NY Times Reporting McCain Linked Romantically

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by Bruzilla

... and my suggestion to you is that before you go casting dispersions on those who criticize McCain, you might want to first find out why they are criticizing him.

You've danced around this for several posts now; which makes me believe their is no credibility to it. Besides, who's casting dispersions here? You are! You made the claims, back it up! I'm not saying they're not true, but it holds about as much water as calling Bush a liar. If you are going to accuse someone of something, provide the facts.

Originally Posted by Bann

I am looking at this man! I am looking at a man who served his country bravely, despite what you say! How much time did you spend in a pow camp? How many of the honors McCaine received do you wear on your chest? It is easy to critisize a man when you hide behind a computer. I look at this person as someone who has shown his character by not always voting with his party, but by doing what he believed to be the right thing and crossing the isle. I am looking at his record and seeing things I like. He votes for what is right, not for what his party tells him to. He supports the right decision to build up our troops and not accept defeat by retreating home as the other candidates would. I see a moderate who is battle tested. You act as though a person who fly's 23 bombing missions over a hostile country is not a brave person.

You're free to see whatever you choose to see. If you want to see a hero, see a hero. If you want to see a guy who chooses to run his own show because he's some sort of moderate free-thinker, you can see that. What you see as a hero, I see as a guy who served, just like all the folks, good and bad, who I served with. Many of them were fantastic people, but not all of them. You can see whatever you want to, but remember... what you are looking at is a picture that many want you to see. McCain and his campaign can rewrite history all they want, but at the end of the day, the Navy declined to keep him around and promote him, or give him higher responsibility after his one CO tour. If you want to buy into the idea that he never got higher command because the Navy didn't like him, or someone had it in for him, or go ranting "SHOW ME THE PROOF", go for it... but it isn't true.

As for his willingness to cross the isle, do some research and look at what was happening when he crossed the isle. McCain has never done anything that wasn't to his advantage. Whenever he has crossed the isle, it's been to score political points, not because it was the right thing to do. McCain was nationally a nobody in 2000 until he ran for president, and the liberals and moderates wanted him back then. Hell, I even voted for hin in the MD primary! But then I, like others, saw him turning on those he was supposed to have been supporting just to get more votes from moderates. I swore I would never vote for him again.

But by all means... if you want to look at his time in the military, the house, and the senate through those rose-colored lenses, go ahead. Just don't be surprised that if he gets elected he fails you as a president.

Originally Posted by Bann

Since McCain is pretty much the Republican nominee, (unless Huckabee gets that miracle he's waiting for! ) I figured I'd go do some more reading on him.

Found this on my reading travels last night...

P.O.W. to Power Broker, A Chapter Most Telling - New York Times

...it's from the NYT, ironically, and Nicholas Kristoff, at that. I thought it was pretty informative. Some of it I'd never heard before.

See... this is what drives me nuts!!! This story is a puff piece. I couldn't get past "Mr. McCain won a coveted assignment as commanding officer of the Navy's largest squadron, the Replacement Air Group in Jacksonville, Fla." First, at that time there were four Replacement Air Groups in Jacksonville, VA-174 (where McCain was), VP-30, VS-30, and HS-1. VA-174 was the largest attack squadron in the Navy, and only because of the students going through school there. And the CO of a training squadron has little direct contact with the students. If you count the students going through VP-30 at the time, that squadron would have been the largest in the Navy, with the exception of maybe VP-31, the RAG on the west coast.

I also find it funny that people can be so willing to accept what the NYT says one day, when they say what they want to hear, and then decry the NYT as nothing but liars when they don't. Just amazing.

Originally Posted by PsyOps

You've danced around this for several posts now; which makes me believe their is no credibility to it. Besides, who's casting dispersions here? You are! You made the claims, back it up! I'm not saying they're not true, but it holds about as much water as calling Bush a liar. If you are going to accuse someone of something, provide the facts.

So... let's review your logic. I go out and research and investigate what I am saying. You do not do any research, and instead demand that I do your work for you. Then, when I tell you to go do your own research, you call me a liar even though you haven't done the research to call me a liar? Is that what you're saying?

[Bann (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Bruzilla

You're free to see whatever you choose to see. If you want to see a hero, see a hero. If you want to see a guy who chooses to run his own show because he's some sort of moderate free-thinker, you can see that.

Well thankyou, thankyouverymuch. I think I will see, think & feel for myself, thanks! I've been doing it for quite some time & am actually quite capable.

Since you quoted my post, I guess you meant to address me in particular. However, those words weren't mine, I happened to be applauding smcop's post. I thought he expressed his opinion very well.

What you see as a hero, I see as a guy who served, just like all the folks, good and bad, who I served with.

Even if he did wreck a bunch of planes and was an all around rabble rouser, skirt-chasing Flyboy, "privileged" son of an Admiral & screw up, he DID have the misfortune of being shot down and being held as a POW. I do hold that in high esteem. Sorry, if you don't. That's your choice. I didn't say it qualified him for President, but right now, he sure as hell has more qualifications (at THIS time in history) than Obama & Hillary.

Many of them were fantastic people, but not all of them. You can see whatever you want to, but remember... what you are looking at is a picture that many want you to see. McCain and his campaign can rewrite history all they want, but at the end of the day, the Navy declined to keep him around and promote him, or give him higher responsibility after his one CO tour. If you want to buy into the idea that he never got higher command because the Navy didn't like him, or someone had it in for him, or go ranting "SHOW ME THE PROOF", go for it... but it isn't true.

Just curious - but did you actually serve with John McCain? Do you know of people firsthand who did? You really seem to take it so personally.

As for his willingness to cross the isle, do some research and look at what was happening when he crossed the isle. McCain has never done anything that wasn't to his advantage. Whenever he has crossed the isle, it's been to score political points, not because it was the right thing to do. McCain was nationally a nobody in 2000 until he ran for president, and the liberals and moderates wanted him back then. Hell, I even voted for hin in the MD primary! But then I, like others, saw him turning on those he was supposed to have been supporting just to get more votes from moderates. I swore I would never vote for him again.

I've said elsewhere on the forum that I voted for him in the primary in 2000. I, too, have paid attention for the last 8 years, so I am well aware of what he's been up to in the Senate.

But by all means... if you want to look at his time in the military, the house, and the senate through those rose-colored lenses, go ahead. Just don't be surprised that if he gets elected he fails you as a president.

I didn't say he was my first (or even 2nd) choice, but I don't have any rose colored glasses on. I know what the choices are. But the choice IS my choice to make.

[Bann (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Bruzilla

See... this is what drives me nuts!!! This story is a puff piece. I couldn't get past "Mr. McCain won a coveted assignment as commanding officer of the Navy's largest squadron, the Replacement Air Group in Jacksonville, Fla." First, at that time there were four Replacement Air Groups in Jacksonville, VA-174 (where McCain was), VP-30, VS-30, and HS-1. VA-174 was the largest attack squadron in the Navy, and only because of the students going through school there. And the CO of a training squadron has little direct contact with the students. If you count the students going through VP-30 at the time, that squadron would have been the largest in the Navy, with the exception of maybe VP-31, the RAG on the west coast.

I also find it funny that people can be so willing to accept what the NYT says one day, when they say what they want to hear, and then decry the NYT as nothing but liars when they don't. Just amazing.

Please re-read my post.

I never said I accepted it, at all. I said it was informative and some of it I'd never heard before. Sheesh.

Originally Posted by bann

...it's from the NYT, ironically, and Nicholas Kristoff, at that. I thought it was pretty informative. Some of it I'd never heard before.

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by Bruzilla

So... let's review your logic. I go out and research and investigate what I am saying. You do not do any research, and instead demand that I do your work for you. Then, when I tell you to go do your own research, you call me a liar even though you haven't done the research to call me a liar? Is that what you're saying?

First of all, if you were paying attention to my last post I stated:

Originally Posted by PsyOps

I'm not saying they're not true...

Far from calling you a liar.

Secondly, it's called a fact check. I want to know your sources. Sort of like when a reporter reports a story on someone, the rule of thumb is to have at least two (or is it three?) RELIABLE sources. You appear to have already done the work, so providing the sources sould be pretty easy. You can throw anything out there you want. If you read many of my posts they are full of links and research. If I provide something and you ask for my source I will provide it to you. I want you to know where I my facts. I have nothing to hide. You seem to be a little shy of putting your sources out there. Credibility is everything. And I definitely don't believe everything I read.

Originally Posted by PsyOps

Far from calling you a liar.

Secondly, it's called a fact check. I want to know your sources. Sort of like when a reporter reports a story on someone, the rule of thumb is to have at least two (or is it three?) RELIABLE sources. You appear to have already done the work, so providing the sources sould be pretty easy. You can throw anything out there you want. If you read many of my posts they are full of links and research. If I provide something and you ask for my source I will provide it to you. I want you to know where I my facts. I have nothing to hide. You seem to be a little shy of putting your sources out there. Credibility is everything. And I definitely don't believe everything I read.

Actually, what you wrote was "You've danced around this for several posts now; which makes me believe their is no credibility to it. Besides, who's casting dispersions here? You are! You made the claims, back it up! " When you say you believe my comments have no credibility, you're saying I'm lying.

My point is that a lot of people like you choose to attack the person making the comment, as you did above, rather than looking into the issues. The reason I am so adament about people doing their own research, and making their own conclusions, is that what I am seeing more and more of is Republicans treating McCain the same way Democrats treated Bill Clinton. I don't want you or anyone else going to sites that I give you and looking at the data I prefer you to see. Instead, I prefer people go out and do their own looking. It doesn't take very long, it's free, so why not go out and enlighten yourself? McCain has written books about himself, biographers have written books, the Arizona media have looked into much of what he;s done, so don't rely on what I or the NYT says... go look it up for yourself.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Bruzilla

The reason I am so adament about people doing their own research, and making their own conclusions, is that what I am seeing more and more of is Republicans treating McCain the same way Democrats treated Bill Clinton.

...said! Well said! Democrats lost their soul starting in 1992. They're starving to get it back with Obama no matter how much or little he's actually qualified, or even inclined, to do it. They just know they have no chance with Clinton II.