onegoodmove

You could almost see the human part of McCain trying to get out of his new Neocon automaton Shell.

The internal conflict almost made him run from the room.

But, there was no escape.

McCain says he's going to run a respectful campain, then immediately says Obama is in league with Hamas!

Gawd, Stewart fawns over the fascists just like Tweety Matthews. Gag!

The dude is funny. He's an honorable man. He's likable. But he is, I sincerely hope, a relic of primitive human thinking. He is a 20th century man who sees the world dualistically: Us and them, good and evil, right and wrong. If the 21st century is to be led by 20th minds, bye bye, baby.

I think McCain is an even greater master of deceit than Geo. W was in 2000. I can sense under his guise of reasonable jokester there is a dark black hole. If he is elected we will see his mean streak, big time.

Wow, i've never seen such deflection. It's like he was wearing Wonder Woman's Bracers and holding Captain America's shield.

He couldn't answer questions. He couldn't defend his Hamas/Obama statement, or denounce bush's policies, or say that Bush has screwed up at all. I almost feel bad for him, almost.

the Dwight Schrute (sp) Joke was just as bad as "Where's the Beef?", where McCain had No idea who Dwight is, and was told by his speechwriters to say it and it will be funny. I wish stewart would have asked, "Why Schrute, what is the project he was in that made you decide he would be a good vp".. and McCain would have deflected again.

This was saaaaad. I'm excited to see mccain in the presidential debates, not answering any questions. It will be telling.

Stewart, like so many other members of the media, let McCain off the hook. McCain dodged the Bush question and Stewart let it go, Stewart didn't call McCain on his weak record on climate change, and didn't call him on McCain's desire to spend more and tax less than Bush.

Did John personally kiss McCain's chair before he sat in it because kissing his ass on television might have been too revealing?

Stewart, like so many other members of the media, let McCain off the hook.

I was going to say the same thing, but then I remember what Jon always says "It's a comedy show, I'm on inbetween crank-calling puppets and swearing 8 year olds."

Sad that the high water mark of Journalism is such a show, right?

It is a comedy show but Stewart often uses his show as a platform to criticize the media for doing exactly what he did with McCain.

A very appropriate venue to host the Republithug nominee; Comedy Central. His one "qualification": he was captured after a bombing raid; and didn't read any books for a number of years...

"but then I remember what Jon always says "It's a comedy show, I'm on inbetween crank-calling puppets and swearing 8 year olds.""

In a media environment where there's no real hard journalism, neither is there haven for Stewart to demure his political influence. He has plenty and this is one of the most disingenuous covers ever. I recall him saying this in his celebrated Crossfire castration of Tucker Carlson. Even at his word, political satire is at least more penetrating and dynamic than straight-across yammering pundits --speaking of puppet heads.

RedSeven wrote:

You could almost see the human part of McCain trying to get out of his new Neocon automaton Shell.

My own powers of observation saw no evidence of this.

I would describe myself as a conservative. (I know what you're all thinking: "Oh! We have a program for that!") I am not, however, in favor of fatally short-sighted foreign policy. Nor am I in favor of the disintegration of personal freedom that has happened under Bush.

Bush's quote about the "terrorist's" motivations, that "they hate our freedoms", encapsulates what I think is exactly what's wrong with our current leadership. It's oversimplified to the level of children's literature. Even Voldemort had fuller character development.

And here we have McCain saying essentially the same thing: "They want to destroy our way of life." What does that mean? They don't want me to go to work five days a week? They think I should have a better diet than Wendy's can provide? They don't like my Chuck Taylor high tops? And yet a significant number of Americans think this makes perfect sense, and they'll go to rallies, make campaign contributions, and eventually vote based on that.

Many Americans rely on quick sound bites, and lack the attention span to listen to a description of any depth. And they outnumber us. That is the problem.

Hamas supports Obama for prez.

President John McCain would be my worst nightmare of the 3.

Great, now he can say I'm in with the enemy. f-ina.

...after we win...

eyes roll, head shakes... heavy sigh

...this is a transcendent evil that wants to destroy our way of life...

See now - John McCain's Secretary of State will be just as effective as uh ... whatsername ... in dealing with Iran. We will smite them!

I read the comments first because I was afraid to see Jon let McCain off the hook as I know he does sometimes....sounds like he did so I don't even want to watch it.

Noahstone - I know what you're saying but, I have to say he is NOT an honorable man. He has not stood by the principles he claims - (won't even take a hard stance against waterboarding! - c'mon). I know good, well-intentioned men from the old school you are talking about and they do stand by their principles and beliefs and do not sell out for money or power - or the Presidency. They would be the ones in the Bush administration that feel they have to speak out like Paul O'Neill. They do have a code of honor and ethics and I have never seen that in McCain.

And teodomiro - you did make me lol (hate the acronym but it's true...) with your round up of what destroying our way of life would affect...very funny.

RE: McCain & waterboarding...

You know, you might find it hard to believe, but a high percentage of people who undergo and survive torture come to view it as an integral and personally defining experience. They would not choose otherwise if they had it to do again.

I don't know if McCain feels that way or not, but I think it's interesting and worth mentioning.

McCain's continued cozying up to hatemongering pastors is a very disturbing trend, prompting me to write the following:

Two men, three professions

A pastor, a politician, and a prostitute were dragging a nation down a paved road one day....

You can write the rest of the joke yourself.

Just don't write it off. It gets less funny the longer it remains unfinished.

He's an honorable man. He's likable.

He called his wife a "cunt". There is nothing about that, that is either honorable or likable.

Perspicio -

I don't get what you are saying about McCain and waterboarding... that his feelings about it aren't known?? That perhaps he thinks it might offer the enemy a life altering experience? That his feelings about it might be ambivalent so he wants to leave the opportunity on the table? I don't get your point.

This might be relevant...

From October 2007 "Waterboarding is a form of torture no matter how it is done and should be a prohibited among U.S. military interrogation practices," Republican presidential candidate John McCain said today, taking issue with GOP rival Rudy Giuliani’s recent remarks.

“Anyone who knows what waterboarding is could not be unsure. It is a horrible torture technique used by Pol Pot and being used on Buddhist monks as we speak,” said McCain after a campaign stop at Dordt College here.

“People who have worn the uniform and had the experience know that this is a terrible and odious practice and should never be condoned in the U.S. We are a better nation than that.”

After WWII, the US prosecuted Japanese soldiers for war crimes, due to their waterboarding American POWs.

Why the hell is this issue is up for debate at all?

In "Fog of War," Robert McNamara said that if we'd lost the war, we'd be prosecuted as war criminals (Dresden and Tokyo firebombing, etc.). Is that all there is to it — that old Nixonian "It's not a crime when the President does it" ?

Man...

jillbryant2003, my post was more of an aside than anything. I was simply shining a light on an often unnoticed or unheeded aspect of human nature. I think it's important to remember that people are almost invariably much more complex than the monolithic personas that politicians strive to project - even to the point that they often simultaneously hold mutually contradictory views. If I had a specific point, it was that John McCain is first & foremost a human being. His political persona, including the views he presents to the public, is just the armor he wears to do battle.

I guess what I'm saying is, even when McCain or another politician takes a strong stand on an issue, we should remember to be skeptical. It's not enough to believe OR disbelieve in a reactionary sense. That amounts to the twin follies of naivete and cynicism. Instead, we have to construct and constantly adapt a composite image of the person by observing their actions through the lens of our own perceptions, NOT preconceptions.

I suspect John McCain's ideas about torture (among a great many other things) are probably much more complex than he can ever express as a politician, if only because he's a man who has experienced it, speaking to millions of people who have not. Most of us literally can't fully understand what he's been through, so there's a limit to what is even worth saying. If you've ever had cancer, for example, or you're a gay or transgendered person, you are likely to have many experiences that simply do not map onto those of others, leaving little or no common ground upon which to build understanding. So what most people do is construct a shell to deflect having to "go there" with every random person that wants to address the issue.

Wow, this was sickening. Just shows you to what extent McCain is able to fend off any criticism from the so-called media. Stewart was just as sycophantic as Matthews or Russert or Leno. Hagee? Never mentioned (instead we got a cheap Bush joke, heh heh). 100 years? Again, we got a joke instead of a serious question. "Secret service separates me from the people" - like your privat jet? "The American people are wondering how to pay their bills" - so let's give the rich few another check?

And so on, and so forth. "Oh, and your Hamas quote was probably taken out of context, no?" - "No, Jon." Soo..? Where's the follow-up?

If I were Tim Russert & co. I'd save this clip and play it again next time Stewart is pestering them for cozying up to McCain or the Republicans.

On an entirely different note, I also believe that John McCain is counting on his opposition "misunderestimating" him by believing in the "doddering old man" interpretation of his words & deeds. He's a hell of a lot craftier and wilier than the democrats are giving him credit for. And he has a gi-normous political machine working overtime to construct a perceptual landscape far in advance for him and (probably) Obama to oh-so-inadvertently step into.

"Gotcha" politics is more sophisticated than many people think. The democrats will lose the election in November if they don't wise up. And I mean right now.

The game is on.

Teodomiro wrote:

"They want to destroy our way of life." What does that mean?

I can tell you exactly what that means:

They hate equal rights for women. They hate the separation of religion and state. They hate tolerance against gays. They hate impunity for abortion. They hate punishment for beating your wife and children. They hate civil rights and constitutional restrains against torture.

Now, who else hates all this, too? Hm...

I guess "they hate our way of live" belongs to the truer things this government ever said. The real question is: Why the hell do George W. Bush and John McCain mind?

Exactly, Frenchfries. Way to wield that hammer!

Why, indeed, do Bush, McCain & the vast majority of right-wing movers & shakers mind?

Because they are the competition. They threaten the American way of empire & entitlements.

Which is also why these elitists hate liberalism.

Wait, what the hell.....? What happened to my double-vision?

Perspicio - Re: your response to me - that might all be true but it wasn't relevant to my comment. You can believe what you want as a person but...he is not an honorable man when, in the position he holds, he says he is going to take a stand on something and is quite clear about the important and necessary reasons for it and then fails to do what he said he was going to. That is not a honorable man from a past generation.

If you want to discuss your comment in a whole different context that's fine too. In these matters - I don't want to figure out what he is thinking, why he is doing what he is doing. I don't want to UNDERSTAND him. These are not gray areas. He might have hesitancies in his private beliefs that make him want to question our laws and he CAN discuss that with his therapist or wife but ---- then he must go out there legally and start working on the changes he believes in - you don't stand for the bullying techniques, shoddy law practices and over-stepping of the executive branch.

I suspect John McCain's ideas about torture (among a great many other things) are probably much more complex than he can ever express as a politician, if only because he's a man who has experienced it, speaking to millions of people who have not.

Even more disturbing is McCain's embrace of the Military Commissions Act of October 2006. The reported "compromise" before the bill was passed and the media acclamation of John McCain as a champion of human rights was shameful. Bush security advisor Stephen Hadley described the bill as "good news and a good day for the American people" while McCain asserted that it safeguarded "the integrity and letter and spirit of the Geneva Conventions." In reality, the act did nothing of the sort. It stripped habeas corpus rights for citizens and non-citizens accused of terrorism and legalized US war crimes committed before December 30th, 2005. It also prevented individuals injured or killed through US violation of the Geneva Conventions from filing a claim in a US court. Legal US residents were denied their right to challenge their detention in court if they are accused of being enemy combatants and the act also retroactively abolished the right of Guantánamo detainees to challenge their detention. Concerning torture, the act approved the CIA program that had allowed waterboarding and other forms of "enhanced interrogation" and authorized the president to define Geneva Conventions violations as he sees fit without any appeal to the courts. There is no prohibition of the Bush administration's once again authorizing waterboarding, threats against a prisoner's family, and hypothermia, all of which are considered to be both illegal and war crimes. The Military Commissions also permitted the designation of any individuals as unlawful enemy combatants if they provide material support to those engaged in hostilities against the US, a concept previously found unconstitutional.

McCain's most recent endorsement of torture was his vote against the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2008 on February 13th. The bill was hotly debated because it would make it illegal for US intelligence agencies to use interrogation techniques that are forbidden by the military's guidelines. President Bush has threatened to veto the legislation and McCain lined up with 38 other Republican Senators, one Democrat, and his good friend independent Joe Lieberman to vote against it. In the debate McCain argued somewhat bizarrely that while he strongly opposes torture he is unwilling to apply the military's standards to the intelligence agencies. Lieberman commented that waterboarding is not torture in any event as it does not permanent damage.

I'd love to hear why Torture is ok for the president to do, but not anyone else, Mr. McCain.

Jill, I fully agree with your moral stance regarding McCain and torture.

I agree, too, that confronting him on his duplicity is a necessary part of defeating him.

My point was not to engender sympathy for him in some way, but to point out that understanding the man in the armor is critical, too. There is literally nothing not worth understanding about the man. If you understand your opponent, you should be able to predict his actions. If you can do that, you can defeat him.

I saw or read something on McCain once which basically has shaped all my thinking on him. The gist of the questioning was - why do Democrats like him? Why do they feel he is more liberal or independent than other Republicans - I think it was when he was still "Straight Talk" McCain. He said he didn't know. He was a conservative, voted conservatively, was against a woman's right to choose, etc. and he didn't understand why anyone would see anything else. The feeling I got from the interview was, if you don't get the fact he is not only a conservative but he is a super hard-core, self-serving conservative - that's your own fault. That pretty much describes him for me.

You obviously have your own process which works for you and that's great.