What are your thoughts on the presumptive Republican nominee to run for president? Do you think he has a chance? Do you think he was or is a wise choice by the party? In your opinion, how did this come about? Was he the best chance? Or are, as Pat Buchannon suggests, the GOP sandbagging this election, giving the Democrats some time in office, and waiting for the pendulum to swing back to the right?

Did you know that when he was in the military, before his residence at the Hanoi Hilton, his nickname was "Crash McCain"? We'll get to this in a moment.

A recent poll shows that the number of Americans who would refuse to vote for a black man plus the number of Americans who would refuse to vote for a woman pale in comparison to the number of Americans who would refuse to vote for a person of McCain's age. If elected, McCain would at 72 be the oldest president in US history. Maybe we're just once bitten twice shy on presidential Alzheimer's? Is that legit? What do PC people say?

Now, back to Crash McCain's nickname, Crash. It would be inhumanely cruel if people were making fun of his ordeal, but he earned that nickname long before his capture. In fact, being shot down in combat was the 5th time John McCain III crashed a military aircraft!!!

1. McCain III lost jet number one in 1958 when he plunged into Corpus Christi Bay while practicing landings. He was knocked unconscious by the impact coming to as the plane settled to the bottom.
2. McCain's second crash occurred while he was deployed in the Mediterranean. "Flying too low over the Iberian Peninsula," Timberg wrote, "he took out some power lines [reminiscent of the 1998 incident in which a Marine Corps jet sliced through the cables of a gondola at an Italian ski resort, killing 20] which led to a spate of newspaper stories in which he was predictably identified as the son of an admiral."
3. McCain's third crash three occurred when he was returning from flying a Navy trainer solo to Philadelphia for an Army-Navy football game. Timberg reported that McCain radioed, "I've got a flameout" and went through standard relight procedures three times before ejecting at one thousand feet. McCain landed on a deserted beach moments before the plane slammed into a clump of trees.
4. This one wasn't his fault. McCain's fourth aircraft loss occurred July 29, 1967, soon after he was assigned to the USS Forrestal as an A-4 Skyhawk pilot. While seated in the cockpit of his aircraft waiting his turn for takeoff, an accidently fired rocket slammed into McCain's plane. He escaped from the burning aircraft, but the explosions that followed killed 134 sailors, destroyed at least 20 aircraft, and threatened to sink the ship.
5. McCain's fifth loss happened during his 23rd mission over North Vietnam on Oct. 26, 1967, when McCain's A-4 Skyhawk was shot down by a surface-to-air missile. McCain ejected from the plane breaking both arms and a leg in the process and subsequently parachuted into Truc Bach Lake near Hanoi.

The fallout from that is well known. Crash McCain sold out his country for a doctor.

After being periodically slapped around for "three or four days" by his captors who wanted military information, McCain called for an officer on his fourth day of captivity. He told the officer, "O.K., I'll give you military information if you will take me to the hospital." -U.S. News and World Report, May 14, 1973 article written by former POW John McCain. "Demands for military information were accompanied by threats to terminate my medical treatment if I [McCain] did not cooperate. Eventually, I gave them my ship's name and squadron number, and confirmed that my target had been the power plant." Page 193-194, Faith of My Fathers by John McCain.

Now I can't hold this apparent act of treason against Crash, although I believe the Republicans will. But I can (and do) consider it a morally irredeemable flaw that McCain voted for the United States to torture others as a matter of policy and law.

I can also say that a handful of American soldiers would still be alive, 40 years on, if not for McCain's demonstrated inability to fly a plane. We don't even need to go into the Navy rumors that Crash was up partying the night before his fateful flight. I can also say that McCain received more metals for his 20 hours of combat time than people who put in many thousands of hours.

I'll never understand how this pro war Hawk managed to become a media darling? Or why he's so keen on sending more Americans into death's cold embrace given his experience?

Well, I certainly wouldn't vote for someone who cant fly a plane. And since you mention that he broke under torture by the VC, he really should be classified as a traitor. Regarding his age, I'd definitely rather have someone younger and less experienced in office.

Seriously though, McCain or Guiliani were the Republican's best shot at winning this election in which the odds are stacked against them by every measure. Apparently the incumbent party has never held the office in time of unpopular war or declining economy. That said, I think McCain has a shot(35% according to the sports books) at it. What will it say about how out of touch the Democrats are if McCain actually wins against all odds?

Originally Posted by cbwm

Well, I certainly wouldn't vote for someone who cant fly a plane.

Can't fly a plane is different from can't fly a plane but won't let that stop him from endangering lives. But it's no surprise the man who faults Clinton for not getting more American soldiers killed in Somalia, and holds that a president with Alzheimer's can (no, should) say "you died for nothing" but a president with a criminal record can't under worse and more dire circumstances, would think it's fine and dandy to give the enemy information they find valuable in a time of war.

I'm going to step out on a limb and make a prediction, based on all that I've observed. I'm guessing you have no problem whatsoever with George W Bush's AWOL status in a time of war, and begrudge Clinton his legal deferment. Which is not at all unlike the many Richard Cheney took.

What does this have to do with Crash McCain? Only that you're consistently holding republicans to an impossibly lower standard than you are democrats.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

I'm going to step out on a limb and make a prediction, based on all that I've observed. I'm guessing you have no problem whatsoever with George W Bush's AWOL status in a time of war, and begrudge Clinton his legal deferment. Which is not at all unlike the many Richard Cheney took.

What does this have to do with Crash McCain? Only that you're consistently holding republicans to an impossibly lower standard than you are democrats.

Truth be told, I don't. I have yet to call Clinton a draft dodger on this forum, even though he did dodge the draft. I'd say Dubya at least joining the forces and using his daddy's influence to skate out off most of it was a better showing, though not much. Since we are speaking of balanced representation lets fairly represent the military records of some people we know, from most presentable, to least:

1) John McCain - served with honor, spent 5 years in the Hanoi Hilton and didnt take the easy pass out, even when it was offered to him.

2) George Dubya Bush - Joined the military in time of war

3) Hillary Clinton - Opposed the war but rejected the radical left wingers going outside the system. Worked within the constraints of government

4) Barack Obama - No war experience whatsoever

5) Bill Clinton - Draft dodger

6) John Kerry - Personally committed questionable acts in Vietnam, solicited purple hearts where they werent merited, exited the war the minute he hit the magic 3 purple heart number, came back to the states and conspired with the communist party (who we were really at war with) to lie to congress, thereby betraying country in no uncertain terms.

That about covers it.
I think that just about sums it up

Originally Posted by cbwm

Truth be told, I don't. I have yet to call Clinton a draft dodger on this forum

Although you "fixed" that below.

Originally Posted by cbwm

1) John McCain - served with honor, spent 5 years in the Hanoi Hilton and didnt take the easy pass out, even when it was offered to him.

If giving up information to the enemy (cough treason cough) counts as serving with honor, you'll have to explain what "with honor" means.

Originally Posted by cbwm

2) George Dubya Bush - Joined the military in time of war

Then went AWOL. Like the employee who quits on the the last day of training, GWB was nothing but a waste of the military's resources. And since taking office has done nothing but harm to our military.

Originally Posted by cbwm

5) Bill Clinton - Draft dodger

Originally Posted by cbwm

6) John Kerry

Served with honor and earned purple hearts for valor under fire.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

If giving up information to the enemy (cough treason cough) counts as serving with honor, you'll have to explain what "with honor" means.

Hehe. I guarantee if it were you captured and tortured by the V.C., they could make you say "George Dubya Bush walks on water" and "Democrats don't have a clue" and pretty much anything else they wanted to by means of torture. Its pretty much accepted that everyone breaks once captured and tortured. The idea is to hold out as long as possible, which he unquestionably did. It's not like he did something really treasonous like give ballistic missile technology to China in exchange for money(Clinton) .

I like John McCain better than Barrack Obama or Hillary Clinton. That's also like me saying I like having my eyes poked out better than I like having my legs amputated and being stabbed repeatedly with a butter knife.

With that being said, I voted for Ron Paul.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

Although you "fixed" that below.



If giving up information to the enemy (cough treason cough) counts as serving with honor, you'll have to explain what "with honor" means.



Then went AWOL. Like the employee who quits on the the last day of training, GWB was nothing but a waste of the military's resources. And since taking office has done nothing but harm to our military.





Served with honor and earned purple hearts for valor under fire.

Man you have some issues. I take it you are one of those people who will take any and everything and try to turn it around as something horrible to make republicans look bad?

I'm not a fan of the current republican party at all but it's people like you that really really put me off to the other side too when you say the things like you have said in this thread.

It's not helping your cause to call a decorated veteran a traitor to his country.

Originally Posted by BamaStangGuy

I take it you are one of those people who will take any and everything and try to turn it around as something horrible to make republicans look bad?

They do a fine job making themselves look bad. I just like to bring this up as much as anything else. It's one thing to shriek and hollar when Bill Clinton cheats on his wife with an intern girl. It's another thing to make a small fuss when Larry Craig is arrested trying to cheat on his wife with a cop in the men's room, and then sweep it under the rug never to be mentioned again. If democracy depends on an educated public, sweeping things under the rug isn't fair play.

Originally Posted by BamaStangGuy

when you say the things like you have said in this thread.

I wouldn't have written them if McCain hadn't done them. That's always lost on conservatives, tho, and apparently their allies as well.

Originally Posted by BamaStangGuy

It's not helping your cause to call a decorated veteran a traitor to his country.

Ahem. I'm not the one who set the standard that giving up information to the enemy is treacherous. And I'm not the one who gave up information to the enemy. So you're taking your frustration out on the wrong guy here.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

They do a fine job making themselves look bad.

I agree. Just like the Democrats do. That's why I vote for neither.

I just like to bring this up as much as anything else. It's one thing to shriek and hollar when Bill Clinton cheats on his wife with an intern girl. It's another thing to make a small fuss when Larry Craig is arrested trying to cheat on his wife with a cop in the men's room, and then sweep it under the rug never to be mentioned again.

It's one thing to counter one extreme with another. Claiming treason on John McCain is much worse than the Republicans unfair crusade against Bill Clinton.

If democracy depends on an educated public, sweeping things under the rug isn't fair play.

I agree. That isn't an excuse to take things to the extreme though.

I wouldn't have written them if McCain hadn't done them. That's always lost on conservatives, tho, and apparently their allies as well.

lol I'm almost afraid to ask who you are voting for.

Ahem. I'm not the one who set the standard that giving up information to the enemy is treacherous. And I'm not the one who gave up information to the enemy. So you're taking your frustration out on the wrong guy here.

No I'm not. My frustration is right on target. It's my frustration with the extreme right wing in this country and my frustration with the extreme left wing of the country, which you fall into the latter. It's politics as usual from your end to not debate the issues but to label a decorated war veteran and a human being that spent 5 1/2 years captured and tortured as being responsible for treason is ludicrous and something I would expect from the likes of the insane left wing.

Originally Posted by BamaStangGuy

No I'm not. My frustration is right on target. It's my frustration with the extreme right wing in this country and my frustration with the extreme left wing of the country, which you fall into the latter. It's politics as usual from your end to not debate the issues but to label a decorated war veteran and a human being that spent 5 1/2 years captured and tortured as being responsible for treason is ludicrous and something I would expect from the likes of the insane left wing.

Again, giving information to the enemy has been considered treason long before I was born. I'm merely pointing out that it happened in this particular case. If you'd like to erase that standard, fine, but let's do it across the board or not at all. You know, in pursuit of honesty.

Sure, if you have no common sense and compassion for people you could do that. I believe treason should only be used in extreme circumstances where intent to harm the country was the clear motive. Not intended for people who have been held captive for 5 1/2 years and tortured. However, it's clear you have a deep hatred for the Republican party which is understandable why you can not be unbias when talking about this.

Originally Posted by BamaStangGuy

I believe treason should only be used in extreme circumstances where intent to harm the country was the clear motive. Not intended for people who have been held captive for 5 1/2 years and tortured.

In case you lost sight, I'm not putting the man on a criminal trial. And in case you lost perspective, the man is a job applicant, not a messiah! In military terms a person who sacrifices country to save self, well, military hawks have a word for people like that. We both know that much is true. This particular individual who chose to give up information the enemy found valuable in exchange for a visit to the hospital wants to be commander in chief of our Armed Forces. We as a country decide whether he gets to.

Originally Posted by BamaStangGuy

However, it's clear you have a deep hatred for the Republican party which is understandable why you can not be unbias when talking about this.

I'm not sure why the Republicans think the best way to have a discussion is to avoid the issues and use "you hate such and such" as a distraction technique? Could be America, in this case it's their party, in other cases it can be just about anything, except what's being talked about.

So would you like to talk about facts, or do you really insist on singing kumbaya?

Its just amazing such a traitor is still respected by the military, and pretty much every politician on both sides of the isle. I cant believe he still consults to the military and still holds his military rank and pension. Cant they see he is a traitor who betrayed his country? Why cant they see what is so clear to Newbie and ..... who else thinks that way?

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

In case you lost sight, I'm not putting the man on a criminal trial.

No but you are holding that against him in a political contest. Which is just as unfair, in my view.

And in case you lost perspective, the man is a job applicant, not a messiah!

Where have I claimed anything else? I don't like McCain's issues but I don't have a problem with him as a person. I won't be voting for him but it will be because I don't like the direction he is taking this country and not because I am scared someone will look at him in an intimidating way and scare him into revealing all our national security secrets

In military terms a person who sacrifices country to save self, well, military hawks have a word for people like that. We both know that much is true.

Yes you are correct. Myself though, I am not going to hold McCain responsible for what he did as no person should be expected to go through what he did without cracking under pressure. This was not some Jack Bauer 10 minute interrogation. I'm not going to use this against him when deciding to vote for him nor do I believe anyone else should. This election should be about the future of this country and the issues that we currently face. Not about whether or not someone who served this country and had 5 1/2 years of their life tore away from them by being held captive by the VC committed treason by caving in during the intense torture I am sure he was exposed to. That's absolutely ridiculous in my book.

This particular individual who chose to give up information the enemy found valuable in exchange for a visit to the hospital wants to be commander in chief of our Armed Forces. We as a country decide whether he gets to.

Answered above. It should not be an issue when deciding who to vote for.

I'm not sure why the Republicans think the best way to have a discussion is to avoid the issues and use "you hate such and such" as a distraction technique? Could be America, in this case it's their party, in other cases it can be just about anything, except what's being talked about.

If you are referring to me I'm not Republican. Also, what issue are you so upset about that I have avoided? I've clearly stated my opinion on your exact topic. You asked the questions in the first post and I believe I covered them. I found it offensive and was quite amazed that someone as your self could accuse John McCain of treason and commented on it.

Why you are saying otherwise is beyond me.

So would you like to talk about facts, or do you really insist on singing kumbaya?

I've stated my opinion on whether or not John McCain deserves the treason label that you have so loosely thrown out at him. I find it very disturbing how some people can get so caught up in hate for a party or candidate that it consumes them so much they loose site of the real issues this country faces and make it their goal to destroy that candidate or party at all costs.

If the far left and right just concentrated on speaking out for the issues they believed in as much as the try to destroy the opposite party and candidate this country would be in much better shape than it is in today.

Originally Posted by BamaStangGuy

I don't like McCain's issues but I don't have a problem with him as a person.

Amen to that.

Originally Posted by BamaStangGuy

No but you are holding that against him in a political contest. Which is just as unfair, in my view.

I don't want to get involved in the mud slinging ... but I have to throw my two cents in on this particular line of reasoning. It's really not unfair to take public information into account when you evaluate a person for a job. That's true whether it's a 7-11 job or the president of the US, who we like to think of as "the most powerful person in the world."

I'm not endorsing John's views, but it would be dangerous to think there should be less scrutiny than a minimum-wage retail worker. Finger on the proverbial button vs the ability to call the police, and all that...

John McCain should put the Republican party to shame. He's almost as liberal as most democrats.

Originally Posted by Lpspider

John McCain should put the Republican party to shame. He's almost as liberal as most democrats.

Yeh, he's the third Democrat in the contest.

Originally Posted by cbwm

Its just amazing such a traitor is still respected by the military

Not the members who served with him! He was given the nickname "Crash McCain" by his fellows.

Do your impression of people who make up their minds using facts, instead of just making up facts?