Slog - Comments on Good Point

Comment by Ziggity

Ziggity — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:05:18 -0800

I like this - too bad it couldn't be used in a political argument since suggesting that POWs lie, cheat, or distort their positions for financial gain is comparable to raping the Statue of Liberty.

Comment by Mr. Poe

Mr. Poe — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:05:53 -0800

Put me on TV. I'll say everything else too. You know, the stuff they tell you not to say.

Comment by Bellevue Ave

Bellevue Ave — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:06:41 -0800

That French whore was asking for it Ziggity.

Comment by Burkinaboy

Burkinaboy — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:24:13 -0800

@1: Tell that to Max Cleland.

Comment by flamingbanjo

flamingbanjo — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:31:08 -0800

Again, an even more relevant question: John McCain was in a better position than just about anybody to know whether or not such "enhanced interrogation" techniques are effective. So either they aren't, in which case his support for the use of such practices makes no sense, or they are, in which case his personal testimonials about how he never gave his captors any useful information are not truthful. He's either endorsing ineffective methods or he's lying about his own experiences.

Comment by monkey

monkey — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:57:51 -0800

Or both.

My hope is that all this niceness ends on debate night. Obama can call him on it all on live TV. Now wouldn't THAT be something to see?

Comment by John Bailo

John Bailo — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 16:00:49 -0800

Contrast that with cry-baby-Bama who winces if anyone asks him a hard question or calls him a "mean name".

Sheesh...

Comment by flamingbanjo

flamingbanjo — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 16:37:25 -0800

#7: Quotation marks are used to indicate that you are quoting somebody.

Comment by yuiop

yuiop — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 16:51:13 -0800

@8: Not necessarily. You can also use quotes to indicate that the phrase is used ironically. It seems correct here (except he should have put the period inside the quote, but who cares?).

Comment by M

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:01:29 -0800

For some reason I thought they broke his arm. Is that not true?

Comment by Will in Seattle

Will in Seattle — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:04:49 -0800

I can prove he was tortured.

Look, he already has delusions that he was Alexander S in the Gulag.

See?

Comment by papillon

papillon — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:24:32 -0800

You should put on the uniform first, before you see yourself as qualified to comment on someone's experience as a prisoner of war and attempt to make a mockery of it. Regardless of political affiliation or belief.

Comment by gnossos

gnossos — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:44:33 -0800

The point here isn't commenting on his experience papillon, it's commenting on what the dude has or hasn't learned from his experience.

And the contradiction is worth highlighting.

Comment by Darcy

Darcy — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:45:21 -0800

@12: If McCain has the right to present his POW experience as some sort of unquestionable testament to his character and as an inviolable reason to vote for him, then we all have the right to comment on and discuss that experience, regardless of civilian status.

Comment by keshmeshi

keshmeshi — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 18:31:12 -0800

@12,

Hypocrisy knows no uniform.

Comment by RainMan

RainMan — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:07:56 -0800

Even if he was waterboarded he still wouldn't qualify as a torture survivor by Bush's definition.

@12: Asking a politician who was a POW 40 years ago how that has affected his position on torture today is a fair question. And it is not disrespectful to other torture survivors, soldier or civilian, to call John McCain on a difficult position to defend. How does he define torture? If (God forbid) McCain becomes president, will he continue the Bush administration's policy of denying that the US government has tortured anyone by raising the definition of torture so high that even crucifixion wouldn't qualify? This is a relevant issue in this election and we as voters have a right to hear both candidates' position.

Comment by David

David — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:42:38 -0800

@12,

Besides, our kind host legally can't put that uniform on anyway...something else McCain supports.

Comment by Ferin

Ferin — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:49:52 -0800

I'd say the beat down they gave him where they broke most his limbs qualifies. I agree the guy's coasting on the torture thing to duck questions, but I think what he went through was hell.

Comment by Ron

Ron — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 20:38:15 -0800

Everyone wants soundbites rather than actually studying the candidate's position on things. Sure, sure, yeah, yeah, MCCAIN SUPPORTS TORTURE OHMIGOD. Or you could actually read and consider McCain's explanation of why he voted for or against whatever bill you're talking about, not that you have any idea about what the fuck you're talking about.

Comment by Karlheinz Arschbomber

Karlheinz Arschbomber — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:22:52 -0800

Torture is probably the only platform where McCain is not totally full of shit-

I'd avoid the topic if I were hoping to get President O in office.

Comment by papillon

papillon — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 00:51:42 -0800

In 2004 John Kerry was promoted as a war hero, having been awarded 3 Purple Hearts during 4 months of combat in Vietnam. He suffered no serious injuries and spent no time recovering in any hospital. Bush's military record became an issue as it did not measure up to John Kerry's service to his country. John McCain was bayoneted, suffered broken bones, no medical treatment, and spent over 5 years in a prisoner of war camp. And yet he is the one being accused of exploiting his military service for political gain. Makes sense to me.

Comment by Will in Seattle

Will in Seattle — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:46:02 -0800

and, @12, unlike you, I served.

Comment by papillon

papillon — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 03:33:29 -0800

@22

Your first post indicates otherwise.

Comment by Jen

Jen — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 04:30:06 -0800

Fly away, papillon.

Comment by Soupytwist

Soupytwist — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 08:28:45 -0800

@papillion - Your position that one must "wear the uniform" to criticize the military and those who carry out orders is bullshit.

Our military is made up of civilian volunteers, who ultimately answer to a civilian government. Anything less is Fascism. Are you advocating Fascism?

Comment by vitupera

vitupera — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 08:57:54 -0800

@25: Easy on the straw there. The idea that we can't put tough questions on policy to our own presidential candidates is total bullshit, which is why I don't want to see papillon worm out of this one by calling straw man argument.