P.S. Of course I don’t know for certain that McCain was listening, but c’mon, this is Presidential politics - does anyone really think that he wouldn’t? These campaign guys are ruthless killers.
Here’s him giving the same story (in the third person) in the NYT. It’s pretty clear its the same guard:
I suspect the candidates would’ve stipulated that the other candidate not be allowed to listen before hand as a pre-requisite to their appearing. From my understanding, that’s usually how these things work.
I caught part of the event replayed on C-SPAN and then went back and watched what I had missed on youtube, and I found it pretty interesting. I don’t expect the so-called debates to be as good, if they are anything like what they have been in the past few elections.
It seems that the more the press is willing to examine McCain, the more likely it will be that he is exposed for all his shortcomings. Clearly, the public does not know much about him. Even this thread is apparently discovering and publicizing features of his past and his “performance” last night that are not part of the public record. Too bad the so-called liberal media don’t do even the most rudimentary digging, cross-checking, and research into his past. One can only hope that good will triumph in the end.
This thread is full of Obama supporters. The general public is not going to be nearly so eager to find out things about McCain that might reflect poorly on him, and in general, neither will the press. He’s a likeable guy - even the people who don’t want him to win don’t for the most part dislike him. I don’t think most people are motivated to dig up dirt.
A point made by Frank Rich in yesterday’s NYTimes in an op-ed titled The Candidate We Still Don’t Know (free reg. required, I think).
You should take it seriously in that your claim was that he changed the story from May to Christmas, whereas that story from February states that the cross incident took place at Christmas several months after the first incident. Obviously, your claim that he changed the story in that context is false.
ETA: Will you take Simplicio’s NYT link from 2000 as valid?
Because McCain said it was the same guard:
http://rickwarrennews.com/transcript/civil_forum_transcript-05.txt
4 ... ALL OF A SUDDEN THE DOOR OF THE CELL OPENED, THE
5 GUARD CAME IN, A GUY WHO WAS JUST WHAT WE CALL A GUN
6 GUARD. HE JUST WALKED AROUND THE CAMP WITH A GUN ON HIS
7 SHOULDER. HE WENT LIKE THIS AND THEN HE LOOSENED THE
8 ROPES. HE CAME BACK ABOUT FOUR HOURS LATER, HE TIGHTENED
9 THEM UP AGAIN AND LEFT. THE FOLLOWING CHRISTMAS, BECAUSE
10 IT WAS CHRISTMAS DAY, WE WERE ALLOWED TO STAND OUTSIDE OF
11 OUR CELL FOR A FEW MINUTES, AND THOSE DAYS WE WERE NOT
12 ALLOWED TO SEE OR COMMUNICATE WITH EACH OTHER ALTHOUGH WE
13 CERTAINLY DID. AND I WAS STANDING OUTSIDE FOR MY FEW
14 MINUTES, OUTSIDE MY CELL. HE CAME WALKING UP. HE STOOD
15 THERE FOR A MINUTE AND WITH HIS HANDLE ON THE DIRT IN THE
16 COURTYARD HE DREW A CROSS AND HE STOOD THERE AND A MINUTE
17 LATER, HE RUBBED IT OUT AND WALKED AWAY.
Who do you think ‘he’ is?
I thought it was obvious that McCain had listened to the questions the first time and that his toadies had prepared his answers for him. I assumed that “cone of silence” thing was a joke. Has the McCain camp been directly asked whether JSM listened to the Obama interview live?
I agree that the whole thing appeared to be a setup to make McCain look good, and I agree that Warren looked biased. I also think that while McCain (with the advantage of knowing what the questions would be) answered quickly, he didn’t answer very thoughtfully, and he often didn’t answer very directly. He was particularly evasive on the question about national security conflicting with civil rights and went off on a tangent about union votes. WTF do unions have to do with the question? It was just an empty cheap shot and a misdirection and he didn’t actually answer the question.
He was also kind of wormy about the “what’s the definition of rich?” question, and he didn’t answer it at all.
He said his greatest moral failing was “the failure of my first marriage,” which is, again, a weaselly way to phrase it in that it externalizes the blame and fails to be specific about what he, John McCain did to make that marriage fail. Obama at least pinpointed a specific moral failing in citing his selfishness in his youth and his drug use.
I’ve never bought that insipid cross story either, by the way. No, I can’t prove he made it up, but it sounds too glurgey to be real. Plus, he’s been caught changing his stories before – specifically, his story about giving the names of the Green Bay Packer offensive starting line. Just recently, when he was in Pittsburgh, he forgot which team he had said in his book and changed it to the Steelers to try to ingratiate himself with Pennsylvanians.
Even though the whole thing was somewhat of a rigged game for Obama, I though he did as well as could be expected with such major disadvantages as a stacked venue, a biased interviewer and having to answer the questions cold.
The part about Christmas was never in his story originally. He added it 25 years after the fact, when he was running for President.
If you can find a cite for the cross part earlier than 1999, we’d all very much like to see it. Apparently the merciful guard dates to 1973, but no one thus far has found the cross bit earlier than 1999.
ETA: You’d really think he’d have mentioned it in 1973; it’s a pretty big deal, I’d think.
What do you expect that they would find if they “did some digging”? What skeleton could McCain possibly have that could be more damaging to his campaign than the self-inflicted damage he’s doing already?
What, is John Edwards McCain’s illegitimate son from an affair with Zsa Zsa Gabor?
For a lot of people, especially crochety republican veterans (of whom my family is full of), telling falsehoods about your war experiences is a VERY bad thing.
Actually, Barack Obama is the infamous illegitimate black child. What a twist!
What if the country found out that he wasn’t as much of a hero as they thought, for example. What if, for example, they found out he had been on the take for years? There are lots of skeletons that might be in McCain’s closet - if we knew about them, they wouldn’t be in the closet. Lord knows, there are plenty out of the closet that everyone seems to be perfectly happy ignoring. The whole narrative they’ve built about him is pretty much false from start to finish, except the fact that he has a good sense of humor, and that he voted across the aisle a few times some years back.
Some further googling reveals that McCain was indeed transfered to a different prison between May and Christmas of 1969. From McCain’s fellow POW:
Of course its not totally impossible that the guard was transfered with him. And it’s not impossible that said guard happened to be a Catholic member of the anti-Catholic NVA, in North Vietnam, which most Christians had fled when the Communists took over. Or that McCain simply never mentioned the story before '99, despite having discussed the actions of the merciful guard in his earlier accounts, or that the stories similarity to that of Solzhenitsyn’s is coincidence. Not impossible, but it certainly has enough going against it that my bullshit detector is pegged.
I don’t suppose there is a cite for this? I’m having trouble searching it out. It would be interesting- if it were confirmed.
edit: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/pastor-warren-contradicts-self-on-cone.html
Wow!
Shit, I don’t even know if the story is real. All I’m saying is that it’s not a change in the story that it happened at Christmas, which is what Lamar said.
But what are we getting all in an uproar about? It’s not as if he was using the Holocaust and concentration camps or civil rights marches to tell some story that has a deeper metaphorical meaning to him, right?
Of course it is. He told one consistent story for 25 years, and then a different one. How can you possibly claim that he didn’t change his story?
But it is a change in the story between 1973 and 1999. That’s the whole point. And while it isn’t concentration camps, it is POW camps. He’s saying in 1973 that he experienced the humanity or kindness of a guard. In 1999, suddenly the guard becomes a secret Christian, who sometime later shares the revering of a toe-scraped cross with McCain on Christmas, particularly interesting because McCain had been transferred by that time to a different camp.
To me, that’s a change in the story, and it is pretty shameful if it’s not true. That’s why I’d like to see if it’s in McCain’s autobiography. Because this sounds like the tale of a good story-teller, who likes to add details to make it a better story. And it does make it a better story. But it makes it bullshit if it’s not true. I’m not real big on the idea of someone exploiting his POW days and the humanity of one of his guards to get elected, you know?
ETA: It wasn’t presented as a metaphor. It was presented as something that had actually happened.