What happened to John Mc Cain ?

[Capn Sunshine]

Well, all you so called MORs (middle of the roaders) who kept foisting the likes of republican John Mc Cain on us in your VP wet dreams. So, what has he done to repay your kind consieration and demonstrated his worthiness ? Oh, not much this week, except MAKE AN AD FOR BUSH-CHENEY.

I just wanted to take a moment to remind you Cheneyed up people who kept breathlessly panting this name you contributed to the meme that MCCain was "Kerry's first choice" (Bush-Cheney '04 campaign unveiled a new ad, titled "First Choice," which, according to a Bush-Cheney '04 campaign press release, "features John Kerry's first choice for a vice presidential running mate, United States Senator John McCain" (R-AZ) which I had to endure about a hundred times yesterday.

I hope it was worthwhile indulging in your right wing democratic fever dreams.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Capn Sunshine]

2. troll huh?

who are YOU to accuse me of trollery? I don't recall you from the dialog in 2001 here. Or 2002, or 2003, for that matter.
Troll? You wish. I'm old school , pal.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

4. That's funny,

your membership says it started in 2003. :eyes:

Oh yeah, and it's the definition of being a troll when you're making a post solely for the purpose of inciting anger with other posters. Gee, that's not EXACTLY what you're doing here, is it?

5. solely?

Post looks to me to be a little deeper than that.
I'd characterize it more as righteous and justified indignation at those who were pushing McCain on this discussion board and a commentary on the fruits of their labor.
Since when is there something wrong with highlighting the ramifications of an action?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

7. It doesn't need to be said

And it certainly doesn't need to be said in such a holier than thou manner.

Further, everything you said simply confirms to me that he just wants to piss on other posters to get them mad. That's being a troll, simply put.

10. uh huh -- one man's troll

is another's thinker.
I've been here as long as you, He's been here longer. Defining trolls etc. is a straw man and a diss (not that I personally care) on the poster and conveniently ignores what is being said in the argument.

So I guess you agree that it was silly to back McCain, is that what your silence on that element of the post indicates?

Concurrently, what does it indicate when your original post is a comment on the nature of the poster instead of a comment on the points he made?

Every time I saw a thread or a poll which suggested McCain back a few weeks ago, I would post "McCain is a Republican," so I understand where the Captain is coming from on this one.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

13. Another's thinker?

That's laughable. Since when is pissing on people "thinking"? Since when is trying to make yourself righteous by telling you "I told you so" a noble thing?

I don't disagree with the content of the post, but it doesn't need to be said in that manner. And being here a few months longer than someone else does not give anyone the right to be condescending, nor does it give anyone the right to dictate what another person should or should not support. Last I checked, he does not solely create the platform for our party.

[regnaD kciN]

50. I could put it the other way...

Since when is pissing on people "thinking"?

Since when is thinking "pissing on people?"

:crazy:

[Cheswick2.0]

61. you might want to edit your information

The best indicator of a troll is someone who hangs out at free republic.

[Capn Sunshine]

9. well, since you invoke the sacred eyes roll icon

I did have a previous incarnation prior to the July 2003 upgrade which you would have known if you had even been present THEN. It was Lorelei. But that is hardly the point, is it ?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

11. It is hardly the point

I'm not sure how being on this board longer than me makes you any better, holier, or more of a Democrat. That pissing contest, as completely irrelevant as it is, doesn't change the fact that you're being a troll. You're posting this thread only to piss people off - period. Who the hell are you to tell people who and what they can and can't support?

[WI_DEM]

12. wait a second you are the one who called him a troll

now you are acting indignant. I think he makes a good point about how readily some are to sell the parties soul to the devil as long as it guarantees victory.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

14. There's more than one way to make that point

He's being condescending to other posters and he's telling them what they should or should not believe. That's not right in any way. He could've very easily made his point without being insulting, but he chose specifically not to.

16. actually

he says --

Well, all you so called MORs (middle of the roaders) who kept foisting the likes of republican John Mc Cain on us in your VP wet dreams. So, what has he done to repay your kind consieration and demonstrated his worthiness ? Oh, not much this week, except MAKE AN AD FOR BUSH-CHENEY.

I just wanted to take a moment to remind you Cheneyed up people who kept breathlessly panting this name you contributed to the meme that MCCain was "Kerry's first choice" (Bush-Cheney '04 campaign unveiled a new ad, titled "First Choice," which, according to a Bush-Cheney '04 campaign press release, "features John Kerry's first choice for a vice presidential running mate, United States Senator John McCain" (R-AZ) which I had to endure about a hundred times yesterday.

I hope it was worthwhile indulging in your right wing democratic fever dreams.

None of which tells anyone what to believe, it does ask people what they think of having pumped up McCain.

I would like to expand or repeat something I wrote earlier--- It is curious you are so sensitve about this point being made regarding support for McCain.

Why is that? Feel like protecting those poor McCain supporters? Maybe you were one of them? Enquiring minds want to know.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

19. Perhaps you didn't notice

but I already answered your question. Perhaps you should re-read?

And I'd be sensitive about what he said no matter what he was saying. He doesn't need to be condescending to a large number of posters here. There are better, more polite ways to say what he said. Period. He doesn't need to piss on everyone.

On edit: "Enquiring minds want to know"??? What kind of fucked up McCarthy-ism are you trying to pull here?

20. oh please

If you don't get that the enquiring minds is just humor, and an ironic comment on the silliness of calling the Capn a troll, I'll elaborate ---
Specifically since you missed the reference the etymology of the phrase---
http://www.yaelf.com/aueFAQ/mifnqrngmndswnttkn.shtml
"Enquiring minds want to know." (notes by James Kiso)
(Phrase Origins)
This originated as a slogan used in TV ads in the 1980s by the
National Enquirer. The Enquirer (based in Lantana, Florida; not to
be confused with Philadelphia Inquirer, a fine paper) is the
largest-selling "news" weekly in the U.S.; it belongs to the
sensationalistic genre known as "supermarket tabloids" or "checkout-
line rags" because the most familiar points of distribution are racks
near supermarket checkout lines.

The ads featured a series of "ear-catching" headlines from recent
issues followed by actors (I hope) miming surprise at the revelation.
The stories ranged from amazing weight-loss diets based on the intake
of broccoli and ice cream to the tragic story of Michael Jackson's
unrequited love for Liz Taylor. A following voice-over would say,
"Enquiring minds want to know."


Source: Mark Israel, 'Phrase Origins: "Enquiring minds want to know." (notes by James Kiso)', The alt.usage.english FAQ file,(line 4705), (29 Sept 1997)


Fucked up McCarthyism! give me a break.
Interesting rhetorical flourish to call it McCarthyism. If anyone is trying to shut off a point of view, it's not me. and to quote your own words in another post
"But no matter what the politics of the issue are, you can still say whatever you want to in a more polite manner. You don't need to be condescending to get your point across, and that's the only point I've been trying to make." I would say that branding something as fucked up McCarthyism certainly doesn't pass that test.

I had re-read your posts and did see that you agreed with the point, actually before I wrote what I did.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

22. I know where it comes from

I wasn't born under a friggin rock. But why does it even matter? The substance of his argument was never my point to begin with.

23. I figured you probably did know

I was just being pedantic and condescending.
My bad bad bad.:O8)
Ha.

[CWebster]

26. Being a little overdefensive there, aren't you?

Sorry if you find his insight an insult, but I don't see anyone else taking offense but you.

[Capn Sunshine]

15. I'm not "telling" anyone anything

I'm pointing out there are CONSEQUENCES for actions. I suppose you would prefer this all go away, but I want the people who indulged in this pointless and counterproductive exercise to be aware of the long term damage they do to the PARTY when they imply that we could even CONSIDER a republican for the 3@ spot onour ticket.

Why do you think progressives and Greens are repeating the "no difference between parties" mantra? This was one hell of a reason, friend.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

18. You just brought up an entirely different point there

Greens might be repeating that mantra, but that's not the way I see it. I think there are very large differences between our parties, although the biggest way they feel we're both the same is that we're both beholden to corporate interests, which is unfortunately true.

But some people here do also believe that we need to bring our country back together instead of further dividing it, and a unity ticket might've done that. Whenever Kerry would've made policy, you wouldn't have to hear the same tired "damn liberals" mantra, because one of their own would be involved in forming that policy. Hey, I don't completely buy it either, but it's not my place to tell them they're stupid for thinking it, and for all we know, it might've worked out pretty well.

I guess part of my problem is that I flat out don't understand why it matters that Edwards would be a "second choice" in the first place. Why does that have any impact on what kind of Vice President John Edwards would make? Dan Quayle was a first choice... you're telling me most people wouldn't have have preferred the second choice? (speaking rhetorically). So all that being said, I don't see how it damages our party in any way. In fact, I do think the fact that Kerry even thought about reaching across party lines was a good thing for the reasons I stated above. He gets the best of both worlds there - he looks more like a uniter and he doesn't have to deal with McCain actually being on the ticket. If you've listened to some of Kerry's speeches, being a uniter is a big issue he's pushing, so that fits in quite nicely, don't you think?

But no matter what the politics of the issue are, you can still say whatever you want to in a more polite manner. You don't need to be condescending to get your point across, and that's the only point I've been trying to make.

edit: typo "wouldn't have"

[CWebster]

28. When unity means embracing Republican policy

what is the point of being a Democrat?

How much clearer does that have to be?

The differences are what we fight for, not what we abandon in some ill-conceived notion of unity. We win on our own issues--that is the only way we win- winning by capitulation is no gain, it is triangulation which leads to loss of identity and reason for winning.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

31. What part of "I don't agree" don't you get?

The only part I like is that Kerry's going to APPEAR to be crossing party lines. That's it. That doesn't mean I can't understand where someone else is coming from, however.

[CWebster]

32. Well, hey, no need to be insulting.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

33. And "How much clearer does that have to be?" isn't?

[ibegurpard]

35. All I have to say is

THANK GOD IT'S NOT FUCKING GEPHARDT!
:evilgrin:

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

36. Thank god it's not Dean either!

[ibegurpard]

37. I agree!

Dean is far more effective doing what he's doing right now! :D

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

40. I agree with that as well

And I also appreciate Dean's contribution to our party.

I'd just love to know why you felt it necessary to bash Gephardt?

[ibegurpard]

42. It was just an aside

in a thread about asinine VP possibilities

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

43. You sure it wasn't because I was defending Gep yesterday?

If that isn't the case, I apologize for my remark.

[Cheswick2.0]

63. I see why you took so much offense to Capt's post

You are one of the originators at DU of the idiotic idea to begin with.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

65. See post 13

Then go away.

[RetroLounge]

38. Ooooh, what a witty and droll reply!

You are surely a thinker...

RL

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

39. And what, pray tell, is your problem?

It doesn't seem that anyone is addressing you here.

44. This is an equal opportunity thread

...despite another attempt to limit the discussion.
I guess it's ok to limit discussion in terms of who gets to post, but not in terms of making asides?
Or some asides are ok and others aren't?
Let's eee, is it bashing Dean to say thank god he's not the VP. As a Dean supporter, I'm glad he isn't the VP selection.
If it's not bashing Dean to say thank god he's not the VP, then is it bashing Gep to say thank god he's not the Vp selection?
I guess one would have to be able to see into the hidden or suspected motivations of the posters who make the attendant comments.

Gee, I wonder why people get disgusted with politics. Could it be related to what happened to me when I went to college after being a star debater in high school and I completely abandoned debate when I realized that 99% of the debaters in college just liked to argue, didn't matter to then which side they took. Not that that is precisely what's going on here, but a not so distant cousin.

Some Yeats line is beginning to ring in my head just now about passionate intensity and a beast.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

45. Enough already

I feel like the original post was unnecessarily inflammatory. Others disagree. As has been stated many times, I don't disagree with the content of the post, only manner in which it was posted. You can agree or disagree with that comment all you like.

The Dean/Gephardt thing is a carry over from a thread that you obviously did not see yesterday. I was defending Gephardt vigorously yesterday, and I think this person who made the comment in this thread is simply making a backhanded reference to that for the sole reason of getting under my skin (and given all the other BS going on in this thread, it worked). I've already offered an apology for that, but once again, it doesn't look like you read it.

46. friendly advice then, Really!

just don't take the bait next time then.
You'll be more relaxed.

[regnaD kciN]

52. Funny you should mention the Greens...

Imagine if, on November 3, we find the following election results:

Bush/Cheney (R) 47%
Kerry/Edwards (D) 46%
Nader/Camejo (Reform) 7%

(I know, Nader and Camejo aren't running under the Green Party this time, but they both used to be members.)

In any event, it's obvious that, once again, Nader has put Bush in the White House. Would anyone who posted an "open letter to Nader supporters" the next day pointing out the consequences of their vote be justly accused of being a troll and "pissing on people?" I'm waiting...

[Cheswick2.0]

64. Hey Sunshine..... I found a portrait of you

Lovely! :hi:

[WI_DEM]

3. you are absolutely right

The whole McCain boom was pathetic. Here is a man who may be a thorn at times in Bush's foot, but he is also a hardliner on Iraq, pro-life, and has a strongly conservative voting record. That some people in the democratic party wanted him within a heartbeat of the presidency is proof that some care more about winning than principles.

[Virginian]

34. The opponent of our opponent is not necessarily our ally

(a revision of, "the enemy of our enemy is not necessarily our friend.")

But, now that the Pubs have made a campaign ad with McCain praising the administration, they leave themselves open for the massive amount of footage available with McCain criticizing Bush.
The other thing the admin is doing is using the primary rhetoric against both candidates. You can get that from McCain, too.
Will Moveon.org or some other group spend the money to use the footage to contradict the Cheney/Bush ad? I could see MM using profits from F-9/11 to fund a flip-flop of what McCain says in the Bush ad and what he has said in the past. How about the negative push-polls incident in South Carolina the Bush team used to spread untrue rumors about the McCains' adopted son? That wasn't just dirty politics, that was cruelty to a child.

These people are the crookedest, lyingest politicians in the history of the US. They will stop at nothing in their efforts for power.

[NWHarkness]

6. McCain shows his colors

He's a right winger, he's always been a right winger. The fact that he doesn't like Bush personally doesn't make him a good guy.

I'm with you, I'm sick to death of seeing people who should know better suck up to this guy.

[lendog_68104]

30. Newsflash

There is a "R" next to McCain's name.  What do you
expect him to do when push comes to shove?

[Bozola]

8. Why would making an advert for Bush disqualify him?

[oly]

17. I gotta believe

that Kerry went into the 'search for VP" campaign event with his eyes open. I doubt that McCain was actually offered the job, but I think that McCain will be cool too answering questions about what he and Kerry actually discussed. Would is help for McCain too directly state that he was not offered the job? It might, might not. Would Bush stop the new ads from running? Probably not. Would Bush's argument stop, be trashed? Probably not. Remember, McCain is and was the AZ chairman for Bush, all this time. McCain is quite popular with dems from my direct contact with dems who are actually quite rational about most other issues. They, of course like his war record (POW), straight shooter and campaign finance reform image. Given, a "poor" dem candidate, these folks can easily jump to McCain. Kerry wants and needs these folks and the balancing act that I think he took, was to sway many of these people his way by dancing with McCain, against offending some of them who will be so turned off by the dance, that they will vote for Bush. All things considered (my simplistic argument) and good Kerry response to Bush's new ads and good Edwards campaigning, more votes go to dems. I'll stop rambling now.

[SayitAintSo]

21. A calculated publicity stunt that worked in Kerry's favor ...

Bush can't win either way with it b/c EVERYONE knows that McCain's first choice for president was himself and that he will NEVER NEVER NEVER forget what the *Bushies did to him and his family in good ol' SC. More over, McCain has routinely been a MAJOR ROYAL thorn in *Bushs butt when ever he gets the chance, and the beauty of it is that McCain has to do very little to thumb his nose at Bush, making great waves in the press. Make no mistake - McCain is in the best of positions to have tremendous leverage between both parties. Any thinking person knows that. He was NEVER, NEVER NEVER been a willing contender, but Kerry used it's potential masterfully. McCain probably loved the attention/position, causing the Bush / Cheney people to need him all the more! A thing of beauty ... I'll bet you Kerry / Edwards (and McCain) are laughing their asses off about the whole ruse and how much mileage they all got out of it - with *Bush/*&#-you Cheney left with the crumbs to try to salvage something. And the best ? Rove is puking right now .... :bounce:

[oly]

24. Very Good Analysis

McCain was dancing, as well.

[regnaD kciN]

53. "Never forget"...?

Bush can't win either way with it b/c EVERYONE knows that McCain's first choice for president was himself and that he will NEVER NEVER NEVER forget what the *Bushies did to him and his family in good ol' SC.

What with McCain actively and prominently campaigning for Bush both in 2000 and 2004, it seems like a) he has, in fact, done a pretty good job of forgetting it, or b) he's got a "pink tutu" that makes the DLCers pale by comparison.

[SayitAintSo]

57. He's being a "good puke" .... He gets a jab in to Bush often enough...

To keep the *Bushies puckering....Every time McCain supports his friend Kerry, which he has done on numerous occasions 9 when rove has tried to slime him). I believe that Bush knows that McCain will not allow the *Bush machine to do to Kerry what was done to him - he has sent VERY clear signals on several occasions - Hagel has too. That's where I think he (McCain) will never, never forget ...

[Demobrat]

25. That whole McCain thing was just sad.

Kerry might just as well have jumped up and screamed that people would rather vote for Republicans than Democrats. Even if he believes that, which, based on the way he's been campaigning I don't doubt, it's too bad he didn't keep it to himself rather than just handing the "second choice" meme to the Repukes.

[mzmolly]

27. Ohh, I'd love to see the clip from McCain being interviewed which states

"I was never asked to be John Kerry's VP" being turned into a counter commercial. ;)

On second thought, nahhh ... this ad campaign will totally backfire on the repukes because the implication is that Kerry is an openminded uniter kind of a guy. :evilgrin:

MAN, I LOVE WHEN THE R'S DO STUPID CHIT!

I expect they'll figure it out soon and pull the ad when they do.

Thanks for the info Captain! :hi:

[Justitia]

29. You are correct.

I wanted to be sick when I saw all the McCain talk on here - I mean geez people! The man is a freakin' REPUBLICAN, a hawkish, anti-choice one at that!

I met a couple of local dems who said they wished he would have been on the ticket. Seeing the scowl on my face they said "from your expression, you don't agree?". I replied: "We have a lot of good dems to pick from before we have to start considering Republicans". Then they went on to gush about how much they admired Colin Powell and how he has gotten a raw deal in the Bush Admin.

Sometimes I just want to bang my head against a brick wall to make it stop.

[lastliberalintexas]

41. That's because you know nothing

of strategery! It was a brilliant move by the Kerry campaign and the DNC. Brilllllliant, I tell ya. ;-)

[Exgeneral]

47. That is the BEST answer in this whole misbegotten thread!

Although sucking in a bunch of flamefighters is always entertaining
:nuke:

[lastliberalintexas]

48. I'm not sure that my condescension was obvious enough

Or else I don't understand your response?

I wholly agree with Capn- I was one of the many on this board asking why the heck people were touting McCain. The response I kept getting and seeing was that it was great strategy, made Kerry look like a uniter, blah, blah, blah.

My response was it made us look like a weak assed party who couldn't even find a VP from our own ranks so we had to go looking amongst the neo-cons, even if neo-con lite. I also said that it would backfire, since McCain is above all else, a repub. And lo and behold...


I was actually (nicely) making fun of the McCain supporters amongst us, not of Capn.

49. It was obvious enough to me

:toast:

[Capn Sunshine]

51. I think Exgeneral knew that

at least, that's the take I got.
It was a truly great answer.

[lastliberalintexas]

62. Guess I just didn't get it!

After all, I assumed that my use of the Shrub-created "strategery" would be a clue as to my thinking of that argument. But that's why I also asked if I just didn't understand Exgeneral's response- and obviously I didn't! :o

[Zen Democrat]

54. Cool off. The McCain boomlet was a creation of the media.

McCain and Kerry just happen to be good friends. It's all about Vietnam. They sponsored legislation together. They went to Vietnam together. They worked on MIAs together. And they like each other, period.

IMO McCain probably wishes he had cast his lot with the Democrats long ago, but he went down that anti-choice road with Reagan.

To the chagrin of Karl Rove, McCain, in spite of making the campaign ad for Bush, has announced that he will not make any critical comments about Kerry and Edwards. He'll say nice things about Bush, but nothing bad about Kerry.

But ... let's face it, Kerry was NEVER going to pick McCain and McCain was never going to leave the Republican party. Reminds me of 1980 when the convention boomlet was that Reagan was going to pick Ford as VP and they would be "co-presidents." That was never going to happen, either.

Be happy, friends. We're going to win BIG this year. I see it in the crystal ball.

[DrFunkenstein]

55. You Are Wrong (and Here's Why)

First of all, McCain didn't "make" the video. The RNC made it from McCain's mea culpa to the GOP for not immediately squashing speculation, giving non-answers at first.

Second of all, the RNC is stupid because it brings up the fact that Kerry is bipartisan, while the incumbent President is slamming Edwards from the get-go instead of welcoming him to the race like a gentleman.

[IronLionZion]

56. We could easily make an ad

with McCain and Bush ripping on each other in 2000. And whenever talking asses on TV say Kerry/Edwards is soooo leftist we need to point out that Bush/Cheney aren't even conservative, they're just plain evil! Cheneying Neo-cons!

I like McCain, but wish he would shut the hell up.

[jonnyblitz]

58. great post!!!

snickersnort!

[onecitizen]

59. Who cares? nt

nt

[TexasSissy]

60. I'm sorta MOR. I never wanted McCain. He's a Repub. It was Kerry's idea.

He was fixated on a unity ticket. You know, a uniter not a divider thing. But my understanding is that it was never offered to McCain. Kerry's camp just discussed it among themselves, then dropped it when McCain made statements that he wasn't interested (when Biden and others hinted at it).

I think it was a bad idea to begin with. He's a Repub. But maybe Kerry is sending a message to independents, intentionally.