The Dangers of Getting What you wish for

Posted By: Peter DavidPosted On:

So John McCain lampooned Obama for his lack of foreign diplomatic experience. Obama promptly scheduled a fact finding tour, and the press and foreign countries ate it up. Visuals of Obama sinking hoops with the armed forces while McCain looked decrepit riding around in a golf cart made the rounds of the media. The result? McCain is now bìŧçhìņg about the media’s love affair with Obama.
Sorry, Senator McCain. What you should have done was keep your mouth shut and not talk about Obama’s not visiting Iraq in several years until September, when it would have been too late for Obama to arrange a foreign sweep. Instead you enabled him to turn a liability into a plus. And since it was all your idea, I don’t really see where you get to complain about it.
PAD

136 comments on “The Dangers of Getting What you wish for”

  3. Alan Coil: Why is it nobody ever suggests McCain stayed a prisoner because he was cooperating with them.
    If he had cooperated he wouldn’t have stayed a prisoner. It’s not like a guy who’s been captured for three years has any useful information to hand over.
    Another thing that keeps people from making accusations like that is all the torture that McCain endured. Even after years of rehabilitation, he still couldn’t raise his arms higher than his shoulders. So there probably wasn’t a lot of cooperation going on. Heck, I don’t have any problem with someone who *does* cooperate under those conditions. Sign whatever you want, it doesn’t mean anything to me. If we all agreed that everyone should sign this stuff the first day, it wouldn’t even be a propaganda win when people did sign.

  5. Why is it nobody ever suggests McCain stayed a prisoner because he was cooperating with them. I know somebody out there thinks this. In fact, I’d say there are many who might think this. I’d bet they would say it if McCain was Black.
    Um, why are you asking why nobody suggests this when you already know one guy who does and think lots of others do???
    If the question why nobody on this board suggests that, it might be because they are afraid of everyone thinking they’re morons.
    I’d have to give McCain a rare win this last week–he’s managed to squeak to a statistically insignificant 1 point lead in the Rasmussen polls. But it’s more of an Obama mistep than anything McCain did. Only 22% of those polled thought McCain’s ad was racist while over half had a negative opinion of Obama’s dollar comment.
    But Obama keeps his cool and he’ll almost certainly bounce back, as long as he keeps the kooky elements under control (McCain has the same problem and is probably less able to control his nuttier followers since they are far more anti-Obama than pro-McCain)

  6. After considering that video of the McCain ad introducing the very metaphor he’s called on Obama as playing the race card, the only thing I’m left to imagine is that Obama’s plan for victory includes abstaining from any mention of race, even if it’s an opportunity to bust on McCain when he’s vulnerable. The notion is frightening for it’s subtlety in a national campaign.

  7. Another thing that keeps people from making accusations like that is all the torture that McCain endured.
    However, that shouldn’t keep people from questioning McCain’s record on whether we, as a nation, should be using said tactics on others. McCain has been very weak on this issue, and has been more than willing to back down to let Bush have his way.

  8. Something I’ve always wondered about McCain is whether he is able to sympathize with non-Americans, whether he has any regret whatsoever if non-Americans are killed in the name of protecting American interests. I’ll explain my reasons below.
    1. Before his capture, McCain flew ground attack aircraft. This is different from serving on the ground, shooting people, and seeing the results of your work up close (which causes some people to have regrets). For McCain, all the killing was done from a distance and he wasn’t given much cause to dwell on the fact that his targets were living, thinking, feeling human beings.
    2. After his capture, McCain was tortured by the other side. Whereas before he may have been merely apathetic towards the people he had been bombing or shooting at or whatever, his experiences as a POW may have turned that apathy into pure hatred.
    If he sees a country today that reminds him of the Viet Cong, do you think he will want to bomb it? He’s sang about doing that to Iran. Do you think he will care if bombing it kills innocent people, innocent non-Americans? I don’t.

  9. Heck, I don’t have any problem with someone who *does* cooperate under those conditions. Sign whatever you want, it doesn’t mean anything to me. If we all agreed that everyone should sign this stuff the first day, it wouldn’t even be a propaganda win when people did sign.
    In the post-Vietnam era, the military did indeed recognize that sometimes a soldier might be exposed to more stress than a human can be expected to endure. In military-law classes in basic training in the Eighties, we were taught that a soldier captured by the enemy is expected to resist interrogation to the best of his ability – and should he crack, his fellow prisoners should attempt to rebuild his morale, to enable him to resist again in the future.

  10. Craig J. Ries, please don’t quote me if you’re not actually responding to what I said. I never said anything about McCain’s torture affecting the discussion on McCain’s policy on torture, so don’t drag me into a discussion of a statement I didn’t make. That’s not fair to me.

  11. Craig J. Ries, please don’t quote me if you’re not actually responding to what I said.
    You said something, I decided to take it off on a tangent because I think the issues are related.
    So, to be blunt, if you don’t want to be quoted, don’t comment.

  12. Craig J. Ries,
    No. You prefer to take it off tangent because you’d prefer getting your talking points in regardless of the point being debated. You’ve proven this time and time again. And McCain has bucked the Bush Administration many times regarding Gitmo, Guantonomo, the Geneva Convention and issue of torture. google those topics and McCain and maybe you’ll see the truth. And maybe his outspokenness against torture has something to do with being tortured himself. THAT is very likely to be related.
    I would very much like to engage in a serious discussion with you, Craig. But you seem incapable of actually reacting with an informed opinion to what people say and instead “insert eye rolls” and the like. And if you’re going to quote someone, it is considered good form to actually respond to what they said, regardless of what you choose to say is “correct” or “related”.
    Seeing as how you tend to overreact when people say something you don’t like, I would think it a formal courtesy that when someone asks you not to quote them if you might give the perception of misrepresenting what they say, you should just say, “Sorry. I realize this is my opinion and not a reaction to what you actually said.” To be blunt, you are rude.

  13. PAD,
    “That is quite possibly the most moronic thing you have ever said”
    While the competition is fierce, I would say it wins. In a walk. These kinds of statements, and Alan Coil’s, are incomprehensible to me. If Obama had been, say, A POW in the first Gulf War and he had done what McCain did in letting others go first AND he had the organization he has and could speak like he does, he would win in a historic blowout.
    I might even vote for him.
    But these are the type of statements I seem to see and hear every day. It makes me more sad than angry, although I experience both emotions.
    I always thought there were some opinions that were pretty much universal. But when you see some of the bile and unappreciation and total lack of concern or appreciation some peoiple have for anything other than themselves, THAT scares people more than 20 Bin Ladens.
    The most admired Presidents – or people in general – tried to inspire people to achieve the greater good for all while having the people striving for the best they could individually. if everyone is at or near their potential, the society as a whole benefits.
    As much as I have detested some of what McCain has done in regard to certain issues, I feel he can be that kind of leader. Feel free to disagree. But some of the venomous, borderline scary stuff coming from some Obama supporters is what could doom his candidacy. More than racism or the “Republican Attack Machine” ever could.

  14. If Obama had been, say, A POW in the first Gulf War and he had done what McCain did in letting others go first AND he had the organization he has and could speak like he does, he would win in a historic blowout. I might even vote for him.

    A lot of fabricated facts are floating around about Obama — like that he’s a Muslim, that he was sworn into office on the Koran, that he refuses to stand for the national anthem, that his wife refers to “whitey” — that the news takes almost every opportunity to correct, but people still report believing them in substantial number.
    Your comment demonstrates you are oblivious to their fabricated nature, from which it can reasonably be inferred you probably believe them. Or worse, you simply don’t care, as long as the fabricated facts floating around benefit your party.
    When McCain rubs the republican leadership the wrong way, his accomplishments are subject to ridicule too, as demonstrated in the 2000 primary. When they don’t like him, he’s a Manchurian candidate South Carolinians are informed fathered a black baby. And you — and McCain — want to preserve that power structure in the conflicting interest of honoring his service. Well, what’s more faithful to reality is that this country will benefit more from starving the parasites you want to shelter.

  15. No. You prefer to take it off tangent because you’d prefer getting your talking points in regardless of the point being debated.
    Listen, Jerome, I know you have a giant hard on for attacking me just to get your jollies, but it’s time to put your ego in check.
    The fact remains that if you actually bother to read just this thread alone, you’ll see that the conversation goes off in many different directions as the conversation moves along. And you know what? This happens ALL the time.
    So why the hëll are you so desperate to single me out when everybody else is doing the same dámņ thing?
    To be blunt, you are rude.
    Well, you need to shut the hëll up and find a mirror, Mr. “Somebody Apparently Died and Made Me God” Maida. You’ve decided to appoint yourself judge and jury around here lately, as if what you say means something more than what anybody else says, and it’s downright pathetic.
    So, instead of discussing anything related to the topic at hand, you’re pìššìņg on me. Again. And *I* am the one who has a problem?
    Or better yet, feel free to not respond to me. Or hold everybody on this board to the same standard and spend your days pìššìņg on everybody equally. Like I said, it’s time you check your ego in at the door.

  16. At the risk of bringing down somebody’s wrath for daring to discuss what has become a tangent of the original topic…
    If he sees a country today that reminds him of the Viet Cong, do you think he will want to bomb it? He’s sang about doing that to Iran.
    Saying and doing are two different things. Clinton and Bush had all the same intelligence on Iraq, and they both said that Hussein should be removed from power. But Bush is the one that acted, and so he’s the one that bears all the consequences.
    To me, it seems like Iran is simply being used as a political tool, rather than anybody actually believing that Iran is another Viet Cong.
    Do you think he will care if bombing it kills innocent people, innocent non-Americans? I don’t.
    Well, let’s face it, on some level, there is a disconnect between the leaders of wars and the innocents that are affected. You know when you start a war that there’s going to be innocents killed, and all the rules of engagement are not going to prevent bad things from happening.
    But I honestly don’t think I’ve seen anything from McCain to believe he wouldn’t care.

  17. If McCain had been a foot soldier there would be people saying the exact opposite–that having to watch the people he killed up close and personal means he has to be a bloodthirsty monster to continue to do it yadda yadda. It’s the silly season, where the partisans use their opinions to determine the facts.
    Jerome, Jason, I think Craig is correct on the point that using Jason’s quote to bring up something that is at the very least tangentially related to that quote is perfectly fair game. Whether you think his point is valid is something else and you can certainly challenge it but I don’t see any unfairness in his bringing it up.
    Hey, did anyone see the Bill Clinton interview last night? Classic vintage BC. He just can’t bring himself to say that Obama is ready to be president. The interviewer asked him point blank and he gave this great answer to the effect that nobody is ready to be president. Huh. Could have sworn he and Hillary said that Hillary was ready “from day one” on multiple occasions.
    How much do you have to hate your party’s nominee if you can’t even say he’s ready for the job?

  18. “How much do you have to hate your party’s nominee if you can’t even say he’s ready for the job?”
    The time to worry is when B.C. starts endorsing McCain,,,

  19. “How much do you have to hate your party’s nominee if you can’t even say he’s ready for the job?”
    The time to worry is when B.C. starts endorsing McCain…

  20. Jerome Maida,
    I did not make a statement as such. I offered up a question, along with an observation wondering if anyone wanted to discuss that point.
    I have no belief that McCain was psychologically damaged by his torture. If I were to adopt typical Reich Wing patterns of discourse, I’d allude to that every chance I had until the general public started to believe it.

  21. Craig said:
    “Clinton and Bush had all the same intelligence on Iraq…”
    Agreed, at least up to the point that Bush got in office.
    Ron Suskind has done an investigation. He is speaking about it on the radio this week. He says that somebody in the upper reaches of the Bush offices ordered the CIA to fabricate evidence.
    “In the fall of 2003, after the world learned there were no WMD — as Habbush had foretold — the White House ordered the CIA to carry out a deception. The mission: create a handwritten letter, dated July, 2001, from Habbush to Saddam saying that Atta trained in Iraq before the attacks and the Saddam was buying yellow cake for Niger with help from a “small team from the al Qaeda organization.”
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ron-suskind/the-forged-iraqi-letter-w_b_117056.html

  23. But the newspapers were reporting at the time that the CIA couldn’t back up any of Bush’s accounts of WMD in Iraq, or of them shopping for yellowcake in Niger. Who was this fabricated evidence ever submitted to?

  24. And don’t tell me that McCain is torqued about the level of adoration Obama’s allegedly receiving, when what’s really got him pìššëd øff is just that he isn’t on the receiving end of that press adoration anymore.
    While I think you are out to lunch about the kid gloves the media are using on Obama, I suspect you are right about the real source of McCain’s anger. He is no longer their darling maverick and he hates it.
    Iowa Jim

  25. What’s the press not saying about Obama that you can say they’re handling him with kid gloves, and that anyone’s out to lunch for not noticing?

  27. God save Obama from supporters like Bob herbert.
    Every family has the uncle (or uncles) they’ll never admit to being related to. 🙂

  31. I’m just surprised at how very little upset there was over the Obama appearance at the Western Wall in Jerusalem, particularly when one of his supporters hung a campaign poster. ON. THE. WESTERN. WALL. I mean, really.
    The Berlin bounce is already out of this fact-supporting tour. Just two days ago, they were neck and neck again (and it’ll change a number of times before November).

  32. But Paris Hilton LIED in her campaign ad! She claimed to be “totally hot”, when in fact she’s an emaciated toastrack whose primary attraction lies in her access to the family fortune! Can we really trust her to lead the country?
    Oh, sure, she could probably cover the national debt out of her petty cash, but still…
    🙂

  33. God save Obama from supporters like Bob herbert.

    Well, today’s Dowd mentioned how Obama is pìššìņg øff the old-guard civil rights leadership because they want him to play the race card, and Obama seems to be going out of his way to not point out McCain came up with the dollar bill image he’s complaining about now a month ago. I can only imagine that Obama has a card ready that defending himself against accusations he’s playing the race card himself is too small for.

  34. If McCain had been a foot soldier there would be people saying the exact opposite–that having to watch the people he killed up close and personal means he has to be a bloodthirsty monster to continue to do it yadda yadda. It’s the silly season, where the partisans use their opinions to determine the facts.
    People might say the exact opposite, but I wouldn’t be one of those people because I didn’t say that about John Kerry in 2004. I didn’t even think it.
    Kerry protested the war after he returned home. I wonder how many bomber pilots did the same. I honestly don’t know, and the answer my very well surprise me. But I’m going to guess that not very many did.

  35. People might say the exact opposite, but I wouldn’t be one of those people because I didn’t say that about John Kerry in 2004. I didn’t even think it.
    I won’t presume to speak for you but that’s sort of my point–some (some) people who think that kerry was heroic while questioning McCain’s psychology based on their military service would probably make the exact same conclusions for exactly opposite reasons were the roles reversed. They have an opinion and they will interpret the facts to support that opinion. Nothing new about that.
    At any rate, with even the tiny possibility of John Edwards being Obama’s vice president now gone I’d say Obama’s chances just increased.

  36. What is it about Edwards that has been bothering you all this time? That the playing field republicans portray as fair he portrays as fixed? Why do you have to declare war on that? Your lifestyle doesn’t even depend on you competing in the private sector.

Comments are closed.