Know who I wish would check into the poshest Retirement Lodge in Elderabuse, Arizona? John McCain...

The BBQ Pit
1

Not done with the vigor it deserves, but maybe others can help-

John McCain on Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in June 2009:

Well suh, General Powell has reversed his opinion. He’s been vocal about it even.

John McCain on DADT in 2006:

And of course they’ve done that, at least sorta kinda. Admiral Mullen (Chairman of the JCoS) has not endorsed the repeal but says he would providing it goes into effect after the Pentagon study. Bob Gates is admittedly not giggling like a hyena about a repeal, has essentially said the same as Mullen and that he can live with it. The SASC voted for repeal 16-12.

So, McCain, while not enthusiastic about it, will at least consider it- right?

He says that he would “absolutely support” a filibuster of a repeal.

Does this old fart know that people record his words? And why the fuck is he dumping all credibility stock he has just to stay alive politically?

What’s his justification? He’s got plenty of money, he doesn’t even know how many houses he owns (which given his other comments could mean that there are two), he’s only got a few good years left maximum, and he’s sunk from one of the most respected men in politics to a laughing stock due to the running mate he chose but never vetted, due to his continual flip-flopping that he decried in others, and now due to his pandering to the rabid right who’ve made it clear there’s nothing he can do that will make them like him. The Daily Show won’t even invite him on anymore.

At this stage of the game if he really cares about his country he’s probably better off getting out of politics and into punditry. A come-clean book about his 2008 campaign would probably be a runaway bestseller, especially if it was honest, and might undo some of the damage when he released the Wasilla Kraken. Freed from office he wouldn’t have to worry about towing party line and might redeem some of his credibility whether straying from GOP positions or being the most right wingnut out there. Instead he decides to get fisted by Jeff Dunham to become the world’s most annoying “crazy old fart” puppet.

And last and perhaps least, where the fuck does he get off passing judgment on anybody with his "cheating on the wife who stood by you when you were a PoW and upgrading to a younger richer one against the teachings of the same Lord and Saviour you claim to worship old fartedy ass self? And what is his great concern for the troops based on- an honest fear that gays will take over the place like hyenas in the pridelands in The Lion King or just the desire to get elected again so he doesn’t have to wind up getting fed Jell-O when his wife drags him to the retirement home dinner theater excursion to see “Suzanne Somers in MY FAIR LADY”? Wicked old "way past his expiration date “raise a partisan objection when you can’t get anything else up” asshole.

He really likes saying “everything in my power” incidentally. One of my favorites was his little slip during the election:

How’s that workin’ for ya?

Old fucker.

2

No, no, no. Not there. He should have at least an honorary suite in the Fletcher Memorial Home for Incurable Tyrants and Kings.

3

Oh, we’re in the Pit? Awesome. John McCain is a piece of shit Admiral’s son who never had to work hard a day in his life. He was a terrible pilot and a cheating douchebag. He got tortured for awhile, which is sad, but that doesn’t make him a good or honorable person. It makes him an asshole that got tortured.

He’s willing to lie and change his long time “beliefs” so that he can get re-elected to a job that he think the country *owes *him. Fuck McCain right in his wrinkly, liverspotted pucker.

4

I think it’s time for a mandatory retirement age across the federal gummint, including the supreme court. Maybe 70 or 75.

Both senators from Hawaii are 85 and both from Utah are 76, for chrissakes.

5

The most likely reason is that former Rep. J.D. Hayworth is trying to Scozzafava him in the Republican Senate primary, so he tacked from from “mavericky” to hard right to try to fight off the challenge.

6

Gotta tell you, Sampiro, that that was some quality rant.

7

Bingo.

8

It would be rather ironicalistic if Palin endorsed Hayworth.

9

That suffering ennobles is a misconception I wish would go the way of the cocaine in Coca Cola. It’s a variant of Oscar Wilde’s saying that “nothing is made true because somebody is willing to die for it”’. Having suffered doesn’t make you a great guy.

Another one that bugs the shite out of me is steadfastness as a virtue. It comes up in every political election: ‘He has always stood by his principals’ and the opponent ‘changed his mind on all these key issues’. The example I usually default to is Jefferson Davis and Abraham Lincoln.

Of the two Davis was by far- incomparably- the more steadfast. He clung to his belief in white superiority and the righteousness of slavery all through the war, through his imprisonment and to the end of his days, and having appointed Bragg commander of the Army of Tennessee he stood by his decision incompetency after incompetency after incompetency and he clung to his belief the war could still go on even when he was on the run and sleeping in tents and Confederates were throwing rocks at him. Lincoln on the other hand was a flip-flopper: he kept changing generals, started out believing slavery shouldn’t be expanded but he had no plans for emancipation and became the great emancipator, he changed the strategy in the war a couple of times, he re-evaluated his opinions of people constantly both for good and bad, he changed his mind on any number of big things when he saw evidence to support changing it. Had he stuck by McLellan and kept his promise not to end slavery I dare say things might have gone a bit differently.
Steadfastness is just proof that you believe in your own infallibility or that you’re right about everything, and it’s really not a 50-50 split as to which categories the steadfast usually fall in.

McCain is a flip-flopper, but the most infuriating thing is he swears he’s not, doesn’t base his flops on logic or information so much as on public opinion polls, and yet condemns it in others.

10

McCain does not flip flop when it comes to telling lies. He is consistent there. He consistently dumped his first wife when he had to opportunity to marry a pretty rich heiress. He sticks with her, even though she now takes political stands opposite his. Without her, he is a broke, principle-less man. He consistently pretends that he admired Barry Goldwater, even though Goldwater thought McCain a huge phony. He sucks up to the memory (such as it is) of Ronald Reagan, even though Ron and Nancy dumped him as a friend when he ditched his first wife, a friend of Ron and Nancy’s.

This fool lost five (or was it six?) aircraft when in the Navy, and for all I know may have started the fire on the Forrestal through his ineptness.

Oh, and after Bush the Dumber slandered his family in the Carolina primary (I forgot whether it was North or South) McCain embraced Bush.

11

Senators don’t elect people; people elect people.

Blame the voters. He’s only giving them what they want. If his constituency wants a dishonest blowhard who will sacrifice his principles just to tell them what they want to hear, they’ll get one. If it’s not McCain, it’ll be another dishonest blowhard. He’s the right shape peg for the hole they need filling. But it’s the hole that dictates, not the peg.

12

Really? Just curious if they said this overtly or is it simply because he’s not on as much as he was before

13

I’m with you as long as Byrd follows him to the West Virginia equivalent.

14

I don’t know anything about McCain’s position on DADT beyond what is presented in the OP. And I don’t see any waffling or lying or position-changing or anything else bad.

It looks to me like McCain previously said he would go with what military leaders think about the issue, and he is currently saying that the current push to repeal DADT is coming from politicians and not military leaders. So, he’s being consistent. So why pit McCain now on this issue (besides the fact that McCain is a Republican and therefore perma-pittable on general grounds here on the neutral intelligent purely ignorance-fighting SD to the motherfucin’ MB)?

15

Jesus, you’re like the Jason Vorhees of ignorance.

McCain is against an amendment that will repeal DADT if the military dudes certify that it won’t hurt readiness. This is the opposite of what he said before, in that he said he would go with the military leaders on the issue. He is an asshole. And you are a stupid, barely sentient child, unable to think for yourself.

16

You have a cite for the bolded part above (especially the “if”)? News reports I’ve seen haven’t stated the contents of the bill in such terms. I’ve seen articles saying that the bill would go into effect only after a Pentagon study, but not only if the Pentagon study says that the repeal would not hurt readiness.

17

It’s an amendment added to the defense authorization bill:

From:http://news.firedoglake.com/2010/05/28/scott-brown-wont-filibuster-defense-authorization-bill-over-dadt/

18

Right. Like I said, your cite says that the repeal wouldn’t go into effect until the Pentagon study is released. But you said that the bill wouldn’t go into effect until “the military dudes certify that it won’t hurt readiness.” Your cite doesn’t support that statement.

19

Read it again. The President, the Defense Secretary and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs have to certify that it won’t affect readiness.

Even if you don’t count the Commander in Chief, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and Secretary of Defense as a “Military Dudes”, all three are basing their certification on the DADT review currently going on. Where the military is examining readiness impacts of repealing DADT.

20

Since DOD policy prohibits service members from using official authority to influence or interfere with an election or solicit votes for a particular issue, allow or publish any articles, letters, or endorsements for or against a particular issue, speak before a partisan gathering that promotes a particular issue, or participate in any media discussion for or against a partisan political issue - how would any push to repeal DADT begin with the military in the first place? Either McCain was being disingenuous then or is being disingenuous now, particularly in the face of the Chairman of the Joint Chief’s statement during one of the hearings that:

It’s one thing if McCain said that military leaders were still somewhat divided on the issue, since Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey said:

But instead McCain is now insisting on service members who cannot openly and officially advocate for a political cause to originate this process. Appropriately enough, that’s a Catch-22.