Friday, June 20, 2008

The Fine-Art of Speaking NOT of What You Know

The latest swipe against McCain apparently has to do with the dissolution of his first marriage. According to a lot of what I've read, while McCain was a POW in Vietnam, his first wife, Carol, became seriously injured in an auto accident. In fact, she was hurt badly enough to the point of her becoming disabled. McCain, upon his arrival back (and, yes, while probably still messed up from his torture/incarceration), allegedly had trouble dealing with the situation; having affairs and ultimately divorcing the woman. And it's in this action, according to McCain's legions of Internet despisers, that reveals his true character. Yeah, that's right, folks, instead of a war-hero who's sacrifices still wreak havoc on his body, McCain is nothing more than a philanderer/opportunist, a man who, in an effort to soothe his own bruised ego, abandoned the woman he supposedly loved. He's a frigging cad, in other words.......................................Well, let me tell you something here, friends. This just happens to be a topic that I know a little something about. This, I'm saying, in that my wife became disabled, too (neurofibromatosis, deafness, ultimately cancer). I had to help take care of her for six years. And, yeah, even though I did in fact stay with her till death did ITS nasty little thing, there is absolutely no way that I am going to cast dispersions on anybody, ANYBODY, who couldn't do what I did. Unless you've been through it yourself, you stupid-assed Internet/partisan stooges out there, you might want to keep your own powder a little dry, keep your judgements to yourself, etc...................................And the thing is, folks, McCain continued to pay her medical bills. It's not like he abandoned her completely. And the fact that she herself forgives the guy (they're still on good terms, from what I can gather) - even going as far as supporting his many runs for office......................................I don't know, folks, is it too much to ask that we simply stick to the issues here? I mean, seriously, McCain's stance on the Iraq War alone, his opposition to the G.I. Bill - all of it, I'm saying. It's not like we're dealing with any empty treasure-chest here - yes, to the point where you don't even have to be gratuitous, for Christ!! Oh well, I guess that people just can't help themselves these days.


Utah Savage said...

Let's examine his War Hero status. He was shot down on his first mission, captured, tortured, gave his captors whatever they asked, made films for his captors denouncing the Vietnam War. His imprisonment was long and horrible--should make him a strong opponent of rights for prisoners of war, but he was critical of the recent Supremes decision that yes, Habius Corpus should apply to those held at Gitmo. He benefited by the GI Bill, but wants to with hold those benefits from returning Iraq war vets. Need I go on with this?

You spend a lot of time excoriating other bloggers. Why don't you name the bloggers who piss you off so much?

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

O.K., at least you mentioned a few issues here; the G.I. Bill, the Supreme Court decision. That's good. That's what you should be doing. But you shouldn't be echoing that crap from "Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain" (talk about a slimy 2 man operation). McCain did not give up any valuable information. And a lot of what he did give them was bogus. As for these disgraceful bloggers, you can find them at Lydia Cornell's thoroughly disgraceful site (some average patriot is one of them). Oh, and why don't you mention that McCain, when he had a chance to get out of that hell-hole early, he declined. He didn't think it was fair to leave his comrads behind. Is McCain a perfect man? No. Am I going to vote for him? No (I'm dialectically opposed to his foreign policy). But I don't like this character assasination at all. And, yes, if I came across a site that slandered Obama, I'd defend him, too. Actually, this thefuturewasyesterday lunatic referred to Obama as "half and half". I let him have it and was referred to as part of the "Obama Police". Go figure, huh?

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

As for torture, all my research indicates that it's highly ineffectual. And I thought that that was the liberal position, too. Oh well, I guess a flip-flop is warranted when it's a Republican (a Republican who's against torture) who's on the receiving-end of it.