Countdown: Was McCain's Steeler Story A Pander Too Far In Exploiting His POW Past?
By Nicole Belle Friday Jul 11, 2008 8:30am
Download | play 
Download | play (h/t BillW) (links fixed)
Countdown guest host Rachel Maddow (and again, I ask, why does this woman not have her own show?) and Newsweek's Richard Wolff don't get trapped in the weeds of John McCain's truthiness over his bizarre assertion in an interview that he recited the Steeler offensive line-up when asked about his Vietnamese captors for the names of his squadron when all his past recountings of this story (including his published memoirs and a TV movie based on the same), it was the Packers' line-up. Instead, they discuss whether this compulsive and near constant exploitation of his POW days during his campaign ends up diminishing the experience and inuring his audience to it.
MADDOW: The McCain campaign is claiming that the Steeler story is an honest mistake. One of many, it would seem. So our choices here appear to be a) Sen. McCain's memory is so bad that he can no longer be counted on to remember much of anything; or b) he will say pretty much anything to be President, even pander on the very issue that's supposed to define him: the years he spent in a prisoner of war camp. Which one of those options is politically palatable here?
WOLFF: ...What we're seeing here might be a memory problem, I somehow doubt it. I think this is a... another sign of the exploitation of this compelling story, this compelling piece of John McCain's life story. And the problem is that the more you repeat this stuff-and where you repeat it in error and in excess-the less powerful that becomes. I mean, the reason in 2000 his aides said he wasn't trying to talk about his life story-even when he was---was because they knew that it was somehow precious and to be brought out when he really needed it. The problem about bringing it out every time is that it's no longer powerful.
So, has McCain gone too far pandering out his POW experience? Has he cheapened it so much that he needs to stop talking about it?
Login or Register to post comments.
McCain could cheapen a lime-green, short-sleeve, 2-for-1 leisure suit from k-mart.
Hey, if he were really pandering he'd have made it the Dallas Cowboys.
In a speech at the Willy Wonka Chocolate Factory, in an effort to position himself to get the Oompa-Loompa vote, McCain said this of his captivity eperience: "When questioned about my squadron members, I gave them names of various candy bars: O. Henry, Reggie, Chunky, etc, etc..."
He will be reminiscing about the Hanoi Hotspurs soon.
'When I was a wee lad, we didnt have the luxury of things like POW camps, we used hotels instead'
I certainly have felt that way for a long time...Read more: http://www.tagg-lines.com/2008/07/shame-on-you-john-mccain.html
It's his choice, and he's decided to cheapen the very experience and sacrifice that General Clark honored and respected when he spoke about Mccain with Schieffer. So, I guess the real question is: will the MSM attack McCain for belittling and cheapening his sacrifice and service? Will Brian Williams and that moron Sanchez from CNN go on the air and do their "tsk-tsk"ing about it, the way they inveighed against Clark?
I'm waiting, but I'm not holding my breath.
And, yes, dammit, give Rachel her own show!
In Las Vegas, the planned McC*nt campaign speech never materialized, McNasty was too busy on a fourteen hour gambling and hooker binge.
Nobody noticed.
I wish they would get some different writers on Olberman's show. Their style is isn't engaging. Maddow does much better without them.
It's not so much that he's cheapened his story, it's that he's cheapened himself. Do "Rest Homes" still exist somewhere? Can somebody find one and send him to it? Because if it isn't crystal-clear by now that John is just another incompetent bumbler who flatters himself as being Presidential material, I don't know what would convince voters that he is.
Hey, when he's in Pittsburgh, its the Steelers. When he's in Green Bay it's the Packers. Stand up comedians do this kind of thing all the time. Change their jokes and stories to add local color.
Does make you wonder though, if the story is even true, or if he just thought it up, because it makes a great story. John is good at making things up, as long as it isn't about sex or birth control. His Victorian sensibilities just won't let him go there.
Football teams are like countries and religious factions to the elderly and infirm,
easily confused, thats why minders and diaper changers are needed.
sniff sniff 'time to do a change again, hes getting all POWey glassy eyed and confused'
treestump @ 9:
Do "Rest Homes" still exist somewhere?
its called the Senate...
Does he have any other major item to run his campaign on other than he's the Manchurian Candidate?
Rudy has 9/11, Romney has his Moronism (err, sorry, Mormonism (a freakish religious cult)), and McInsane has Vietnam . Events that changed their lives forever and made them the megalomaniacs they are today.
Jahbulon does work in mysterious ways.
We must pity McInsane's ego all the way......to retirement.
OT, but still about McCain: The episode of his having the little old lady with the McCain=Bush sign thrown out of his "townhall meeting" by the police (who seem to be confused about where they got their orders from) is a curious one, in that it proves the little librarians point for her. This is the same thing that George Bush was doing in 2000 and 2004. So it seems as if McCain, does indeed = Bush.
Check and Mate
McCain’s True Torture Story Really Reveals His Age
foolme1ns @ 14:
Same with the Kerry incident in Florida when that student got arrested and tasered for asking embarrassing questions about Skull and Bones.
Who gave the order that the police stand behind him with their guns (or a taser) pointed at him when he was talking.
Who gave the order to arrest him (for no reason) and drag him out of the room, the kid had permission to talk and ask questions of Kerry.
According to today's standards set by Bushco, McCain wasn't really tortured in Vietnam. He was 'harsly interrogated'.
Reagan pulled this kind of crap all the time - even when he was YOUNGER than McCain - and Reagan was ADORED by the media, not to mention the Republican base. Confusing the facts in his own stories was just considered another charming example of 'Reagan being Reagan.' Am I the only one that remembers this? If so, can I have my Social Security NOW, instead of having to wait 25 more years?
Seriously though, forget this 'pandering' BS and raise the issue of Alzheimer's'. Reagan had it. People years YOUNGER than McCain get it. Lord knows that McCain has made some incredible gaffs the last few months that would fit the diagnosis. Thus it's fair to bring up as an issue and if McCain wants to defend himself by claiming that his Pittsburgh Steelers comments were meant to be pandering, well then that's a grave he's welcome to dig.
Is it me or do I see a totally different video? The video has nothing to do with the goof-show that McCain is, but the US being accused by the red cross of practicing torture.
Nicole Belle: You do see the wrong video and it's my fault for not selecting the right video. You see the danger of doing posts after midnight for the following morning. I'm not at my sharpest. But I've fixed it now.
joeedugan...No, you may not. You will never see a dime of Social Security. And Ronnie Reaguun being adored by the press just reminds us that he ALSO was a two-term foregone conclusion.
[Deleted. Off topic. Please take it to an Open Thread. Thank you. Site Monitor]
Keep on talking about it McCain and watch its rhetorical effectiveness erode. I'm in Ohio, so I'm getting that summer of love while I was a POW ad. It's shameless and more importantly, terrible. Yeah.
[Deleted. Off topic. Please take it to an Open Thread. Thank you. Site Monitor]
There's a couple of important angles to this story that should not be lost in the kerfuffle -
1 - McPander whips out the POW story in response to a benign fluff question... amazing how far he'll reach to remind folks that he's been tortured
2 - His story (if true) confirms that detainees will say anything, true or not, when under duress
McCain is damaged goods - keep him as far away from the White House as is physically possible.
Whitehouse @ 19:
Near as I can reckon, that's pretty much the same thing...
Is his Steelers/Packers mix up a memory gaffe or is it that he can not keep his lies regarding his military record straight? I mean, he refuses to answer direct questions about it and he has put forth very few records to prove it. I've known many veterans that have done the same thing. They exaggerate their service in order to look good. When you ask them for proof to verify their claims they refuse to provide it or dodge your follow up questions in response. I attempted to bring this possibility up at a veterans website that I frequent but I caught Hell for it because questioning McCain's "heroic" service is considered a big no, no.
Richard Wolff believes that McCain's time in a POW camp in Vietnam is a "compelling story." It would seem that McCain's participation in Operation Rolling Thunder, which destroyed Vietnam's economy and infrastructure and killed or maimed many of its citizens, is not compelling enough to sustain McCain's image of a war hero. Wolff's job as a journalist is to tell his readers and audience that McCain dropped napalm on the Vietnamese people, which in plain terms meant that many of them burned to death. McCain himself admitted in a 1997 interview on the news program 60 Minutes that "I am a war criminal; I bombed innocent women and children."
When McCain was shot down he was completing a bombing run against a power plant. It was only through the intercession of a Vietnamese worker who worked at that plant that McCain was not [justifiably] beaten to death by a mob of Vietnamese peasants after McCain had parachuted into a lake. Why has this intrepid journalist not reported this to the American people? Or does Wolff believe that focusing on what McCain did during the war and what McCain's last mission was and what led to his capture are not compelling enough reasons to cast doubt upon McCain's status as an [alleged] war hero? Or should that be a war criminal?
[Deleted. Off topic. Please take it to an Open Thread. Thank you. Site Monitor]
[Deleted. Off topic. Please take it to an Open Thread. Thank you. Site Monitor]
Bombing or destroying civilian infrastructure is a war crime.
IF she does get a show I hope its on Cinemax around 3am. She's hot.
Erroll @ 27:
Theres no reason to believe that the 'worker' did this out of love for US airmen,
most likely he was a commissar in the local soviet or local defense group,
so wanted a live prisoner for poltical puroposes and brownie points for himself.
McNasty was one lucky SOB to be rescued from the mob or not be left to drown at the bottom of the pond.
I am sure over the course of the five years he spent as the 'crown prince' POW he was reminded of this on a daily basis.
Did he repay his captors for their largess ?, and why are his POW records very very sealed.
If he does this sort of thing then it should be open season for anyone who wants to render an opinion on his military credentials and POW years as being important to being President. If he can 'lie', yes I'll say that, about his own story just for political gain, then by all means it right at that moment should be fine for anyone else to comment. Just with respect of course. and if you're also a veteran or in the military currently then even more backing to comment. My father was a decorated Air Force veteran, and was in Vietnam, and I'm very proud of his service to this country, and I'm sickened that McCain would twist a story, told one way repeatedly, just for potential political gain. this makes him look rather pathetic. and thank you for your service, sir.
comment 10 has it right on. Stand-up comedians, performers, itinerant preachers and politicians all change their stories to add "color" and to try to appeal to the local yokels. It's insulting because it implies that the yokels are too stupid to care about anything that doesn't involve their own local logo. "Oooh, da Stillers!" And if that part of it is invented, well, maybe the rest of it is made-up too. I say this as an insulted Pittsburgher. I'm not inspired by McCain's love of my local team, I'm offended that he thinks we're all that one-dimensional.
The story is an old legend about POWs and the in-joke of using the names of sports stars when forced to broadcast to their buddies still fighting. It probably has been around as long as wars and broadcasting have, at least from WWII. McVane simply appropriated it. He has not the capacity to recognize the truth. He is an empty can filled with the beans selected by associates who then apply the label. Maverick. Hero. There is no John McCain.
What exasperates me is just why it is that POW experience the McCan stuffers are always touting is not examined. He gave up quite a bit more data than the names of NFL players.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/7/10/111216/158/819/549372
McCain, PTSD sufferer, anger management prone, dodgy selective memory, Chimpy's loyal puppy,
the ultimate in the GOPs 'Raygun' part two experiment in seeing what the American public will vote for and swallow.
Its one wild swing from a coke addicted draft dodging drunk, to a flag wearing crippled insane old geezer,
I pity the poor Repug voters in november , decisions decisions 'ah F$%@ it lets go get drunk instead...'
[Deleted. Off topic. Please take it to an Open Thread. Thank you. Site Monitor]
breakspear @ 33:
That is what I am saying. If your a veteran like McCain and you make claims regarding your service and don't answer questions about it or provide documentation to prove it then that should be a red flag to everyone. I'm a veteran and every time I want to use my service experience for something or other I have to prove it and or answer questions about it. Every veteran has to do that either through a DD 214 or a DD 295 (verification of education which I am working on getting from the VA) or some other form depending on what they are claiming. McCain's service is being deliberately hyped by his campaign yet no questions are answered and he provides little to no verification to back it up. Its as if McCain's service record is so "holy" that no one can touch it, look at it, or question it. Have we put people (veterans like myself) on such pedestals that they are beyond scrutiny? If so, then there are going to be a lot of veterans claiming heroic efforts even though they have done none of them because they know no one is going to call them on it.
bush thinks that because he is an "Amerkan" he could never be someone who commits War Crimes. In fact the law applies to American leaders as well.
Yo!!
Site Monitors!!
Link goes to "wrong" video ..
Great clip of Maddow & Turley .. deserves its own post ..
[Thanks, MM. Passed it along to the proper people. Site Monitor]
getalife @ 21:
[Deleted. Off topic. Please take it to an Open Thread. Thank you. Site Monitor]
That doesn't bode well for Specter, then, does it?
ps. Nicole: McCain's two stories are Packers offensive line and Steelers defensive line. I know it's hard to keep up with McCain's stories, but please try.
She has her own show, on the radio!
Why is this about McSame? This is about WAR CRIMES! Get it right. These human sacks of shit should be tried in international courts. If they had tortured one Jew, Israel would be hunting these sick fucks forever.
ferrofluid (Obama 08) @ 32:
You are wrong. The Vietnamese who rescued McCain was not a "commissar in the local soviet or local defense group." He was a security guard who worked at the power plant [though some accounts state that it was a light bulb factory] that McCain was attempting to destroy. The Vietnamese worker was interviewed in 2000 and the story was carried by Knight-Ridder newspapers during the 2000 primary campaign. In the interview, the security guard, Mai Van On, said,
"They tried to beat him in the head with the bricks, but I covered him. They surely would have beaten him to death. I said I wanted to rescue this man and return him to his family."
You say that McCain was "lucky." What you fail to acknowledge, for some unknown reason, is that McCain was lucky because Mai Van On felt compassion and pity for McCain and protected him from the mob. I suggest that you try to refrain from engaging in stereotypes of the evil, malevolent Oriental. If it were not for Mai Van On, McCain would have felt the wrath of those people whom McCain was so eager to drop his bombs. One can imagine the reaction if a foreign pilot landed in Kansas City after bombing innocent women and children. In all likelihood, that mob would have torn apart the evil foreigner. But in reality, this Vietnamese worker [no, not a communist worker] took pity upon McCain and rescued him from the enraged crowd. Apparently, this act of humanity was not a compelling enough narrative to be told in front of a national audience by Rachel Maddow and Richard Wolff. It certainly has not been told by that [alleged] straight talking John McCain, as he makes absolutely no mention of Mai Van On in his autobiography. It is doubtful if it made it into McCain's life story on film, either. After all, it would not do to humanize someone who never attempted to harm anyone in these United States, now would it?
Wrong video on the QT side. Don't know if it's the same on the Real Player side.
It might be worth the effort to look into what is known of John McCain's military record. Something tells me that the AP would not have released an item to the effect of "Admiral's Son Sings" if all John was doing was giving football rosters.
Furthermore, keep in mind that at the time of his capture/detention, KGB personnel would certainly have been involved...especially considering his genetic proximity to positions of high command. That is, whatever John told his interrogators he also told the Kremlin. We don't need to see his US service documentation, we need to see his KGB files.
The facts of our "war hero" may actually paint him as a traitor and an enemy collaborator. Moreover, if he gave information (willingly or unwillingly) he would also be responsible for the deaths/detentions of his fellow servicemen.
He keeps bringing up his POW experience because he has absolutely nothing else to run on.
BlueStateSam @ 47:
Yes, only "hard" surface to run on....in ALL other respects, he is treading water
and most assuredly, cannot walk on water.
Meh, McCain gets a pass on the indignation for this goof. Either he was playing up a connection to Pittsburg (everyone does this: celebrities, rock stars, hell, even my mom does this) or he forgot which starting team he recited (it's been a while since Vietnam. I can't even remember what I ate for lunch two days ago).
The third, and most interesting scenario would be that he completely made this story up whole cloth, then and now. Again, everyone does this from time to time to make themselves seem more exciting or glamorous than they really are. However, McCain really doesn't want us to find out what really happened. From what I understand, McCain slammed shut all records of what went on, even denying vets who wanted to know what was done to them the right to find out. He refused to let anyone see, even if seeing might have lead to the location of other POW's or MIA's.
If he was such a stand-up guy, why hide the records?
{ Deleted, Off Topic. SiteMonitor}
@46
The reason why the M$M doesn't look too carefully at what McCain said to his captors is that it's a lose/lose story. Either McCain gave up useful information, which makes him much less of a "hero," or he gave up fake information, which demonstrates the uselessness of torture.
Look forward to near-complete silence on whether it was the Packers or the Steelers. At best, it will remain a story about pandering, leaving the deeper issues unmentioned. To the extent that sites like C&L also focus on the pandering angle, the likelihood of this triggering useful discussion will remain quite low, especially when said sites can't keep the story straight, allowing McCain defenders to distract us even more.
jackpine savage @ 46:
Agreed. This is why its so important to question McCain's service record especially since he was a POW. Its also potential events like the one you mentioned that his campaign wants to hide. I'm sure that if something like that did occur and it got past public scrutiny because people were afraid to question The war Hero" John McCain's record for fear of being unpatriotic or something that the Russians wouldn't mind. In fact, they would hope that happens because they can use that as blackmail against him.
McSame's soporific speeches probably put his supporters to sleep before they'd notice. Besides, referring to his supporters, we are talking about Bushies here. Does anyone believe a Bushie would care if McSame says it was the Packers or the Steelers?
Pretty much everything about McSame is phony and cheap. He's full of $hit and would say anything and do anything for a buck.
At this point when I see these stories my outrage isn't so much about the actual quote from McCain... but that if the roles were reversed, the story would be so huge, so all-encompassing and invasive in any press coverage that you wouldn't be able to pay attention to anything else.
It makes your blood boil, but I guess it's the hand of cards we're forced to play with
Joe O. @ 38:
Only if they're Republican. Democratic veterans are fair game. See: Kerry.
lyleleander @ 55:
Ain't it the truth....Sure am glad that we all have this "liberal" media...snark
44 Erroll... very well said! I concur and find it strange that a man's humanity, which saved one's life, wasn't enough to be mentioned in either an autobiography or movie. Compassion is not something that John McCain knows much about... nor is it something Americans in a similar situation as Mai Van On would know anything about. People who act out of compassion and humanity, like Mai Van On did, deserve our adulation... not lying crooks like McCain. There... I said it out loud!
JTM @ 41:
Not true. In McCain's book he named Packers players from both sides of the ball. Adderly(DB), Wood(DB) and Davis(DL) were listed with Gregg(OL), McGee(WR) and Ringo(OL who hadn't played for GB in at least three years).
McCain was pandering in his book, at least, and this week in Pittsburgh he both pandered and lied. Remember, he was shot down in '67. The Steel Curtain defensive line of the Steelers (Greene, Holmes, White and Greenwood) weren't all members of the Steelers until '72, and none of them were on the team until '69. Or do you think that the guards let the POWs listen to the AFRN?
Nicole,
Why doesn't Rachel have her own show?
Because she's a lesbian.
And an intelligent, hard-hitting, free thinking woman to boot.
That doesn't fly on MSM.
I hope your eyes are ok. I know I just hit you with the blinding light of the obvious, but, I thought it needed to be said. ;-)
If Rachel was a white, heterosexual man, she would have her own show, much like Olbermann (although I think Rachel is better and less over-dramatic than Keith).
Let's see if McCain goes down to Florida and boasts about naming the defensive line of the Jacksonville Jaguars.
I love Rachel Maddow, but I wish her stardom in another medium. Cable news is such a vile and degrading place. It's irredeemable.
doesn't matter -- corporate, fascist MSM will cover his ass as usual.
when I click play, I get Rachel and Jonathan Turley talking about torture and war crimes. what the deuce?
[I sent an email to the people who can fix it-Sitemonitor]
Ruth @ 2:
he will when he's pandering in dallas.
Anything McCain, Clinton or Obama says is a lie. I don't know why that is surprising to people.
When it comes right down to it, is this any different than Obama saying he was born as a result of the civil rights marches yet he was born years before? Is this any different than Obama saying his father was brought over to the USA to study by JFK personally when it was a foundation that brought him over and JFK did not get involved personally with the program until the year after his father was brought over. This was when he was being touted as the second coming of JFK by his Kennedy supporters and the second coming of MLK by those supporters.
Pandering for votes isn't acceptable no matter which side does it. If it is not good for one then it should not be acceptable for the other side. The candidate you support should have no bearing on allowing one a pass and the other not. And what do you think a lot of my friends thought about Obama wanting to sponsor a nascar car - PANDERING to republican nascar dads....... seems he won't be doing it now since his driver is a republican supporter.......I thought that wouldn't have made a difference to him wanting to appeal to ALL political parties and independents.
And I forgot what about pandering to your own base saying you will support a filibuster of FISA and then vote for Cloture?
using my ninja URL skills, i found the Packers+Steelers segment on the server:
Pander Banter
ergh, the video does end mid-sentence 4+ minutes in, so it still needs work, apparently.
IN DALLAS... he claimed he recited the Cowboys lineup
IN SEATTLE... it was the SEAHAWKS
IN MIAMI... it was the DOLPHINS
IN LOS ANGELES... he claimed that he recited both the RAMS and RAIDERS lineups... and then told his torturers that both teams should stay in LA
ferrofluid (Obama 08) @ 27:
You really don't want to go there.
That sort of thinking really takes the edge of the concept of war crime.
Damned few wars are so limited geographically that civilians and infrastructure aren't hit. During the war that is so extolled by today's Bobbleheads - WWII, aka Archie Bunker's Big One - London, Berlin, Dresden, Stalingrad, Tokyo, Hiroshima, the list is almost infinite.
War as a tool to settle disputes is a terrible idea.
War crimes are an abomination - abhorred even by the professional military who would defend the concept of war.
MADDOW: "You don't get to call something legal because you say it is".
In a country of men and not of law, you do. I think the final proof came in this week with the Congress nullified any consequences for violating the 4th amendment. With a justice department engaged in politically motivated prosecutions, the concept of "rule of law" is a joke. Or more specifically, the corporate owners of our government has seen to it that the "rule of law" doesn't apply to them or their minions.
Has McCain overplayed his Vietnam experience?
Ahhh ... let me check w/ Gen. Wesley Clark, and I'll get back to you on that. (But I'm thinking the answer is Yep)
right on! @ 58:
Thank you for your perceptiveness and empathy.
I came to US in 1980, and hence either I missed the hoopla about McCain's POW story earlier, or am simply NOT IMPRESSED by it. What is so compelling in the context of a Presidential election?
So he refused early release denying the enemy a publicity propaganda, and withstood several years of torture. If he was leading a POW MIA group, yes - that gives him a good standing. As a senator, he can be on Veterans affairs committees, etc. Even that, he has been incredibly antagonistic to some veterans and groups, to the point of backhanding one woman who had come to ask for help to find her uncle.
Is it to be measured in a vacuum absent all his other transgressions? He stood 894 in a class of 899 in college. He was essentially a frat boy, and barely graduated. He divorced his then wife with 3 kids to take up with a much younger richer woman. He was in an adulterous relation, shunned by even the conservative Reagans for his treatment of his first wife. He has demonstrated a foul mouth, calling his fellow Senators and even his wife names not fit to print. He has scuffled with his fellow Arizona congress critter. He has repeatedly lied. He has made jokes in the poorest taste about Chelsea Clinton, and dismisses a whole nation in the most flippant way. Is this a here or a future president?
WE ALL LOVE A LITTLE BUSH @ 71:
That would be funny!
Miami Dolphins were in their second year of existence in '67, and they stunk.
The Raiders were in Oakland from '60 until '82, and the Seahawks weren't around until '76.
I just hope McPander doesn't get a whiff of this. I'd like him to try to use those teams the same way he's used the Packers and Steelers so far.
Bill in Chicago @ 61:
I was wondering if he would tell people in Indianapolis that he used the names of the Colts' offensive line!
It is a shame that he didn't originally give the names of players of a college team, that would give him many, many more cities to pander to.
The man has become the Eddie Haskell of presidential candidates!
Pittsberg....Packers...whats the difference?
John McKeating
raker @ 62:
Well, she might try radio. Or blogging.
The advantage on the right with broadcast is that their core is the sort who must be told because they cannot read for themselves. That's the unmentioned factor in the vast rightwing talk media conspiracy. They sit like sheep and hear Faux Noise or Lush Rimbaud express their simpleton hate slogans for them and simply nod. I'll bet there are very few here who do not receive the large portion of their news in print, and I'll bet also there are not many of the Faux faction who do.
Slamming McBush about his military record will only earn you less votes by Independents who consider military service an honor. It is best if the picture of McBush hugging George Jr. be hung on every pole and tree in the country. With every thing in the toilet due to this administration the truth about McBush's ties to it would go a long ways in swaying those who are Independent and are undecided. As to his Vietnam service, every one bitches about bombing civilians but nothing is said about the North Vietnamese Army who wiped out villages of innocent people, been there and seen it. Neither is right but why are we the only ones who commit war crimes? I really believe that the rhetoric of the 60's won't win this election, consistent reminders of voting records and the changing of his beliefs as suits his need from a middle of the road Republican to now a very conservative Republican will indeed change many people's minds concerning their vote for him.
I think that blasting him about war records is the wrong way to go. Accusing him of rendering top secret info to the enemy is BS. Guess that we don't know what we would do if under the same circumstances and misery furthermore I'm not to sure that he would have know very much "top secret" info as a mere pilot. The military usually passes down only as much as you need to do your job and not every facet of why it is being done or the total scope of the operation. The constant negative barrage of his military service will lead to another McGovern type loss for the Democrats.
I think Nicole Belle's wonderment, expressed in this excerpt: "Countdown guest host Rachel Maddow (and again, I ask, why does this woman not have her own show?)" is the most interesting part of this piece. Maddow may be good -- as a reader. Have y'all noticed that her subbing for Keith seems like -- Keith? As in, every phrase, every sentence, in fact the whole damn show is exactly like Keith's - she even sounds like him. Which means, of course, that Keith is just a reader, too. Someone else is doing the writing - or maybe it comes out of a machine like pie dough. Maddow or any other good monitor reader should have their own show under these circumstances.
(Except for the political differences, MSNBC seems to be just like Fixed Noise. One network feeds it own choir, nothing changes, no one is enlightened or influenced to change.)
One more detour to WhoTheHellCaresville.
Year after year after year all politics has become is a matter of discrediting ANYTHING a candidate utters. It's akin to chumming the water for sharks. If a candidate says it, it's fresh meat to be torn apart, ridiculed, made to be a lie, in the hope of "winning."
Any tidbit, no matter how mundane or trivial is twisted to a character flaw, a matter of debate. It makes me sick. "Obama didn't salute the flag," or "Obama insults the working class," or, in this case "Was McCain’s Steeler Story A Pander Too Far In Exploiting His POW Past?" Is there NOTHING more important to talk and write about? You wonder why Rachel Maddow doesn't have her own show? This is a fine example.
His Prisoner of War story is all he has to run on . . . not much favorably notable in past 7 1/2 years. Pretty much a "has been" with a childish notion of becoming president.
Was Senator McCain the only POW in American History?
When o' when will the swiftboating of the "Greatest Packers, er Steelers-Fanatic POW Who Can't Raise His Arms Above His Head but Never Uses His Time as a POW as a Political Means to an End" in American history ever end?!!?
I would guess that a man who became a POW, didn't exactly make the right decisions in the first place.
pissedcanuck @ 88:
Good point, since McCain's decision to bomb civilians and kill innocent women and children [his own words in a 60 Minutes interview] qualifies him as a war criminal [again, his own words, in that same interview]. Yet people like that [alleged] liberal Keith Olbermann believe that McCain's military service is, in Olbermann's word, sacrosanct. Apparently just one more example of how so many Americans bow down and genuflect before the altar of American militarism.
Tremonius @ 81:
Rachel Maddow Official WebSite
Air America: The Rachel Maddow Show
Sorry I'm late to Nicole's show fans. Any weasels on the thread? Just checking before
I launch into yesterday's "Countdown" and explain how Rachel proved herself to be a Princess of the MSM with what she did not cover yesterday or the day before.
Why doesn't our McCainstream Corporate Media (McCM) do a little investigative research into the destructive fire on the aircraft carrier USS Forrestal in 1967? Maybe John McCain himself should be asked a few pointed questions about it.
Maybe John McCain is suffering from battlefield-story-telling fatigue like Hillary did with her delusional Bosnia sniper-fire story.
Thanks to previous posters on this thread. I happily learned some new information about Mr. McCain.
OneTrickPony @ 84:
I couldn't agree more in the ideal sense. What makes this story important is that it has more relevance to McCain's character than any comment ever made by Rev. Jeremiah Wright has to Barak Obama's but will probably never get any more coverage than that given to it last night. Why? Because the media already has its script. McCain's service as a POW is proof of his heroism and criticism of it is only allowed when that criticism is used to smear whomever offers it. It is important because of what it says about the media.
Assassin @ 70:
Watch the entire segment here:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#25645898
Well, she might try radio. Or blogging.
Rachel Maddow Official WebSite
Is it possible someone didn't realize that suggestion was a joke?
Why oh why dont the dems attack him on his service record , he has opened the door ? . What is really scary to me is how many people are voting for this moron .
Rachel did get off a funny line , she fined him 10 yards for pandering .
Richard Wolff and Howard Fineman were two of the biggest reasons I stopped watching Countdown some time ago. Both, huge Bush apologists. I understand Keith, Richie, and Howie are all members of the NBC family but I don't need, nor want, to listen to their Bushplap.
Those who are not Bob Somerby fans over at the Daily Howler may miss some context of this post, but I won't wade back into Gore v. Bush like Bob does. I'll summarize.
The Daily Howler criticizes all manner of media excess, lies, cover ups and other misdeeds regardless of ideology. But he is especially critical of liberals in the media or blogosphere who allow their own ideology not to debunk their own when they engage in misdeeds.
COUNTDOWN likes to lead with the line about how many days it has been since the Declaration of Mission Accomplished in Iraq. Last night's COUNTDOWN was the second day that Rachel has hosted the show and failed to mention in her coverage of the McCain/Phil Gramm story that a huge lie was perpetrated by McCain and also that it was not covered by the main stream press. Day 2.
McCain assembled the press in Michigan on Thursday for the express purpose of distancing himself from his chief economic adviser's pronouncment in that morning's Washington Times that the recession in the American economy was "mental" and that America had becaome a nation of whiners.
Let what Grammm said sink in thoroughly in the context of how Rev. Wright, Gen. Clark, and Rev. Jackson comments have been looped over and over on the broadcast news.
None of these people are even part of Obama's campaign formally, much less the chief adviser on the issue the MSM and polls keep telling us is "Issue 1" to borrow from CNN.
McCain assembles the press and says "Phil Gramm does not speak for me."
Halfway across the country Phil Gramm has, that very day, been speaking for him on his economic plan to the Wall Street Journal in New York. His visit was previewed in that morning's Washington Post. I know it because I followed the story and I link to the Post. TPM picked up on it too.
That night all of the MSM television news broadcast carried McCain's quote trying to distance himself from Gramm. None mentioned the Gramm meeting. None. That includes, my friends, the good liberal Rachel Maddow over at COUNTDOWN. She did have time that night for a long piece on Madonna and the breakup of NY Yankee star Alex Rodriguez's marriage.
Friday, Day 2. The Rev. Jackson comments, first made on Sunday, but not aired until Wednesday continue to get more play than the Gramm comments. David Corn, as a guest on HARDBALL, manages to slip in a mention of the "Gramm doen't speak for me"
absolute howling lie. However, HARDBALL, despite having a long piece on political gaffe's doesn't manage to include this particular one. They do cover Hillary Clinton's badly taken out of context comments about RFK made to an editorial board in remote South Dakota. They couldn't go down the street for the tape of Phil proving McCain a liar over at the Wall Street Journal.
St. Rachel of America is on next. The lie has slipped onto her network. Is it mentioned?
Nope. She does the Packer/Steeler story, not once, but as the lead and show closer.
In the middle she does a piece on the press giving McCain a free ride. Is the lie mentioned here and the lack of coverage of same? Nope. She lets her guest on this issue give all the bogus reasons why McCain is treated with kid gloves without really challenging him. Then she does a peice attacking Obama for not hammering McCain that day on the Gramm issue. JFC on a crutch!!!!
Obama should have been all over McCain yesterday. And the Packer/Steeler story is worth some coverage. BUT RACHEL PROVED SHE IS PART OF THE YAPPING PRESS PACK BY IGNORING A DIRECT LIE BY A PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE, LETTING THE PRESS SLIDE ON ITS LACK OF CRITICAL COVERAGE OF MCCAIN.
Rachel Maddow. Worst person in the World.
MountainMan23 @ 90:
Which is where she can stay on her thoughtful, incisive message. She works on TV for the network who has tweety and karl rove's backup dancer david gregory who spends an hour a day stepping on or minimizing mccains missteps. Aside from Olberman, I don't think she would be allowed to out as much information (read truth) by GE the parent company of her network. She is usually pitted against harwood, gregory, buchanan, scarborough, barnicle, and that guy who used to be gingrich's press secretary. tweety won't have her around because she would clean his clock. We're lucky we have what we have.
nicky #98
I don't know what you're talking about but Rachael covered gramm every day since the 'whiner' quote.
http://thenewshole.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/07/10/1194319.aspx
Tim in Japan @ 60:
The rumor MSNBC is that Tweaty will be given his walking papers and Rachel be given her own show.
Republican Presidents have presided over 8 out of the 9 recessions in the past fifty years. They create a hole so deep that the next guy spends his administration dealing with it- instead of concentrating on making coherent socio-political progress- while they bitch and whine about all that he's not doing. Then, they claim ineffective government. GOP= Grand Obstructionist Party.
Would the GOP act like such clown shoes with their shitty grade-school tactics if they knew that they actually had some sort of moral high ground?
And I'm not championing the Democrats. There are to blame for a lot- like being spineless in fighting the GOP's shitty tactics. It's all for party, none for country, with both of them.
In my eyes, the Dems aren't progressive enough, but considering what they walk into every time, it could be worse. The only reason I vote Dem is not that they give me someone to vote FOR, but that the Rethugs never fail to provide me with something (or someone) to vote against: Bush 1, BOB DOLE! BOB DOLE! BOB DOLE!, Shrub 43, and Grampy McSame. I'd vote for a more progressive third party if I thought they had a chance to get anywhere, but in this lock-step goose-boogie two-party shit-fest, the only solution is to pull the level while holding one's nose for the least PUKE-INDUCING prospect. And the Rethugs have yet to provide that.
myshadow, my friend, @100.
You don't know what I am talking about because what she covered, while important, ignores the most salient points in the Gramm/McCain issue. She covered more about this, with better detail and greater frequency than most of her brothers and sisters in newly joined MSM land. It is not what she did. It is what she did not do. What she missed.
When John McCain attempted to distance himself from Phil Gramm he lied.
Period. L.I.E.D. Phil Gramm was speaking for him at the Wall Street Journal.
On his economic plan. Which he helped write. Which Rachel, in her coverage, noted he helped write. She noted that McCain had used Gramm-like terminology himself before. That McCain would have a hard time distancing himself from Phil Gramm. She simply did not call McCain a flat out liar, which is something Keith has done with Bush regularly. But that was just on Thursday.
Mc Cain did not assemble the press and say, "I disagree with Phil Gramm. And because I do, he no longer speaks for me." He said flatly "Phil Gramm does not speak for me." Present tense. Phil was speaking for him that very morning. In New York. Where Rachel's broadcasts are taped. Where Phil's comments were probably taped.
Is this an important distinction? To me it is, because when he was asked if Gramm would be joining his cabinet or administration after McCain said Gramm did not speak for him, McCain did not say "No." He did not say, "after what he said? You must be joking." Instead McCain made a joke himself, about naming Phil as an ambassador to some country McCain obviously thinks is worth making the punch line of a joke. And some of the media covered that. But not Phil speaking for him
as McCain was denying he did.
Is it an important distinction? Yes, because it destroys the credibility of McCain in trying to act like he does not really share Gramm's view of the economy and the plight of average Americans. Because it leaves unasked the logical follow up question "Mr. McCain, when did he stop speaking for you and what part of your economic plan does reflect Mr. Gramm's view?" It allows the press to return to the trivial.
It is an important distintion because it allowed the networks to run the McCain distancing quote and then let the story drop and return to the Jesse Jackson distraction. Or the Packer/Steeler distraction.
On Friday, to me, the issue had become the fact that the media had let McCain get away with a bald faced lie. And while Rachel did put the media coverage of McCain on her jukebox, she danced around this particular issue and never really hammered home her point. I think she hammered Obama a lot harder for not following up on this issue than she did the press for mishandling it. He deserved it, but the press deserves it more. What, you say? They can't cover something unless the Obama campaign spoon feeds them? If you feel that way you buy the media rationale for why they did not do their job when the Bush administration lied us into war.
Ouch. Rachel dropped the ball on that one. Don't EVER make a big deal about ANYTHING he did while he was being tortured in defense of the U.S.. Just thank him for his service to the country and leave it at that. Don't mention anything about John McCain's life prior to 1975. Sheesh, what an idiotic thing to do.
Wow, just wow.. Hillary Clinton might have been able to win after all! I guess that the bald faced lying doesn't make good press though as this is the only place I've heard about this particular heresy. Which was it, snipers or Steelers?!
Also, Rachel is far better believable when non-scripted, by far more honest and engaging. Leave the scripting for Keith Olberman.
I am totally incredulous at the giant eight lane pass mccain is getting on EVERYTHING he has misdone....that being said, rachael also assembled a series of clips of mccain using and reusing the 'psychological' part of his talking points on the recession, which he has been doing since his debates with mittens and the seven dwarves till now. It is more about the fact the dnc has YET to assemble these things and buy minutes and JUST PLAY THEM. You don't need a voice over, you don't need an explanation, just play these lying bastards. bush snuck in that mccain 'supported' the GI bill, but a goddamn minute of time, gramm and fred 'beetle' barnes call us whiners, buy a goddamn minute.
Pericles @ 104:
The reason you are right about this Pericles is because his POW story is part of the MSM script. As Somerby teaches us, you cannot deviate from the script. Rachel is an MSM newbie. She can deviate from the script. The MSM will not follow her, but will not hold her accountable for it. Unless, God forbid, she deviates from the script by pointing out that the Emperor MSM has no clothes. Which is, I think why she skated very carefully in her segment on media coverage of McCain.
Olbermann got away with attacking Katie Couric recently for her commentary, but he did not escape unscathed. The reason he was not attacked more viciously was because his attack on the MSM empress was, in fact, a defense of the other MSM emperors over the issue of whether media coverage of Hillary Clinton was sexist, which Couric had the temerity to suggest was accurate criticism. The MSM does not like it when you point out the galling fact that while they are being critical of Hillary's pantsuits, they are themselves buck nekkid.
If Obama had called McCain on the lie, it would have been covered like crazy yesterday.
He made a big mistake. But Rachel could have called him on the lie herself. In the MSM script, McCain bumbling and stumbling on economic issues is becoming part of the script and she could have helped that along. She can get away with talking about POW stuff because she is an MSM empress now and following acceptable MSNBC practice within the narrow demographics and time slot of COUNTDOWN. Only FOX will attack her. Probably allude to or directly add something about her sexual preferences while they are at it.
Now, if General Clark had been her guest yesterday and said "I don't think liking the Steelers or Packers is a qualification to be President", you would be watching it on all the Cable networks all weekend denouncing his attack on McCain's service. There would be trailers at the bottom of the screen with Obama's bowling score and experts from NASCAR would come in to denouncing his sports authenticity.
myshadow @ 107:
Another minute on the complicity/sponsership of gramm on the 'Enron exception'.... gramm's wife's involvement in the mortgage/subprime meltdown. The proximity of gramm to mccain as a possible treasury secretary...every forclosed former homeowner, Californian enron hostage, enron stockholder....
MountainMan23 @ 90:
Rachel Maddow used to have a good show on Air America. You know what airs in that slot now under the name "The Rachel Maddow Show?" The David Gregory Show simulcast from MSNBC, covering compelling topics like Obama's terrorist fist bump and McCain's maverick wonderfulness. The horror.
bilhelm-X @ 106:
You need to trundle over to ABC's website, my friend. They are running a Christian Science Monitor article which makes exactly the same comparison, only in their scipt Maddow's part is played by McCain, and Olbermann's by Obama. BTW, I have tried posting about the big media McCain/Gramm lie coverup over there, but they keep deleting it. They don't allow you to talk about the Emperor's clothes over there.
ABC does let Jake Tapper write a whole column telling you his discerning nose caught Obama smelling like cigarettes in the U.S. Capitol and how when he called Obama's campaign staff in Chicago they must have lied to him about whether Obama was puffing on the sly, because, thousands of miles away, they said he had quit.
I am getting very tired, listening to everybody paying homage to McCain, the great American war hero. I too am a Vietnam combat veteran. I spent 30 months in Vietnam; 24 in the Mekong Delta and 6 in an attack squadron on the USS Kittyhawk. The differences are huge.
I honor the service of all my Vietnam brethren, in the same way I do for all the vets from the two Gulf Wars. There is a natural bond between virtually all combat vets (exceptions would be for guys like the Swiftboat liars, who broke the bond to promote a political agenda). McCain was just another guy doing his job. Until he was shotdown, and captured, he had it better than most. Once he was became a POW, there was very little to be heroic about. They have you and you are not going anywhere. McCain's intel value would have been very limited. And what value he did have, would have quickly been outdated.
Now, do not misunderstand me. I definitely would not have wanted to be a POW. There was little chance for me to have been interned. The vast majority of my time was spent in the most southern region of the Mekong Delta. Charlie was seldom interested in marching us, over the long expanse, to reach a POW camp. So, my sympathy definitely goes out to all of the guys who did end up in a POW camp. They deserve our Country's gratitude, just like the other 1 Million plus guys who served. Or, even more importantly, the 50,000 plus men, and women, who lost their lives, and another 250,000 who suffered wounds, many life altering.
In summary, we do need to honor all these servicemen, and John McCain is one of them. However, he was nowhere near being unique and I do not like the way he and the MSM keep beating his 'hero status', while ignoring what the man really stands for.
Beautifully put MacDaKnife.
myshadow @ 109:
All of which bears repeating over and over again. By Rachel. And by Obama.
But still, on Monday, when COUNTDOWN airs I will be thinking, "which story will they not be talking about tomorrowon on this the fifth day since John McCain got away with lying about Phil Gramm not speaking for him."
Oh, and since you checked, how many minutes was that segment on Madonna and A-Rod?
McCain: A noun, a verb, and P.O.W.
oh come on, can we not talk about stuff like this?
as if "our" own candidate obama has not pandered?
the uncontested repetition on the coordinated republican talk radio monopoly is what determines whether a story like this just flits through the media light or, if it has to do with Obama or Kerry, or Gore, stays there for days and weeks.
Whatever happened to the old "name, rank, serial number" line that POWs were supposed to recite when undergoing "harsh interrogation"?
Pandering is a bipartisan enterprise. What I don't understand is, why do so-called liberals bow and scrape in deference to McShame's Viet experience, calling him a true patriot, &c. Not only is McShame's flyboy and captivity experience NOT a qualification for being president (as Wes Clark pointed out, to a chorus of disapproval), it's not even something to be proud of. Some of us protested that war, calling it immoral, believing that the US had no business interfering in what was in essence a civil war between conflicting economic and governmental philosophies. We went in because the nation was cowed into going along with it in the wake of a lot of hoopla about something called "the Domino Theory." Even former defense secretary Robert McNamara has admitted in retrospect that the nation was blinded by "the fog of war," and that we never should have done it.
That idea held that all of the Pacific Rim countries were like dominoes, lined up in a row as in those Guiness Record-breaking attempts to run a row of dominoes so that when one was tipped over, it hit the next, and so on. The story went, if Vietnam falls to communists, so will Thailand, Cambodia, and so forth and so on. The Viet conflict was a Cold War war. But the parallels to Iraq couldn't be more obvious. First, substitute for "Domino Theory" "weapons of mass destruction," "an Iraq-al Qaeda connection," and "yellow cake." The entire Viet enterprise was hopeless from the start, and it ended up costing thousands of American lives and wasting gazillions of dollars. The McShames of this world were undoubtedly in contemplation of the philosopher, Santayana, who said that those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it.
McShame had a choice. He could have stayed home. He got himself into the Hanoi Hilton and is now ashamed of having given his captors what information he imparted; no matter that some of it was worthless -- as is most information extracted by torture, which doesn't exactly speak well of his flip-flop on waterboarding. McShame could have joined the protestors, who exercised as valid a form of patriotism as military service. He could have refused to go, but his gung-ho militarism dictated otherwise.
In my book, McShame is no hero. I just don't understand why the opposition sucks up to his supposed patriotism. It was the Daniels -- Ellsberg, Berrigan, and Shore -- the critics of our involvement in Vietnam -- who are the TRUE heroes.
I am offended that he tried to usurp my Steelers. First of all McCain is too old not because of age but because of Philosophy. He still believes that we lost the Vietnam War because of the protesters back home. All you fact finders look it up he has stated it. Anyone who believes that and other cold war rhetoric is not what we need to lead this country in today’s turbulent times. Having spent 16yrs as an officer in the Navy I know and history has shown that the protesters did not cause us to lose in Vietnam.
As far as experience and BO people need to understand that being around the oval office is not the same thing as being in the oval office. It’s like the idea that Hillary was so qualified because of her time in the White House. That’s like saying because my plumbers wife sleeps with him and they discuss a few things about his job she should come and fix my plumbing. Or because McCain has been living at the Senate next door to the White House he is experienced about things that go on in the White House. Even if you and your neighbor work together at the same company and live next door but do different jobs does that make him experienced at doing your job and you his.
Being President is OJT (on the job training) you either do well at it or fail miserably Like Bush and what did Bush bring to the table in terms of experience. He screwed up every company he ever headed as CEO in fact Texas wasn't in great shape as a state based on his Governorship. So we elected a Head of State who was an experienced lousy business man. And now experience is a defining category for being President, Please!
Login or Register to post comments.