McCain's Speech: The Best Part

[Gutshot John]

This is what Kerry/Dems failed to understand when he said he was "reporting for duty". We don't want a self-proclaimed war hero...we want a man that has genuinely suffered in war and understands the danger faced by men a President sends into harm's way.

I'm not ashamed to say that this had me a bit choked up. This isn't a story of heroism...this is a story of character forged in failure and adversity.



On an October morning, in the Gulf of Tonkin, I prepared for my 23rd mission over North Vietnam. I hadn't any worry I wouldn't come back safe and sound. I thought I was tougher than anyone. I was pretty independent then, too. I liked to bend a few rules, and pick a few fights for the fun of it. But I did it for my own pleasure; my own pride. I didn't think there was a cause more important than me.

Then I found myself falling toward the middle of a small lake in the city of Hanoi, with two broken arms, a broken leg, and an angry crowd waiting to greet me. I was dumped in a dark cell, and left to die. I didn't feel so tough anymore. When they discovered my father was an admiral, they took me to a hospital. They couldn't set my bones properly, so they just slapped a cast on me. When I didn't get better, and was down to about a hundred pounds, they put me in a cell with two other Americans. I couldn't do anything. I couldn't even feed myself. They did it for me. I was beginning to learn the limits of my selfish independence. Those men saved my life.

I was in solitary confinement when my captors offered to release me. I knew why. If I went home, they would use it as propaganda to demoralize my fellow prisoners. Our Code said we could only go home in the order of our capture, and there were men who had been shot down before me. I thought about it, though. I wasn't in great shape, and I missed everything about America. But I turned it down.

A lot of prisoners had it worse than I did. I'd been mistreated before, but not as badly as others. I always liked to strut a little after I'd been roughed up to show the other guys I was tough enough to take it. But after I turned down their offer, they worked me over harder than they ever had before. For a long time. And they broke me.

When they brought me back to my cell, I was hurt and ashamed, and I didn't know how I could face my fellow prisoners. The good man in the cell next door, my friend, Bob Craner, saved me. Through taps on a wall he told me I had fought as hard as I could. No man can always stand alone. And then he told me to get back up and fight again for our country and for the men I had the honor to serve with. Because every day they fought for me.

I fell in love with my country when I was a prisoner in someone else's. I loved it not just for the many comforts of life here. I loved it for its decency; for its faith in the wisdom, justice and goodness of its people. I loved it because it was not just a place, but an idea, a cause worth fighting for. I was never the same again. I wasn't my own man anymore. I was my country's.

[TOrrock]

I sure as hell got choked up.

[Fuzzyblob]

I just got back from a trip and so missed all but the beginning of the Republican convention, but the part you just cited sounds pretty powerful. The overall reaction from the convention I've been hearing though from pretty much every quarter has been pretty negative. I ran into a friend of mine today who's a Republican leaning independent and he told me he stopped watching before McCain even spoke because the majority of the speeches were so intolerably venomous, fear-mongering, and filled with hatred.

[Gutshot John]

I just got back from a trip and so missed all but the beginning of the Republican convention, but the part you just cited sounds pretty powerful. The overall reaction from the convention I've been hearing though from pretty much every quarter has been pretty negative. I ran into a friend of mine today who's a Republican leaning independent and he told me he stopped watching before McCain even spoke because the majority of the speeches were so intolerably venomous, fear-mongering, and filled with hatred.

Really? Charlie ROSE gave it an A minus. David Brooks who I think is one of the best commentators out there said it was classic McCain, flawed delivery but powerful message. This might have the virtue of not making him seem like a polished politician.

If your friend didn't listen to the speech, how does he know what he said?

Quite the contrary, McCain didn't attack anyone. In fact he said "we" a lot when mentioning the failures of the GOP.

Have you read the entire speech?

[Fuzzyblob]

Really? Charlie ROSE gave it an A minus. David Brooks who I think is one of the best commentators out there said it was classic McCain, flawed delivery but powerful message. This might have the virtue of not making him seem like a polished politician.

If your friend didn't listen to the speech, how does he know what he said?

Quite the contrary, McCain didn't attack anyone. In fact he said "we" a lot when mentioning the failures of the GOP.

Have you read the entire speech?

I don't think you read my message very carefully. My friend didn't watch McCain's speech, therefore, his commentary was aimed at the speakers who came before, especially Palin. My point was that although it's very nice that McCain gave a good (and based on what you posted, quite moving) speech and managed not to attack anyone in it for a change, it doesn't really matter if everyone else in his campaign (including his VP candidate) is spewing hate.

[Palmguy]

I don't think you read my message very carefully. My friend didn't watch McCain's speech, therefore, his commentary was aimed at the speakers who came before, especially Palin. My point was that although it's very nice that McCain gave a good (and based on what you posted, quite moving) speech and managed not to attack anyone in it for a change, it doesn't really matter if everyone else in his campaign (including his VP candidate) is spewing hate.


Oh give me a break. Palin got a few jabs in, yes; but after the treatment she had received the week before with virtually everyone out there throwing all kinds of **** against the wall to see what would stick, you are saying that she is "spewing hate"? :rolleyes: I think she showed an amazing amount of restraint actually...I would have liked to see her come hard after the dumbasses that had been attacking her...

I caught a bit of Thompson, Giuliani, and all of Palin and the words "intolerably venomous" did not once come to mind. Sure it's a matter of perspective I guess but it sounds to me like someone is being a little oversensitive...

[Gutshot John]

I don't think you read my message very carefully. My friend didn't watch McCain's speech, therefore, his commentary was aimed at the speakers who came before, especially Palin. My point was that although it's very nice that McCain gave a good (and based on what you posted, quite moving) speech and managed not to attack anyone in it for a change, it doesn't really matter if everyone else in his campaign (including his VP candidate) is spewing hate.

I guess you didn't watch the Democratic convention either.

Don't be absurd, without having read the speech you've no idea what you're talking about.

Hate? Please. :rolleyes:

[RAM Engineer]

I don't think you read my message very carefully. My friend didn't watch McCain's speech, therefore, his commentary was aimed at the speakers who came before, especially Palin. My point was that although it's very nice that McCain gave a good (and based on what you posted, quite moving) speech and managed not to attack anyone in it for a change, it doesn't really matter if everyone else in his campaign (including his VP candidate) is spewing hate.

"spewing hate"...That's what people call it when they are called out on their dangerous fallacies, in order to shut the debate down. It's as tired a catchphrase as there ever was.:rolleyes:

[nickdrak]

My point was that although it's very nice that McCain gave a good (and based on what you posted, quite moving) speech and managed not to attack anyone in it for a change, it doesn't really matter if everyone else in his campaign (including his VP candidate) is spewing hate.

Give me a f***ing break! All of a sudden, speaking the truth about a candidates insufficiencies is now considered "spewing hate"? Grow up.

I also get the feeling that your "Republican leaning independent friend" is your alter ego, and the "quarters" that you have been getting feedback from are Berkley and San Francisco, CA. , the DU blogs, and keith olberwomann.

Fortunately, the rest of the world has fallen in love with Palin after her speech, and the McCain/Palin ticket has overtaken Obiden in the polls following all of the "spewed hatred" that you speak of.

Go back to the DU troll. You joined a gun specific board, and have yet to contribute anything but pro-liberal BS here. You wont change any minds with your weak propaganda.

[Fuzzyblob]

Give me a f***ing break! All of a sudden, speaking the truth about a candidates insufficiencies is now considered "spewing hate"? Grow up.

I also get the feeling that your "Republican leaning independent friend" is your alter ego, and the "quarters" that you have been getting feedback from are Berkley and San Francisco, CA. , the DU blogs, and keith olberwomann.

Fortunately, the rest of the world has fallen in love with Palin after her speech, and the McCain/Palin ticket has overtaken Obiden in the polls following all of the "spewed hatred" that you speak of.

Go back to the DU troll. You joined a gun specific board, and have yet to contribute anything but pro-liberal BS here. You wont change any minds with your weak propaganda.

Since when is having a different opinion being a propagandist? Learn to live with the diversity of opinion that you claim to celebrate. That's the reason why I'm here.

I'm don't have time right now to respond to everybody's responses (although I kind of wish I did), so I'm just going to leave it at that. Oh, except to point out that McCain has not in fact overtaken Obama as you claim:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

http://www.newsweek.com/id/145737

[Gutshot John]

Since when is having a different opinion being a propagandist? Learn to live with the diversity of opinion that you claim to celebrate. That's the reason why I'm here.

You've commented on things which you admit you've no direct knowledge of...nor does your friend.

Distorting truth is the work of the propagandist. One can repeat the lie that conservatives are spewing hate, but clearly most people who watched any part of the convention don't see it that way.

Secondly you conveniently pretend (or didn't bother to watch) the Democrats spew their own "hate" inspired tirades.


I'm don't have time right now to respond to everybody's responses (although I kind of wish I did), so I'm just going to leave it at that.

Probably a good thing because you shredded your own argument.


Oh, except to point out that McCain has not in fact overtaken Obama as you claim:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

http://www.newsweek.com/id/145737

Learn to read a poll. Both links you cited show Obama's ENTIRE post-convention bounce is GONE. Your own polls/links discredit you.

Look a little closer at the CBS poll, tied. Look at the poll average at how the margins that have shrunk in two days...ON THE AVERAGE...and that includes polls from BEFORE the Republican convention.

All this is irrespective of that fact that you can't produce a single quote that refers to "hate" in name or spirit...unless you think legitimate criticism is hate.

In which case aren't you engaging in the exact same rhetoric you accuse the campaign and others on this board of?

Read the rules of this board...then ACTUALLY read the speeches in question.

[nickdrak]

Ahhh, "diversity":rolleyes: Ugh.

Fabricating stories about your "republican leaning independent friends" to try and make a political point is pretty much the definition of political propaganda.

[MarshallDodge]

I'm don't have time right now to respond to everybody's responses (although I kind of wish I did), so I'm just going to leave it at that. Oh, except to point out that McCain has not in fact overtaken Obama as you claim:


Oh, can't we all get together and have a group hug. :p

There are much better candidates out there for President of the United States than Barack Obama.

[Colt6920]

Since when is having a different opinion being a propagandist? Learn to live with the diversity of opinion that you claim to celebrate. [That's the reason why I'm here.

I'm don't have time right now to respond to everybody's responses (although I kind of wish I did), so I'm just going to leave it at that. Oh, except to point out that McCain has not in fact overtaken Obama as you claim:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

http://www.newsweek.com/id/145737
I took a quick look at all your posts since you have became a member here, and it's clear you came here to be a political troll. This is a firearms website and if you are not here for that, then you are in the wrong place.


I predict your time here will be short and not well spent.

[Business_Casual]

Oh, can't we all get together and have a group hug. :p

There are much better candidates out there for President of the United States than Barack Obama.

Such as Hillary, right?

M_P

[Fuzzyblob]

I guess this is goodbye then (at least until the next time I need to take the pulse of…this demographic :cool:). Refusing to listen to anything other than the sound of your own voice and those of people who parrot your beliefs back to you is the God given right of every human being the world over, and I have neither the means nor the desire to take that right away from you. Just please remember—the half of the country that disagrees with you is not crazy, nor especially dumb, nor evil. It believes what it believes for good reason, just as you believe what you believe for good reason. So once in a while, please stop talking and LISTEN. I leave you with some wise and mildly relevant words from Ralph Waldo Emerson’s essay “Self-Reliance” :):


“The objection to conforming to usages that have become dead to you is, that it scatters your force. It loses your time and blurs the impression of your character. If you maintain a dead church, contribute to a dead Bible-society, vote with a great party either for the government or against it, spread your table like base housekeepers, — under all these screens I have difficulty to detect the precise man you are. And, of course, so much force is withdrawn from your proper life. But do your work, and I shall know you. Do your work, and you shall reinforce yourself. A man must consider what a blindman's-buff is this game of conformity. If I know your sect, I anticipate your argument. I hear a preacher announce for his text and topic the expediency of one of the institutions of his church. Do I not know beforehand that not possibly can he say a new and spontaneous word? Do I not know that, with all this ostentation of examining the grounds of the institution, he will do no such thing? Do I not know that he is pledged to himself not to look but at one side, — the permitted side, not as a man, but as a parish minister? He is a retained attorney, and these airs of the bench are the emptiest affectation. Well, most men have bound their eyes with one or another handkerchief, and attached themselves to some one of these communities of opinion. This conformity makes them not false in a few particulars, authors of a few lies, but false in all particulars. Their every truth is not quite true.”

Peace

[Gutshot John]

I guess this is goodbye then (at least until the next time I need to take the pulse of…this demographic :cool:). Refusing to listen to anything other than the sound of your own voice and those of people who parrot your beliefs back to you is the God given right of every human being the world over, and I have neither the means nor the desire to take that right away from you. Just please remember—the half of the country that disagrees with you is not crazy, nor especially dumb, nor evil. It believes what it believes for good reason, just as you believe what you believe for good reason. So once in a while, please stop talking and LISTEN. I leave you with some wise and mildly relevant words from Ralph Waldo Emerson’s essay “Self-Reliance” :):



Yeah right....so you're Emerson now? :rolleyes:

You said yourself your opinion was uninformed. Why would anyone LISTEN to an uninformed opinion? Especially one that plays fast and loose with the facts.

Emerson (if you've actually READ him) would laugh. Perhaps you should actually READ what Emerson said and apply it to yourself. He was no fan of self-deception nor your brand of sophistry.

You discredited yourself by throwing the "hate" bomb, and instead of offering a cogent defense simply made the absurd claim that you're somehow a voice of dissent? The vanity in your statement is palpable.

Don't make me laugh.

[CarlosDJackal]

I don't think you read my message very carefully. My friend didn't watch McCain's speech, therefore, his commentary was aimed at the speakers who came before, especially Palin. My point was that although it's very nice that McCain gave a good (and based on what you posted, quite moving) speech and managed not to attack anyone in it for a change, it doesn't really matter if everyone else in his campaign (including his VP candidate) is spewing hate.

I must have missed all that part. Can you or your friend please post the text for that part of Palin's speech?

[JAW3]

My compatriots, please remember that those who call themselves "liberal" and/ or "progressive" should be pitied, not hated. I believe that every serious reader of this forum realizes that "liberal" and "progressive" are used as synonyms for "socialist". Socialism has been tried over and over again for centuries and has failed every time. Those who advocate socialism in our nation, therefore, must have some sort of physiological and/ or psychological disorder that renders them incapable of learning from history. Dealing with those afflicted with this handicap can be frustrating but we cannot allow ourselves to be driven to hatred. We must treat their mental illness as we would any other and compassionately prevent them from hurting themselves or others.

[Leonidas]

Socialism has been tried over and over again for centuries and has failed every time. Those who advocate socialism in our nation, therefore, must have some sort of physiological and/ or psychological disorder that renders them incapable of learning from history. Dealing with those afflicted with this handicap can be frustrating but we cannot allow ourselves to be driven to hatred. We must treat their mental illness as we would any other and compassionately prevent them from hurting themselves or others.

You make some very valid points of why McCain should not be elected.

"For workers in industries that have been hard hit, we'll help make up part of the difference in wages between their old job and a temporary, lower paid one while they receive retraining that will help them find secure new employment at a decent wage." Sen McCain's acceptance speech.

Does the Constitution support this? Do the Presidents responsibilities under Article II Sections II&III in the Constitution give him authority to do this?

[JAW3]

I agree that Sen McCain either has some socialist leanings or owes some favors to someone who does. However, Obama is an extreme hard line socialist. I would like to believe that an independent might win, but I don't believe Barr can pull it off. We have a two distasteful options in the coming election. I believe that McCain will do less damage to our country, therefore he gets my support.

Our republic is slipping away as it is. I believe that, at the end of an Obama presidency, we would be left with a totalitarian government that we are all forced by law to call a democracy.

[Gutshot John]

You make some very valid points of why McCain should not be elected.

"For workers in industries that have been hard hit, we'll help make up part of the difference in wages between their old job and a temporary, lower paid one while they receive retraining that will help them find secure new employment at a decent wage." Sen McCain's acceptance speech.

Does the Constitution support this? Do the Presidents responsibilities under Article II Sections II&III in the Constitution give him authority to do this?

Actually I don't think he was talking about McCain, that being said you're talking about the Constitution as YOU think it should be...not as it actually is.

The President does not have the power to do this unilaterally but he's NOT talking about doing this by presidential decree.

He's only talking about proposals he'd make to Congress and it would be up to them to pass the relevant legislation.

With Congressional assent of course he has Constitutional authority to enact such a plan.

Just like he doesn't have the authority to authorize a budget...he writes the executive budget which Congress then approves.

That being said, this plan ALREADY exists. It's already been enacted by Congress and is called Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA). If your job is eliminated by foreign competition, you are qualified to get government funding to get re-educated. All in all, this beats the heck out of welfare, and is a sound investment in the future economy.

John McCain socialist? Please. By that standard every Republican president since TR has socialist leanings (TR perhaps most of all).

PS. Socialism is an economic system, Democracy is a political system. You can have socialist economies that are democratically controlled. Just as you can have a capitalist economy with totalitarian control. Socialism is also antithetical to smaller government and lower taxes, things McCain supports.

[JAW3]

By that standard every president since TR has socialist leanings (TR perhaps most of all).

I agree with that assessment.

I'm not sure how much of the rest of your post was directed to me. I am aware that socialism is an economic system rather than a political one. However, the socialist ideal of collective ownership coordinated by the government IMHO makes a slide into totalitarian government inevitable. Sooner or later some individual or small group will realize how easily they can seize power and do so.

I believe that Sen McCain is for smaller government and lower taxes; but how much smaller, how much lower, and how much is he willing to compromise? I have no doubt that Sen McCain loves his country and will do what he feels it best for it. However, I don't believe he and I have exactly the same beliefs about what is best.

Please do not mistake any of my concerns about Sen McCain for support of Sen Obama.

[KintlaLake]

Sen. McCain's story, as he told it, was compelling.

To this patriot's ears, the anecdote delivered at the end of Gov. Mike Huckabee's speech was the best of the convention.


On the first day of school in 2005, Martha Cothren, a teacher at Joe T. Robinson High School in Little Rock, was determined that her students would not take their education or their privilege as Americans for granted. With the principal's permission, she removed all the desks from her classroom.

The students entered the empty room and asked, "Mrs. Cothren, where are our desks?"

"You get a desk when you tell me how you earn it," she replied.

"Making good grades?" asked one student.

"You ought to make good grades, but that won't get you a desk," Martha responded.

"I guess we have to behave," offered another.

"You will behave in my class," Mrs. Cothren retorted, "but that won't get you a desk, either."

No one in first period guessed right. Same for second period.

By lunch, the buzz was all over campus...Mrs. Cothren had flipped out...wouldn't let her students have a desk. Kids had used their cell phones and called their parents.

By early afternoon, all four of the local network TV affiliates had camera crews at the school to report on the teacher who wouldn't let her students have a desk unless they could tell her how they earned it. By the final period, no one had guessed correctly.

As the students filed in, Martha Cothren said, "Well, I didn't think you would figure it out, so I'll have to tell you."

Martha opened the door of her classroom. In walked 27 veterans, some wearing uniforms from years gone by, but each one carrying a school desk.

As they carefully and quietly arranged the desks in neat rows, Martha said, "You don't have to earn your desks. These guys already did.

"They went halfway around the world, giving up their education and interrupting their careers and families so you could have the freedom you have.

"No one charged you for your desk. But it wasn't really free. These guys bought it for you. And I hope you never forget it."

[HAMMERDROP]

Reverend 'Al' and Sean Hannity go at it in the other room on TV - LOL

[chadbag]

Sen. McCain's story, as he told it, was compelling.

To this patriot's ears, the anecdote delivered at the end of Gov. Mike Huckabee's speech was the best of the convention.

All is not lost in public education it seems...

[Leonidas]

Actually I don't think he was talking about McCain, that being said you're talking about the Constitution as YOU think it should be...not as it actually is. Actually, I am aware that he was not talking about McCain. I was only having a little fun with it because it was so fitting to the Republicrat party in general.


The President does not have the power to do this unilaterally but he's NOT talking about doing this by presidential decree.

He's only talking about proposals he'd make to Congress and it would be up to them to pass the relevant legislation.

With Congressional assent of course he has Constitutional authority to enact such a plan.

I agree, the President can, when he feels it necessary propose needed legislation for the benefit of the country. Of course, McCain has promised to do, or I mean "propose" so much that if they are enacted it tends to counteract what you mentioned below about him being for smaller government. It sure will take alot of money to execute all of these measures. And besides practically everything he proposes to do is blatantly unconstitutional.

Article II, Section III "He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient"

"The path we have to pursue is so quiet that we have nothing scarcely to propose [to Congress]. A noiseless course, not meddling with the affairs of others, unattractive of notice, is a mark that society is going on in happiness." Thomas Jefferson
I really doubt McCain has any plans for a noiseless course.


That being said, this plan ALREADY exists. It's already been enacted by Congress and is called Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA). If your job is eliminated by foreign competition, you are qualified to get government funding to get re-educated. All in all, this beats the heck out of welfare, and is a sound investment in the future economy.

Where do you find Constitutional support for this?


John McCain socialist? Please. By that standard every Republican president since TR has socialist leanings (TR perhaps most of all).

Actually, McCain and the current rendition of the Republican party in general are actually closer to most definitions of fascism than socialism.


PS. Socialism is an economic system, Democracy is a political system. You can have socialist economies that are democratically controlled. Just as you can have a capitalist economy with totalitarian control. Socialism is also antithetical to smaller government and lower taxes, things McCain supports.
I agree with everything except the part about McCain.
And by the way, the knockout of Chuck Lidell by Rashad Evans a few hours ago was pretty awsome. :p

[chadbag]

Actually, McCain and the current rendition of the Republican party in general are actually closer to most definitions of fascism than socialism.


In reading several definitions of fascism, I see very little in common with McCain and the modern rendition of the Republican party.

Also, fascism and socialism are not mutually exclusive. Fascism is a governmental form / tendency while socialism is an economic one. You could have a fascist government that espoused and controlled a socialistic economy.

[Gutshot John]

Actually, I am aware that he was not talking about McCain. I was only having a little fun with it because it was so fitting to the Republicrat party in general.

In your opinion, but you seem to be arguing the Articles of Confederation which no longer exists. Why not? Because it lacked an executive to make decisions when congress couldn't or wouldn't.


I agree, the President can, when he feels it necessary propose needed legislation for the benefit of the country. Of course, McCain has promised to do, or I mean "propose" so much that if they are enacted it tends to counteract what you mentioned below about him being for smaller government. It sure will take alot of money to execute all of these measures. And besides practically everything he proposes to do is blatantly unconstitutional.

Cut government where you can and it makes sense. Moreover I'm a bit skeptical that you correctly interpret the Constitution. Your penchant for overstatement undermines your argument.


Article II, Section III "He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient"

"The path we have to pursue is so quiet that we have nothing scarcely to propose [to Congress]. A noiseless course, not meddling with the affairs of others, unattractive of notice, is a mark that society is going on in happiness." Thomas Jefferson
I really doubt McCain has any plans for a noiseless course.

TJ opposed the Constitution so he's hardly qualified as the correct or even best authority. Likewise his actions as executive undercut his words above. Where in the Constitution did it give TJ the power to make the Louisiana Purchase. Perhaps we should give it back.

Argue your own words rather than TJ's, because I can bust him up all day long on the Constitution. Madison is a much better (and more erudite) source.


Where do you find Constitutional support for this?

Among other places Article I, Section 7, 8 and 10. Most importantly the Commerce Clause.


Actually, McCain and the current rendition of the Republican party in general are actually closer to most definitions of fascism than socialism.

You need to study up on both, because that's more than a little absurd.


I agree with everything except the part about McCain.

So McCain is proposing larger government and higher taxes? Where do you get that?

By all means vote against him, I'm sure you'll be quite content with Obama as President.

[KintlaLake]

You could have a fascist government that espoused and controlled a socialistic economy.

We have a word for that -- bipartisanship. ;)