintended consequences.
Finally, Jonn, Wikipedia? It wasn’t enough to convince you that America supplied Iraq with materials to build and sustain a chemical weapons program…but it’s reliable enough to use to reference political defeat? Hmmmm…
How dare you question the validity of a “real american heroes” time in a POW camp Allen!
What is your “conflicting” stories garbage? The French interview of McCain? Held while he was STILL a POW? Gee, go figure McCain didn’t say then that he had been tortured.
McCain, btw, was shot down in 1967. The first use of laser-guided bombs did not occur until 1968. The A-4 Skyhawk of 1967 was not equipped to use laser-guided bombs, and McCain was shot down during a low level bombing attack – which was a tactic used to enhance accuracy of the attack, while minimizing collateral damage.
Allen, I think you are off your anti-BDS meds. “Appetite for foreigner’s blood”? Been watching too many Dracula movies?
And let’s not forget to mention his second Career in Congress.
Now, for the best part, I shall taunt you a second time. Go and boil your bottom, you son of a silly person.
509th:
You might want to re-think your attack about McCain not having an appetite for foreigners blood, consider this quote from McCain himself.
“I hate the gooks,” McCain said yesterday in response to a question from reporters aboard his campaign bus. “I will hate them as long as I live.”
But I am sure he is indifferent towards Arabs/Muslims.
I will never question the actions of a fellow vet when I didn’t even know them personally, but quotes about hating gooks like the one above are a disturbing to say the least.
But I believe most people (like Jonn) on this site weren’t even McCain supporters until recently. They are merely “picking the lesser of two evils”. I refer back to my earlier comments on voting and why this is a bad idea.
Who are the “gooks” (obviously the Vietnamese)? And why does he hate them (obviously due to the torture he suffered at their hands). If he hated Arabs or Muslims (not always the same thing), he would not have objected to Guantanamo.
As to being “indifferent” to them? So what, he’s running for the President of the United States, not the United Nations. And if indifference means he’s not bought off by them (as is Clinton and, I suspect, the current Bush), then that’s fine by me as well.
If you want some historical comparisons, FDR was an Anglophile, and practiced unlimited anti-submarine warfare against Germany as early as April 1940. We did not declare war on Germany until Dec. 11, 1941. Did that mean that FDR had an appetite for foreign blood?
Same war, different hemisphere, one of the U.S. Navy admirals, I think it was King, but I could be wrong, said that, at the end of the war, Japanese would only be spoken in Hell. Even though an official U.S.G. spokesman said it, did that mean that FDR or Truman had an appetite for foreign blood? Keep in mind that Truman authorized the use of nuclear weapons, and took us back to war in Korea.
I, myself, have been known to state that we should simply “Nuke them all.” But its a rhetorical statement, not an actual expression of a preferred military strategy. Do I have an appetite for foreign blood? No, I don’t. My father was a physician, and he routinely cut people open, but simply because he “spilled blood,” I wouldn’t characterize him in any was being “bloodthirsty.” Don’t be swayed by silly semantics.
“way” not “was” in the last paragraph. Damn, and I can’t blame it on beer this time!
Rooney Says:
I refer back to my earlier comments on voting and why this is a bad idea.
It’s our civic duty to vote. By not voting, you automatically forfeit your right to biotch about the government. 🙂
509 Bob…
“Go and boil your bottom” … I haven’t heard that one in a long, long, long time. Funny stuff – seriously!
You make some good points about our attitude towards our enemies in combat, and they are especially relevant when considering McCain and his experiences. Where I differ from McCain is that we branded him a hero – and for what? For bombing civilians? For withstanding torture? Killing civilians goes against International Law, and for that I cannot forgive McCain.
I agree with you about POW experiences. There’s simply too much material to weed through to get the straight scoop. I’m puzzled by McCain’s actions to block the release of his records, as well as his opposition to POW investigations (HR 3603), though.
Regarding FDR, he’s no saint. He’s among the worst Presidents we’ve ever had, definitely in the top five. To say FDR harbored bloodlust is an understatement – like Wilson, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and McCain, FDR never met a fight he didn’t like.
I’d sooner celebrate General Smedley Butler’s heroism than McCain’s (phony) heroism any day.
Rochester:
It is not our civic duty to vote. Casting a vote for a sub-standard candidate does not make you a good citizen nor does it fulfill your “civic duty. By voting for a candidate that wins, and takes the country closer and closer to bankruptcy makes you part of the problem.
509th:
I have a few questions for you and anyone else that would like to chime in, if McCain was such a model officer and served so honorably, why did he block POW investigations, why did block the release of his records, and why did he fail to make Admiral?
Bob Bakian Says:
It is not our civic duty to vote.
In the United States of America, it’s our first civic duty:
Pulling the Lever: Our First Civic Duty
I’m with alot of people in that I’m not a big fan of John McCain, but I plan on voting for him because he’s not going to surrender to the jihadists and he’s not a supporter of sacrificing pre-born babies to the altar of convenience.
Rochester- I don’t want to get too deep into the details here, but voting is not a civic duty. Google “voluntaryism” for more details. But to sum it up- the state relies on your vote to give it legitimacy and the appearance of consent. If you do not consent to the state’s confiscation of your personal and financial liberty then you shouldn’t vote. Even if you believe you are voting for the lesser of two evils.
Bob Bakian- You can probably answer your own question about why he didn’t make Admiral, but I’ll put it out there for everyone to consider. we are talking about a man who graduated almost last in his class at the Naval Academy, is known for having an uncontrollable temper, has the reputation of a maverick, and he never had major command. The fact that he even made O-6 is probably due to his “hero” image and his family connection.
Rochester:
Something a little bit more concrete than something from Leadership U would be a little more persuasive, show me where it explicitly states it’s every American’s civic duty to vote.
Like Rochester Veteran, McCain was not my first choice, or second choice, but was the least objectionable of the three remaining candidates (I don’t count Ron Paul).
As to McCain’s block on the investigation of POWs held by Vietnam AFTER the war? I didn’t agree with it then, and don’t agree with it now. Who knows, maybe that’s why he still hates the “gooks”? The Democrats had forced a surrender upon us in Vietnam (yes, yes, I know that Nixon came into Office with his “secret plan,” and fully shares the blame), and we abandoned hundreds of our servicemen to the communists. If the records (assuming that was what was contained) revealed that, what would we have done as a nation? Gone BACK to war in Vietnam?
Are you old enough to remember the Koh Tang incident under Ford? And the liberal hysteria that arose from sending in our Marines to recover the crew of a Cambodian-seized freighter (I think it was the Mayaguez, but its been a long time).
Just as an aside, do you also think that Vince Foster was murdered in the White House by an angry Hillary Clinton? I’m trying to establish the parameters of your susceptibility to conspiracy theories here. (On the other hand, I do think that Vince Foster killed himself in the White House.)
On the voting issue – it is your legal right to vote or not vote. The civic obligation to vote (as opposed to a Soviet-style legal DUTY to vote) arises from the desire to have the largest pool of citizens express their choice for whichever office is being voted upon. Legitimacy of the system is maintained by the expression of popular will, which is done is a controlled and restrained manner, hopefully divorced from the passions of any given momentary issue.
509th:
So if you are saying he is the least objectionable, he is objectionable nonetheless, so why cast a vote for that? Why not write in a candidate that you think would best support our liberties and security, or a candidate whose values coincide with your beliefs rather than someone that’s objectionable? My questions regarding McCain still stand.
Rooney said:
…the state relies on your vote to give it legitimacy and the appearance of consent
Sorry dude, if you want to buy into that stuff, go for it, but I don’t.
I may still not vote – depending upon who McCain selects as his running mate.
As for writing in some idiot’s name? Thats simply not responsible. But it a choice. I don’t choose it. Remember Ross Perot? FNU Anderson? The Green Party idiot whose name I can’t think of at the moment?
If all you want is anarchy, then go the Democratic Convention. But, even if anarchy wins, its us evil conservatives who cling to our guns and know how to use them. I’d put money on whose side won that battle.
509th:
So you would rather vote for an admittedly objectionable candidate rather than writing in someone you think would do the best job? Where in my post(s) did I say you needed to write in an idiot? I simply said you should write in the name of someone who would do the best job and whose values coincide with yours. What is it with the name calling and the schoolyard bully lingo? “Cling to our guns and know how to use them.” Maybe you like McCain more than you think…
Rochester- the greatest trick the state ever pulled is convincing the masses to vote for its own enslavement. I don’t want to condemn you for voting because I realize that will only strengthen your conviction. I only ask you to do some research and keep an open mind.
Rooney,
Thanks man, but I have a very clear view on what’s happenin’ now (remember the church 🙂 ).
I’m voting according to my conscience and for sure it’s not with great enthusiasm for the Presidential race, but as I stated in a previous post here, my two top issues are not surrendering to the Jihadists and defense of pre-born babies. Between McCain, Obama and Hillary, John McCain has sided with those issues.
I don’t put much into the conspiracy theory stuff…
Rochester-
Fair enough buddy. I’m glad to hear someone who has opinions on the issues and actually takes the time to come to a thoughtful decision, as opposed to just blindly following a the party (happens on both sides) or a person (seems to be working for Obama mostly).