This isn't the sort of thing society grows out of. It's the sort of thing that society grows into
Quote of the day
 Our writers |
 |
John McCainWhy should I vote for him?
Submitted on Thu, 2008-05-01 14:46
1. He's a Maverick
1. He's a Maverick politician that is not beholden to the right or left. 2. He's NOT Clinton. 3. He's NOT Obama. 4. He has more foreign policy experience than all the others combined. 5. He's the one with most promising ability to unite Left and Right to meet the common challenges of the economy and global jihadist enemy. Those are pretty good credentials, don't you think? Sounds like a rather
Sounds like a rather ridiculous list to me. The lady asks a serious quesiton and that's how you respond?
The question is wide-open
The question is wide-open and no offense intended to Candace, but I think I treated it with as much seriousness as it was worth and probably more serious than many people who will cast a vote. How many people will vote racial or gender identity instead of the issues? A vote is a vote and motivation runs the gamut. For a starting point in discussion, my list is as good as anyone elses. On the other hand, if the question is so "serious" that you didn't care for my list, where's the "serious" list that you offered? Hmmm? I must have missed it.
Too soon Mike, let's wait
Too soon Mike, let's wait until both parties have a nominee then we can properly evaluate their policies. 
Too Soon?
How long
Too Soon?
How long should we wait -- until the night before the election? John McCain IS the Republican nominee. And as for Hilary vs. Obama, there doesn't seem to be much to separate the two, as far as substance goes. People will be choosing on style, it seems, and whether they like young, African American Obama, with his hackneyed message of change, or staid and stodgy Hillary, with her people skills and baggage-laden presumptive First Husband.
HH I say we wait until a week
I say we wait until a week after the election has passed. Then we'll be able to put forward the name of a good candidate who everyone who didn't vote could have voted for. Sounds fair to me Why Change Custom
Why Change Custom Now? JB: "I say we wait until a week after the election has passed. then we'll... put forward the name of a good candidate" Second guessing is the custom on OD. Haven't you noticed? a maverick with a socialist
a maverick with a socialist agenda? John McCain has a proud record of common sense stewardship of our nation's rich natural heritage. Along with his commitment to clean air and water, and to conserving open space, he has been a leader on the issue of global warming with the courage to call the nation to action on an issue we can no longer afford to ignore.
America has been blessed with a rich and diverse natural heritage. In the tradition of his hero, Theodore Roosevelt, John McCain believes that we are vested with a sacred duty to be proper stewards of the resources upon which the quality of American life depends. John McCain believes that America's economic and environmental interests are not mutually exclusive, but rather inextricably linked. Our economic prospects depend greatly upon the sustainable use of ample and unspoiled natural resources. A clean and healthy environment is well served by a strong economy. History shows that poverty is a poor steward. I believe it was an
I believe it was an intelligent man - or maybe you - who said once: 'Hindsight is 20/20'... Let's face it tt: The only reason why we're here bitching about current or past events is because we're bored with our day-job ;-) Iron Mike wrote:He's the one
He's the one with most promising ability to unite Left and Right to meet the common challenges of the economy and global jihadist enemy.
Why would you say that? reasons to vote
You forgot
reasons to vote You forgot his broadcasting experience. I'm sure Hanoi Radio will provide a reference The Audition
BigC(RAP);
A
The Audition BigC(RAP); A reference from Radio Hanoi? Sure McCain passed his auditon for Radio Hanoi after two years solitary confinement (during which his hair turned white) and weekly torture which left him unable to raise his arms. At least he's not as bitter as you.
Quote:McCain passed his
McCain passed his auditon for Radio Hanoi after two years solitary
confinement (during which his hair turned white) and weekly torture which left him unable to raise his arms. I'm sure his medical records would confirm that - Don't you wonder why he refuses to release them?
Quote: I'm sure his medical
I'm sure his medical records would confirm that - Don't you wonder why he refuses to release them?
Yes. I'm confident the medical records WILL confirm that, along with the fact both arms were broken in the high speed ejection from his aircraft when it was shot down. McCain's treatment as a POW is well documented and so is his heroism. Whatever political differences people may have with him, he is a man of courage and conviction, tested in ways you (and I) have never been. He deserves your respect. Your failure to show it says more about you, than him. McCain stated that his medical records will be released in May after the results of his cancer check-up at the end of April. Negative Waves;
BC;
You
Negative Waves; BC; You really should learn to acquire a more positive attitude. To paint a former POW's health problems derisively says more about you than the man. TT
My father was a POW.
TT My father was a POW. The difference between him and McCain is that he didn't broadcast for the Germans in order to save his skin. Apples And
Apples And Oranges BC; You're father was a POW who did not broadcast for the Nazis? The questions are obvious. 1) Was your father an officer? 2) Did they ask him? 3) How long did they torture him? 4) Which camp was he in? 5) Why would the Nazis have wanted you father to broadcast for them when they had Lord Haw Haw? 5) What were the life long physical effects of his confinement? Wrong questions TT.
The
Wrong questions TT. The question is why did JM broadcast for the North Vietnamese? Because they tortured him? You can believe that if you like. I suspect it was simply to get better treatment.
Quote: You can believe
You can believe that if you like. I suspect it was simply to get better treatment.
Perhaps you are projecting your own likely response onto McCain. If that's the case, McCain is a much better man than you. If he wanted better treatment, he would not have declined his captor's offer of an early release. Instead, he refused an early release unless his fellow POWs were released as well. That does not sound like the opportunistic McCain you choose to protray. Comparing the treatment of POWs by two very different enemys is patently fallacious. These are much different wars, different cultures, and different circumstances. Duck and Weave
IM;
BigC(RAP)
Duck and Weave IM; BigC(RAP) is pointblank avoiding scrutiny about his father being a POW. I wonder why.
What a hypocrite!
After
What a hypocrite! After taking me to task for attacking dead collaborators he comes up with this:
BigC(RAP) is pointblank avoiding scrutiny about his father being a POW. I wonder why.
My father fought in a real war against a real evil. He fought as a soldier against soldiers. He was so badly wounded that he was lucky to survive at all - that only because his burned and naked body had one tuft of of blond hair and one blue eye remaining so he was assumed by the germans to be one of their own. Despite his injuries he was proud to have done his duty as a soldier in making himself as much a nuisance as possible to the Germans - the duty of every Prisoner of War. McCain fought in a war to prevent a peasant people gaining their independence. He dropped bombs from thousands of feet up on defenceless women and chidren. When he was captured he made himself as useful to the enemy as he could to save his own skin.
The only truth BigC
The only truth BigC knows about his father's experience is what he's been told. Chances are BigC's father was not a high profile POW like McCain who suffered extra as the result of his family connections. It was more important to the enemy to exploit him. I'm confident his father whould be much more charitable in his assessment of McCain's experience as a POW. One thing I know about those who've been unlucky enough to have been in this position is their common empathy and bond of brotherhood that would make criticism such as BigC unthinkable and dishonorable. Unlike BigC, they understand that when you serve your country, you don't have the luxury of picking your wars. I suggest they would confine their disagreement to the issues, since his heroism as a POW is already well documented. Something In
Something In Common; BigC(RAP); You father and John McCain have a few things in common in addition to being POWs ( You still haven't said if your father was an officer, what camp he was in, or if the Germans wanted him to replace Lord Haw Haw). 1)They both went to aid an ally unwilling to fight for their own country. For McCain it was the Vietnamese. For your father, it was the French. 2) Both men fought an aggressor. Hitler started WWII in Europe. Ho started the war in South Vietnam. 2) Both men were proud to serve their countries (at least I hope your father was). Bombing Defenseless Civilians? You are confusing the US with your own country. McCain flew fighter bombers with precision munitions. The rules of engagement over the North forbade bombing Hanoi and Haiphong. It was still an air war but Johnson interrupted it on more than one occasion to try and make peace. Targeting defenseless civilians was a British specialty British bombers couldn't drop bombs within five miles of a target in WWII. YOUR GOVERNMENT adopted a policy of mass bombing of German cities at night to break civilian morale. The US opted for daylight precision bombing of military targets. I don't recall Americans gaining nicknames like "Butcher Bomber" Harris. "A Peasant People Gaining Their Independance"? Sounds romantic, but it's nonsense. Vietnam's peasants had no say in the war. The war was a power struggle on an international scale (North Vietnam, China, USSR vs. South Vietnam and the US). It was way past their understanding. South Vietnam was a rural country and very poor. The average Vietnamese peasant cared more about his village than his country, or independance. They gained nothing from either side. They didn't like the Saigon government abusing them; but they didn't dance in the streets when the VC took food and men either.They were victimized as much by the VC as Saigon. Even the communists made no bones about indoctrination of the peasants. As for peasant loyalty to one side or the other, more Vietnamese served with the ARVN than the Vietcong. Much of the VC was wiped out in 1968 during Tet. Peasants Gaining Their Independance? More romantic nonsense. Vietnam was not "liberated" by a peasant uprising, in l975. It was conquered by a mechanized army from the north which rolled over an exhausted South like Hitler rolled over Poland. It was not an oxcart that broke down the gates of the presidential palace in Saigon. It was a T34. Before, during and after "Independance" those Vietnamese who could flooded out of the country, many at the risk of their lives. I have met many of them in California. They felt anything but liberated. Just a few years ago they rioted when a shop owner tried to place a picture of Ho in his store. I always sigh when people talk about "gaining indepence" with the fall of Saigon as if that was the end of the story. I wonder why they ignore the aftermath. If "independance" under communism was so great, why have the Vietnamese been jumping with both feet into capitalism in the last decade? The youth of Vietnam don't care about the war. Veterans have become bitter. Your posts are based more on hysteria than facts. TT
I haven't answered
TT I haven't answered your impertinent questions because they have no bearing whatsoever on the argument. For what it's worth he was not a commissioned officer - though I'm not sure why that's relevant. He was in several camps, mostly officers camps because of his injuries and mostly in Poland. I have no idea of the names of any of them. What on earth has that to do with the argument? The last question is not even impertinent - just silly. Your little precis of the war in Vietnam is (as usual) garbage from top to bottom but one piece of garbage crowns the tip: "Hitler started WWII in Europe. Ho started the war in South Vietnam." I'm going to regret this again but: Exactly how did he do that Terry?
BigC,
You want something
BigC, You want something that bears on the argument? How about this American Hero who was McCain's cell mate for 5 years as a POW. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3868124.ece John McCain urged to play up his personal life and war heroics
When George “Bud” Day first set eyes on John McCain in a Vietnamese prisoner of war camp, he doubted his new cell-mate would survive until the following morning, let alone return to America to become a senator and eventually a presidential candidate. “He was emaciated and puny and although he was a young man his hair had turned white,” Day recalled last week. “He had obviously been starved. I was positive he’d die.” Day was in no great shape himself. A US air force pilot, he had been shot down over Vietnam in August 1967 and badly injured when ejected from his plane. He was captured, then escaped, was caught again but refused to surrender. The Vietnamese shot him and later bayoneted his left leg to discourage further escapes. Yet somehow, against overwhelming odds, the two cell-mates survived monstrous torture, nursed each other through agonising injuries and forged a lifelong friendship that added an intriguing twist last week to the 2008 presidential campaign. While McCain’s experiences as a captured navy pilot during the Vietnam war are scarcely a secret, the Republican candidate rarely discusses in public the details of his wartime captivity. Nor does he ever talk about the military service of his son, a US marine who has fought in Iraq. McCain’s reticence, born of both a natural modesty and a fierce determination to protect his family’s private life, has begun to worry prominent Republican strategists, who believe the endless Democratic feuding between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama has opened the White House door to McCain – provided he opens up his own life to the kind of intimate scrutiny that presidential voters have come to expect. Those worries were aired last week in a striking commentary by Karl Rove, President George W Bush’s former campaign manager, who has often been accused of masterminding the vicious campaign of character assassination that knocked McCain out of the 2000 presidential race. Day has many other stories of unimaginable stress and stirring comradeship. The point, Rove argued, was that these were stories Americans should hear. “I have heard things about Senator McCain that were deeply moving and politically troubling,” he said. “Troubling because it is clear that Mr McCain is one of the most private individuals to run for president in history.” American voters “want to know more about a candidate than policy positions”, he continued. McCain’s aides have been politely keeping their distance from Rove, who is seen by some to be either looking for a job in a McCain administration or, at the very least, trying to ensure that he would not be shunned by a new Republican White House. Last week Day, who is still sprightly at 83, was happy to oblige with tales of derring-do from the Hanoi Hilton and other prison camps. “John has always felt on all kinds of issues a strong determination to do things on his own terms,” Day said. “That got him through Vietnam and I don’t think it will change. His son Jim saw combat in Iraq, but he has always refused to use his children in his campaign. Personally, I find that admirable.” To Rove, the calculating strategist, it may be admirable but it makes no political sense. “Candidates who are uncomfortable sharing their interior lives limit their appeal,” he warned. Yes. Here's an opportunity for you to trash one American hero supporting another. Who's Being
Who's Being Impertinent? BigC(RAP); You throw out wild accusations about John McCain and then call scrutiny "impetinence"? Sheesh. Skipping lightly over McCain's suffering as a POW when your own father was one is impertinent and sad. I have the right to disagree with you and I will exercise it. You left the veracity of your father's plight open to question when you dodged simple questions about him. You still haven't answered them. Vietnam? It is your privilege to maintain romantic notions about simple peasants fightng the US to "gain their freedom". It simply isn't accurate. Your only piece of scrutiny in my text about the war is Ho Chi Minh's decision to start the war in the South. It is true. Ho and the leadership in the North ordered the war at the moment they thought the government in the South was ready to fall. There was communist network in the South waiting. The war went from a peasant revolt, to a guerrila war, to a mechanized war. I am surprised you ignore the NVA, the Ho Chi Mihn Trail, the Cambodian sanctuaries and the mechanized invasions in l974 and l975. It must be the romantic in you. The US first supported the South with weapons and advisers and later with troops. The Russians and Chinese supported the North with weapons and advisors. Recent histories have revealed the Chinese stationed 30,000 troops in the North to help man the SAM missles. The North controlled the war, not the peasants in the South.
TT's questions are not
TT's questions are not 'impertinent' at all. YOU brought up the topic of your father and what he did or did not do, so it is quite legitimate for TT to ask more questions and to comment upon what you have said. If you don't like TT and IronMike asking those sorts of questions then perhaps you should not have used your fathers experiences (of which you merely know what he has chosen to tell you) to justify your attack on John McCann. To be blunt, 'Put up, Shut up or withdraw the remarks'. Simple as that.
Owly
Quote:TT's questions
Owly TT's questions are not 'impertinent' at all. YOU brought up the topic of your father and what he did or did not do, so it is quite legitimate for TT to ask more questions and to comment upon what you have said.
[....] To be blunt, 'Put up, Shut up or withdraw the remarks'. Simple as that. Well first of all Owly I have "put up" as the questions were answered in my last post so perhaps I'm not the one who should shut up. Had I been using my father's POW status as a claim to some expertise on the issue then perhaps it may have been appropriate to dig deeper for details. But that was not the case. The statement was in response to this: "To paint a former POW's health problems derisively says more about you than the man." This implies that I was in some way ignorant of realities to which TT considers himself to be privy and it was perfectly in order to correct this. I do not know the details of TT's combat experience (though it must be vast considering the weight with which he throws it around) nor would I be so impertinent as to press him for such details. |
|
Go Read... |
Posts: 551
Joined: 2005-12-24