John McCain: War Hero or North Vietnam's Go-To Collaborator?

[quote=“Dr. McCoy”]It’s been proven that those papers are all forged. See the watermark? No? Nobody can.[/quote] Watermark? Have you ever seen military records? There is no “watermark” on anything - just crap printed on paper. Even the “official” piece of paper outlining your entire record of service doesn’t have a notary stamp - just signatures & then it gets filed away in several different places. Where’s this “proof” of forgery?

As to the original post - the author’s qualifications to write about the Vietnam POW experience are … that his dad was a POW of the Japanese 30 years earlier?? WTF does that have to do with anything? How about listening to what the other POWs have to say about him instead? Watch “Return With Honor” if you can find it - PBS documentary from around 2000.

BTW, the Code of Conduct only takes people so far. It’s expected that everybody has a breaking point, and once you hit it, nobody holds anything against you. The POWs made a point of reminding each other that just because you broke once doesn’t mean you have to keep going. Start over the next time & make them work even harder to get something out of you. McCain took a lot more shit than some of the others by virtue of being the son of a famous admiral (and grandson of another one). He’s the one they wanted most for a talking head because they thought they’d get more propaganda mileage out of him. It’s despicable that somebody would attempt this tactic to discredit him or others like him.

His political beliefs alone are enough to keep me from voting for him this time (would have in 2000 if he’d beaten Bush), not to mention his age, health & choice of running mate. This is a smear job, and a bad one at that.

[quote=“sjhuz01”][quote=“Dr. McCoy”]It’s been proven that those papers are all forged. See the watermark? No? Nobody can.[/quote] Watermark? Have you ever seen military records? There is no “watermark” on anything - just crap printed on paper. Even the “official” piece of paper outlining your entire record of service doesn’t have a notary stamp - just signatures & then it gets filed away in several different places. Where’s this “proof” of forgery?

As to the original post - the author’s qualifications to write about the Vietnam POW experience are … that his dad was a POW of the Japanese 30 years earlier?? WTF does that have to do with anything? How about listening to what the other POWs have to say about him instead? Watch “Return With Honor” if you can find it - PBS documentary from around 2000.

BTW, the Code of Conduct only takes people so far. It’s expected that everybody has a breaking point, and once you hit it, nobody holds anything against you. The POWs made a point of reminding each other that just because you broke once doesn’t mean you have to keep going. Start over the next time & make them work even harder to get something out of you. McCain took a lot more shit than some of the others by virtue of being the son of a famous admiral (and grandson of another one). He’s the one they wanted most for a talking head because they thought they’d get more propaganda mileage out of him. It’s despicable that somebody would attempt this tactic to discredit him or others like him.

His political beliefs alone are enough to keep me from voting for him this time (would have in 2000 if he’d beaten Bush), not to mention his age, health & choice of running mate. This is a smear job, and a bad one at that.[/quote]
Shhhhhh
If I do a good job on this, maybe they’ll let me join the Republican party.

[quote=“Dr. McCoy”]Shhhhhh
If I do a good job on this, maybe they’ll let me join the Republican party.[/quote]

I’ve tried to ask Tigerman about the requirements to become a member of the Republican Party, i.e., whether it includes anything more than registering to vote as a Republican or saying “I’m a Republican”. My internet research so far indicates that one can only take the “blood oath” after passing a thorough review of the past 200 years of ancestors and the past 7 years of income statements. A good word from one’s evangelical pastor can help overcome a negative credit history.

Regarding John McCain, although the Hanoi-ing Candidate possibility is hanging out there, I think it’s likley that his latest major gaffes are the result of senility or alzheimers. 5-1/2 years into the Iraq war and he still has no idea who the Sunnis and Shi’ites are, which seems a bit stoopid… or senile, to be charitable. Sad thing is he also seems easily persuaded which does favor the Hanoi-ing Candidate possibility, and so the suggestion of Sarah Palin as a veep candidate was probably made after someone uttered one of the “trigger” words for acquiesence provided by his Hanoi masters… or by someone else who has simply figured out that the word “zucchini” and a snap of the fingers will be enough to get McCain agreeing to any kind of horsecrap.

I’m no Republican, that’s for sure, but you do yourself no favours ragging on a person’s military service to their country. It was wrong when the repubs did it to Kerry, and it’s equally wrong wanking on about McCain’s misery years in a Hanoi prison.

The reason there doesn’t appear to be any place for decency in the American political milieu is because that might mean public officials had to address core and real issues.

HG

The Republicans did themselves “lots of favors” when they went after Kerry’s war record, smearing him with lots of crap. My view is that McCain’s biggest problem is that he’s an emfeebled old man who doesn’t know what happens from one day to the next. One day he’s against the “Bridge to Nowhere” in Alaska, the next day, he’s gotten hitched up to Sarah Palin, the Porkbarrell Princess who was one of the BtN’s biggest proponents.

Remember how Reagan was at the end of his presidency, mumbling during questioning about the Iran-Contra affair that he “couldn’t remember” anything? My guess is that within one year of McCain getting elected, he’ll be spending his days on the South Lawn raking up leaves from morning to night, with Secret Service bodyguards artfully laying out leaves for him the night before.

[quote=“Huang Guang Chen”]I’m no Republican, that’s for sure, but you do yourself no favours ragging on a person’s military service to their country. It was wrong when the repubs did it to Kerry, and it’s equally wrong wanking on about McCain’s misery years in a Hanoi prison.

The reason there doesn’t appear to be any place for decency in the American political milieu is because that might mean public officials had to address core and real issues.

HG[/quote]
You are certainly right. Obama has not said anything against McCain’s military record. But when somebody does, it is so funny to see the very people that did it with such relish 4 years ago squeal like a stuck pig when the shoe is on the other foot. It’s irony on the base level, as Bill Hicks would say, but it’s a hoot. The same people who ragged on Kerry for having a wealthy wife, are now aghast that anyone would say anything about McCain’s beer-lady. It’s a hoot.

Well as then Australian PM Arthur Caldwell said: “two Wongs don’t make a white”, or something like that.

Mind you, the irony isn’t wasted on me either.

HG

…with lipstick.

Yinz really don’t get it, do yinz?

I love seeing the crap yinz Dims spew.

Have you noticed how the polls have changed ince yinz Dims started with your false attacks on Palin?

Haha!

Yinz really don’t get it, do yinz?

I love seeing the crap yinz Dims spew.

Have you noticed how the polls have changed ince yinz Dims started with your false attacks on Palin?

Haha![/quote]
For example?

Don’t you pay attention?

Gallup

Don’t you pay attention?

Gallup[/quote]
I meant example of the “Dims” false attacks on Palin.

IIRC the attacks on Kerry’s military record came from a 527 group, not the GOP. Bush distanced himself from them.

Just like the attacks on Palin come from DailyKos and The Huffington Post and Obama does the same.

Of course, there’s a massive hypocrisy here, in that both parties can simultaneously benefit from negative campaigning and probably share resources with the groups doing it on their behalf whilst at the same time officially condemning it.

IIRC the attacks on Kerry’s military record came from a 527 group, not the GOP. Bush distanced himself from them.

Just like the attacks on Palin come from DailyKos and The Huffington Post and Obama does the same.

Of course, there’s a massive hypocrisy here, in that both parties can simultaneously benefit from negative campaigning and probably share resources with the groups doing it on their behalf whilst at the same time officially condemning it.[/quote]
Yes, but now McCain has ads that he approves, but are lies. Like he says Obama called Palin a pig, or Obama wants to teach sex to kindergartners. If he’s ahead in the polls, why is he so desperate?

  1. There’s no “if” at this point in time.

  2. He just wants to show the Dims that he can play that game, too?

How could you miss this one?

A McCain-Palin ad has FactCheck.org calling Obama’s attacks on Palin “[color=#000000]completely false[/color]” and “[color=#000000]misleading[/color].” [color=#0000FF]That’s what we said, but it wasn’t about Obama[/color].

Yes I forgot. Since he was a POW and tortured so harshly, he can no longer raise his campaign out of the gutter.

[quote=“Dr. McCoy”]
How could you miss this one?

A McCain-Palin ad has FactCheck.org calling Obama’s attacks on Palin “[color=#000000]completely false[/color]” and “[color=#000000]misleading[/color].” [color=#0000FF]That’s what we said, but it wasn’t about Obama[/color].[/quote]

I did miss that one. But, so what? I didn’t claim that the Obamessiah, The One, himself stated the lies about Palin. I said the Dims were spreading the lies. I stand by that.

Here’s another thing… unlike some of you wide-eyed innocents, I’ve never believed that US politics is anything but dirty. Always has been, still is now. What amuses me, however, is that the Dims are apparently too stoopid to see how dirty politics almost always backfires on the Dims. So, keep at it, Dims. Stoop as low as you can… the false accusation that Palin used racist and misogynist statements to describe the Obamessiah and HRC respectively is a particularly good one! The American voters just eat those up!

I’m just here shaking my head at the stoopidity… and grinnin’, too. At least for now.

[quote=“Tigerman”][quote=“Dr. McCoy”]
How could you miss this one?

A McCain-Palin ad has FactCheck.org calling Obama’s attacks on Palin “[color=#000000]completely false[/color]” and “[color=#000000]misleading[/color].” [color=#0000FF]That’s what we said, but it wasn’t about Obama[/color].[/quote]

I did miss that one. But, so what? I didn’t claim that the Obamessiah, The One, himself stated the lies about Palin. I said the Dims were spreading the lies. I stand by that.

Here’s another thing… unlike some of you wide-eyed innocents, I’ve never believed that US politics is anything but dirty. Always has been, still is now. What amuses me, however, is that the Dims are apparently too stoopid to see how dirty politics almost always backfires on the Dims. So, keep at it, Dims. Stoop as low as you can… the false accusation that Palin used racist and misogynist statements to describe the Obamessiah and HRC respectively is a particularly good one! The American voters just eat those up!

I’m just here shaking my head at the stoopidity… and grinnin’, too. At least for now.[/quote]
I thought you meant Dims=Democrats, but it just means anyone who doesn’t agree with you. Stoopid=Stupid means anyone who doesn’t agree with you. Typical wingnut has to resort to name calling because he’s got nothing else.
The accusation that Palin used racist and misogynist statements is not false. It’s a true accusation. You can’t prove it wrong can you?