John McCain

from PolMach Forums

So, remember when John McCain was in an interveiw, and he started talking about Obamas relationship with Bil Ayers? First some backround on Mr. Ayers. Bill Ayers helped found the radical Weathermen, launching a campaign of bombings that would target the Pentagon and United States Capitol. Mr. Ayers and Mr. Obama have met at fundraisers and other events. So anyways, McCain said in an interveiw last spring (on television) "How can you countenance someone who was engaged in bombings that could have or did kill innocent people?"

So, the only reason why this is at least a little ironic comeing from Mr. McCain, is because he killed innocent people in Vietnam.

On October 26, 1967, John McCain was shot down while flying his A-4 Skyhawk, but before he was shot down McCain fired off his missile at—not a military target, not an army unit, not a battleship—but an electricity generating station that supplied electrical power to a number of neighborhoods. The target, according to McCain, was in 'a heavily populated part of Hanoi.' Heavily populated. A plane from the sky raining missiles down on a heavily populated area of a nation's capital.

Also, McCain has continully voted to fund the war over and over again, a war that has caused countless civilian casualtys.

Well this is just some rambling from me. I know alot of people might comment along the lines of things like "Well, Obama..." or "Obama did this...", but the point is this is about the McCain hypocrisy. Thank you.

4,689 views 14 replies
Reply #1 from PolMach Forums Top

There is a huge difference between someone who caused unfortunate collateral damage in the service of our country, and someone who told people to kill their parents.  The parallel you've conjured up here is absurd!

Let's not forget Obama's association with other messed up characters:

Jeramiah Wrong

Soon to be behind bars Rezko

Oh, and his enormous contributions to that wonderful organization ACORN

Enough said

Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top

There is a huge difference between someone who caused unfortunate collateral damage in the service of our country, and someone who told people to kill their parents. The parallel you've conjured up here is absurd!
End of quote

I would modify that slightly to reflect "in times of war".  Since the villians in war are the agressors, not the soldiers.  Ayers is the agressor and the war monger in this comparison.  I am sure he would not find that funny, but then I dont find him funny in the least.  And I doubt his victims do either,

One other difference, and it is huge.  Bill Ayers targeted civilians.  John McCain never did.

Galactic Civilizations IV
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top

Bill Ayers targeted civilians. John McCain never did.
End of quote

I don't want to put the blame on anyone, but some American troopers DID targeted civilians in the Vietnam war. There also have been accidental bombing of civilian targets too during that war. Off course, there is a huge, huge, huge step before calling the people who have done any atrocity (accidental or intentional) while serving under the flag as "terrorists" or the such.

It's an even bigger step to call any people who's only blame was to serve under the flag terrorist, just because some of their co-warriors have acted like butcherous dicks once.

Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top

but some American troopers DID targeted civilians in the Vietnam war.
End of quote

And they were prosecuted (when found) as war criminals.  I agree we should prosecute Ayers as one as well.

Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top

And they were prosecuted (when found) as war criminals. I agree we should prosecute Ayers as one as well
End of quote

Why wasn't he? I think it was some sort of technicality, right?

I hate it when that sort of thing happen... But then again, it's when those "technicality" happens that we learn to close the gap on them. And if America ever turns into a nation where the justice itself can violate it's own law to bring justice (a partial justice, to add, since Justice is always partial to the one who rules it), then we are in trouble.

In short, should Ayers have been tried? Yes. Should have be condemned? Yes. Is Obama guilty by association? No.

Are the American troopers who have done terrible things on the field guilty? Yes. Does anybody who has served alongside them be guilty by association? No.

Clear and simple.

Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top

Bill Ayers targeted civilians. John McCain never did.
End of quote

 

Dr. Guy, don't forget Ayers targeted FELLOW citizens.  

Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top

In short, should Ayers have been tried? Yes. Should have be condemned? Yes. Is Obama guilty by association? No.

Are the American troopers who have done terrible things on the field guilty? Yes. Does anybody who has served alongside them be guilty by association? No.
End of quote

 

Cikomyr, I'm not following your reasoning here. 

If you are serving with someone participating in war crimes you don't always have a choice who you serve with. 

Barak made the choice to be associated with this man and to announce his political aspirations from this man's living room. 

The first doesn't have a choice the latter does.  

Although I don't agree in guilt by association but when you have a list of concerning affiliations as he has, one has to question if there is guilt by association.

Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top

Barak made the choice to be associated with this man and to announce his political aspirations from this man's living room.

The first doesn't have a choice the latter does.

Although I don't agree in guilt by association but when you have a list of concerning affiliations as he has, one has to question if there is guilt by association.
End of quote

Not really. If the association is in no way related to the actual crime committed, I don't see why we should associate the crime with Obama. After all, it's not like they sat together to plan the downfall of America. They were part of the same charity movement.

Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top

If the association is in no way related to the actual crime committed, I don't see why we should associate the crime with Obama.
End of quote

If a man is rejoicing about his terrorism, and you are a party to it by association it does have a lot to do with it.  You may not be guilty of any crime, but it says a lot about your judgement and your views.  That is the slam, not a crime, just "birds of a feather"

Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top

If a man is rejoicing about his terrorism, and you are a party to it by association it does have a lot to do with it. You may not be guilty of any crime, but it says a lot about your judgement and your views. That is the slam, not a crime, just "birds of a feather"
End of quote

Except if you think you will hurt a good cause by refusing to work with the man, such as being on the administration board of the charity movement. Come on, you just try to label bad things on the guy. Come back when Obama will have effectively joined an anti-american organisation!

Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top

Except if you think you will hurt a good cause by refusing to work with the man, such as being on the administration board of the charity movement. Come on, you just try to label bad things on the guy.
End of quote

Eh, no.  The KKK does some good work, but I will not serve on the boards with them.  This is the same thing, just with a different color hood.

Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top

Eh, no. The KKK does some good work, but I will not serve on the boards with them. This is the same thing, just with a different color hood.
End of quote

Please give me example of good work..

Okay. But would you accept to sit on the same board than 1 KKK member for a charity organisation that is in no way related to the KKK?

Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top

But would you accept to sit on the same board than 1 KKK member for a charity organisation that is in no way related to the KKK?
End of quote

Ever heard the Groucho Marx quote?  I beleive it goes something like "I would not be a member of any club that would have me as a member".  Kind of the same. I would not serve on the board of any organization that would have a KKK member on the board.

Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top

Okay. But would you accept to sit on the same board than 1 KKK member for a charity organisation that is in no way related to the KKK?
End of quote

If it was a KNOWN and PROMINATE member of the KKK I would absolutely not sit on the same board.  NOR would I allow myself to be associated enough with them to be caught in their house yet alone announcing my political career from their living room. 

Being caught on a board may be one thing but there was more of a relationship than just a fellow board member.