B
Bruzilla
Guest
I was just watching MTP, and Russert has his favorite Republican, John McCain on, and McCain of course served his purpose and agreed with every attack on Republicans that Russert offered up. What I thought was interesting was when the subject turned to torturing prisioners, a subject that McCain is supposed to be very familiar with after being in the infamous Hanoi Hilton. McCain showed zero emotion about the subject, and I mean zero. He talked so matter-of-factly that I just couldn't believe that this guy had ever been at the Hanoi Hilton. Every other interview I've seen, or person I've talked to personally, who's been through that sort of thing reacts to some degree emotionally to questions about it, but McCain doesn't. It's all just a simple matter of human nature... questions about something troublesome instantly recall memories of the situation, which generate emotions... it's just not something that someone can stop from happening.
As I thought about the interview, I thought about all of the other times I've listened to McCain talk about the treatment of prisioners or the Hilton or the North Vietnemese, and I can't recall anytime when he's been really critical of the North Vietnemese or of what happened at the Hilton aside from the stock "It was wrong" type answers that any one would give. I've known a lot of guys who saw combat in WWII, Korea, Vietnam, etc., and they universally have some dislike of their former enemies and no matter how hard they try to contain it it always shows through at some points, like when they're being asked about a particularly emotional issue, which torture would be near the top of that list.
This got me to thinking that after watching McCain show no hesitancy in betraying his party now or in the recent past, betraying the religious right that have helped him so much in his political career, and betraying his first wife, why is it unlikely that he would have betrayed his country while at the Hanoi Hilton? Could the reason that he shows no emotion about torture is because he was never tortured? And could it be that he goes easy on the North Vietnemese because they know things about him that he doesn't want to become public knowledge?
As I thought about the interview, I thought about all of the other times I've listened to McCain talk about the treatment of prisioners or the Hilton or the North Vietnemese, and I can't recall anytime when he's been really critical of the North Vietnemese or of what happened at the Hilton aside from the stock "It was wrong" type answers that any one would give. I've known a lot of guys who saw combat in WWII, Korea, Vietnam, etc., and they universally have some dislike of their former enemies and no matter how hard they try to contain it it always shows through at some points, like when they're being asked about a particularly emotional issue, which torture would be near the top of that list.
This got me to thinking that after watching McCain show no hesitancy in betraying his party now or in the recent past, betraying the religious right that have helped him so much in his political career, and betraying his first wife, why is it unlikely that he would have betrayed his country while at the Hanoi Hilton? Could the reason that he shows no emotion about torture is because he was never tortured? And could it be that he goes easy on the North Vietnemese because they know things about him that he doesn't want to become public knowledge?
And I remember it because originally I was for the guy and then I lost respect for him as he blew his gasket left and right. But now he has moderated... haha! Small pun...