Excellent speech–good thing he didn’t use those rhetorical skills when he was pushing amnesty or we would be in deep trouble.

Say what you will, I think John McCain is a class act.

ArmyAunt on March 4, 2008 at 11:52 PM

Agreed…100%

JetBoy on March 5, 2008 at 7:41 AM

agreed 1000%! i like him more and more. if he keeps this up, i think he has every chance of winning.

i am really looking forward to seeing him debate whomever the dems nominate. expect a replay of cheney SCHOOLING silky pony back in ‘04. :-)

Well, I guess that’s what he’s got left. Since he’s spent years doing the wrong things, maybe “saying” the right things will help him. Not with me, but I’m not an undecided voter.

Defend the First Amendment, and the Constitution… anyone but McCain. I was against McCain during the CFR vote. I was against McCain during his lawsuit against the FEC. I was against McCain during his amicus brief in 2007… and I’m against McCain now.

Things that might help… repealing McCain-Feingold. Picking FEC Commissioners early and have ones known to not support McCain’s push to regulate internet speech. Showing just one iota of acknowledgment that a law that abridges freedom of speech in fact violates the clear text of the First Amendment.

Some sort of respect for the Constitution itself, and acknowledging that the Constitution trumps his political goals.

These would help. Everything else is just frosting on the sh*t sandwich.

And flashes of comprehensive immigration zombie-amnesty bills arose in my mind. What a hypocrite.

I liken McCain to my younger brother.
I can punch him, but I will be damned if I let anyone ELSE do it!

ArmyAunt on March 5, 2008 at 12:27 AM

As the baby of my family I can’t quite appreciate that.

Valiant on March 5, 2008 at 9:12 AM

Here is what a war hero thought of McCain.

Even if you take that as fact for the sake of argument, none of it would make him a traitor to his country as you claim. Such claims are odorous and offensive. The site you link even mentions that the Code of Conduct has been changed.

Unless you’re a disabled war vet yourself, you haven’t done a 100th of what he has for your country.

funky chicken on March 5, 2008 at 9:44 AM

I agree with alot of What Hackworth says there but what he leaves out is critical. Kerry used that brief yet honorable service to label himself as the perfect critic against the war effort, our nation and our warriors. And he slandered them mercilessly and his involvement in France is nothing short of traitorous.

It is obvious by his post-service action that he used his service only as a political tool to gain power.

What’s really interesting is that he hasn’t spoken of his immediate post-war involvment for some time now.

Why?

http://imustimes.wordpress.com/2008/03/05/matt-taibbiwhen-doves-cry/

Hack praising the POD himself:

COL. HACKWORTH DOES AN “ABOUT – FACE”

One well-known commentator on military matters seems to have come 180 degrees, however.

No less than Col. David Hackworth, champion of the enlisted soldier, critic of fat cats and brass hats, who blasted Clark with both barrels in a 1999 “Defending America” column, now sings the praises of the man he once derided as the “Ultimate Perfumed Prince.”

A few short years ago, Hack slapped Clark for not being a “muddy boots” soldier. “He’s a military politician without the right stuff . . .” Hackworth said at the time.

“At West Point, he graduated No. 1 in his class, and even though the Vietnam war was raging and chewing up lieutenants faster than a machine gun can spit death, (Clark) went to Oxford for two years of contemplating instead of to the trenches to lead a platoon.

“A year after graduating Oxford, he was sent to Vietnam, where, as a combat leader for several months, he was bloodied and muddied. Unlike most of his classmates, who did multiple combat tours in the killing fields of Southeast Asia, (Clark) spent the rest of the war sheltered in the ivy towers of West Point or learning power games first hand as a White House fellow.”

But by 2003, Hackworth was full of admiration for Wesley Clark. He announced that “after three hours interviewing the man” (for MAXIM, a skin magazine – Hack stopped writing for NEWSWEEK years ago) “I’m impressed.”

“He (Clark) is insightful, has his act together, he understands what makes national security tick – and he thinks on his feet somewhere around Mach 3,” Hack gushed. Calling the onetime perfumed prince “brilliant,” and “super-smart,” America’s most-decorated living soldier embraced Clark with the ardor of a reformed zealot.

There was unintentional humor in the recent Hackworth column, too.

The colonel raved ecstatically about how Clark came along “without the standard platoon of handlers.” Hack reported that Gen. Clark “treated the little folks who poured the coffee and served the bacon and eggs with exactly the same respect and consideration he gave the biggies in the dining room, like my colleague Larry King, and Bob Tisch, the Regency Hotel’s owner. An appealing common touch.”

As if Wes was going to be a “bad boy” and give Hack a second shot at ripping him up! The mercurial general was, of course, on his “best behavior.”

One almost hopes that come April 1st, 2004 – by then, Clark’s candidacy may be just a fading memory – Hack will spring a surprise on us all and say: “Hey guys, I really had you going there, didn’t I? That was just old Hack, doing the schmooze. I really got Clark’s number. I know what he is. Don’t worry.”

http://www.militarycorruption.com/wesleyclark.htm

And sure, Kerry’s campaign push on how he Ramboed his way through the war ? for four months ? rubs a lot of vets the wrong way. And it does take its toll on those of us who prefer our heroes to be modest, unassuming types like Alvin York ? who stayed the course until it was “Over, over there.”

But politics and style aside, Kerry did serve with distinction in Vietnam when he easily could have avoided that killing field. His service to his country shouldn’t be diminished by the same despicable, politically motivated tactics visited upon Sens. John McCain in South Carolina and Max Cleland in Georgia, also Viet vets. This kind of gutter-bashing doesn’t belong in American politics, and vets shouldn’t allow themselves to be used as ammo for cheap shots at one of their own.

The stalwart Brown Water Navy warriors who fought at Kerry’s side say he was A-OK, which is good enough for me. The muckrakers such as John O’Neill and his SWIFT-boat snipers ? who didn’t sail on his boat but served anywhere from 100 meters to 300 miles away ? are now coming off like eyewitnesses when in fact not one of their testimonies would hold up in a court of law. A judge would call these men liars and disallow their biased statements.

I’ve been in a fair number of battles in my lifetime, first fighting for my country in several hot wars, then covering a dozen conflicts as a correspondent. And I’ve learned that if you can’t see the fight right up close, smell it, hear it and touch it, you can’t possibly bear witness.

This isn’t the first time Kerry’s been sniped at. Joe Klein wrote in the New Yorker that Nixon aide Charles Colson formed the Vietnam Veterans for a Just Peace in 1971 solely to attack John Kerry.

Colson told Klein that Kerry “was a thorn in our flesh. He was very articulate, a credible leader of the opposition. He forced us to create a counterfoil. We found a vet named John O’Neill and formed a group called Vietnam Veterans for a Just Peace. We had O’Neill meet the president, and we did everything we could do to boost his group.”

O’Neill and his chorus of haters are still in their get-Kerry mode. I suspect the decades-long fury is still fueled by Kerry’s high-profile anti-war stance when he returned home. A position that was taken by hundreds of thousands of other Viet vets, including myself in 1971 ? which, according to Joe Califono’s recent book “Inside: A Public Life,” almost cost me my life.

McCain has already asked President Bush to distance himself from this “dishonest and dishonorable” attack. Advice that Bush should take one step further by ordering Vietnam draft-dodger Karl Rove and the rest of the character-assassination squad who zapped McCain and Cleland to back off. And then publicly stand tall and say that this type of behavior insults every vet who’s served America in peace and war.

As our commander in chief, Bush also needs to bear in mind that the U.S. Navy and its high standards for handling awards are now on trial as well. Hopefully, the president’s righteous actions will expedite that institution’s exoneration along with Lt. John Kerry’s heroism.

After saying that, it is to bad for Hillary that she can’t use McCain’s greatest weakness against him: amnesty.

But she may indirectly. She’s a smart woman and knows that McCain’s amnesty involvement has angered most Americans. I’m sure that she is also aware of popular conservatives who have suggested to let America go to hell in a handbasket under her administration if elected.

She would be wise to have unofficial supporters fan that fire against him. (The MSM may do that of their own volition.)

I’m already concerned about his amnesty involvment and denial but I would rather contend with McCain in the Whitehouse than with Hillary.

funky chicken on March 5, 2008 at 9:02 AM

Never heard of Ted Sampley, but thanks for the link. Please find me one conservative who loves McCain. Seriously. Have you heard of David Hackworth?

Here is what a war hero thought of McCain.

http://www.miafacts.org/mccain.htm

Short summary of the types of “conservatives” who have hated and defamed McCain since the 1980s.

McCain’s Position on US-Vietnam Relations and on the “Live-POW” Question

In the late 1980’s, McCain took the position that the US should move toward normal diplomatic relations with Vietnam in return for their increased cooperation on the MIA issue. Sampley recognized — as does the rest of the “activist” community — that such talk in high places can be disastrous to their efforts to recruit and to raise money. Their recruiting and fund raising pitch is the same: US POWs are still being held, alive, in Vietnam and we need just a few more dollars from you to free them.

As US researchers probe into Vietnamese wartime records, and as US search teams recover remains from crashsites and battlefield gravesites, the number of unaccounted for Americans goes down. More importantly, it is clear from the information collected that no American POWs were retained in captivity after Operation Homecoming. The “activists” do not want this information to become known because they depend on folks falling prey to their claims and then donating money or other support — such as the proliferation of “POW-MIA Remembrance Sites” on the WWW.

McCain refused to be drawn into the live POW battles and he continued to support normal US-Vietnam relations. For a returned POW to take these two positions was more than the “activist” community could stand.

McCain’s Exposure of Frauds

In the closing days of the SSC, a hearing was held that focused on individuals and groups who are raising money on the MIA issue. A friend of mine who was on the SSC staff briefed McCain on the money-raising activities and McCain was incensed that anyone would play on the emotions of families to enrich themselves. McCain wanted to hold a hearing that would expose these activities. There was, however, a problem. McCain’s two main targets were former congressman Billy Hendon and Sampley’s Homecoming II with its vigil booth on the Mall, selling T-shirts and other paraphernalia. Senator Bob Smith, Vice-chair of the SSC, was godfather and protector to Hendon and Sampley.

Really, why one earth would you want to associate with people like that? Any time you see a McCain hater say he is/was a traitor to the military, this is what they are saying.

The author of that site:

Joe Schlatter, Colonel, U. S. Army, Retired. He retired on 1 April 1995. His involvement in the MIA issue came during two assignments:

February 1986 – July 1990
Feb 86 – Dec 88: Chief, Analysis Branch, Defense Intelligence Agency Special Office for POW-MIA Affairs
Dec 88 – Jul 90: Chief, Defense Intelligence Agency Special Office for POW-MIA Affairs
July 1993 – March 1995: Deputy Director, Defense POW-MIA Office