NY Times claimed McCain "sometimes seems conflicted about" highlighting Vietnam experience, didn't note he also highlighted it in 2000
SUMMARY: The New York Times claimed that Sen. John McCain's recent biography tour "offered Mr. McCain a way to talk in a broader context about his war experience -- which he has in many ways made a central part of his candidacy, though he sometimes seems conflicted about doing so." The Times offered no evidence that McCain "seems conflicted" about highlighting his war experiences, nor did it note that McCain repeatedly highlighted his war experience during his failed 2000 presidential campaign.
In an April 6 article, The New York Times asserted of Sen. John McCain's recent biography tour that included stops at several military institutions: "[I]t offered Mr. McCain a way to talk in a broader context about his war experience -- which he has in many ways made a central part of his candidacy, though he sometimes seems conflicted about doing so." The Times offered no evidence that McCain "seems conflicted" about discussing his war experiences or making them "a central part of his candidacy." In addition, the Times did not note that McCain repeatedly highlighted his war experience during his failed 2000 campaign for the Republican presidential nomination in addition to using it in his current campaign, as Media Matters for America has repeatedly documented, or that in 2004, while advising then-Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry not to bring up his own service in Vietnam during the campaign, McCain reportedly falsely claimed that "I didn't talk about" Vietnam because "I didn't need to."
In fact, McCain's own 2000 presidential campaign released a biographical video of McCain that prominently featured McCain's time in the Navy during Vietnam. McCain himself appeared in the video and discussed, among other things, the "[t]hree keys to a successful survivor in a prison camp, a situation such as I and my friends were in." At the end of the video, a disclaimer noted that the advertisement was "Paid for by McCain 2000, Inc."
Additionally, media coverage of McCain's 2000 campaign demonstrates that McCain highlighted his experience as a POW in Vietnam in campaign advertisements and on the stump. The Boston Globe (accessed via Nexis) reported on March 1, 2000, that "John McCain ran a campaign ad about the Christmas sermon he wrote for fellow prisoners of war in North Vietnam 30 years ago." And USA Today noted on January 4, 2000, that McCain ran a television ad featuring Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) "accusing [then-President Bill] Clinton of betraying the military" and "mention[ing] McCain's time as a prisoner of war in Vietnam."
Likewise, a January 31, 2000, article in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (accessed via the Nexis database) reported on McCain's highlighting of his wartime experience:
McCain, who once downplayed his prisoner-of-war experiences in Vietnam, now emphasizes his military service. He pleaded with veterans at one stop yesterday to "go on one more mission" to help him win. A new campaign ad says that he is the only one in the campaign with the military experience to be president.
Reports from other media outlets, including the Los Angeles Times, the National Review, The Washington Post, and Time magazine also documented the fact that McCain highlighted his POW experience during the 2000 campaign.
From the April 6 Times article:
On his campaign plane, Mr. McCain, 71, said he would caution young people against behaving as he did. "I enjoyed a lot of it," he said, "but I didn't, I think, take advantage of a lot of the opportunities that I had by neglecting my studies at the Naval Academy and some of the other things that I did."
Mr. McCain planned the tour to reintroduce himself to voters as the Democrats continue to squabble, and to try to paint a picture of his life and character and how that might influence him as a president. The confessional bent gave it an idiosyncratic feel. The various recollections were in keeping with his mischievous streak, which sometimes seems to relish pushing boundaries. And it offered Mr. McCain a way to talk in a broader context about his war experience -- which he has in many ways made a central part of his candidacy, though he sometimes seems conflicted about doing so.
Redemption stories play well in politics -- from Prince Hal renouncing Falstaff to become Henry V to George W. Bush, talking as a candidate about finding God, quitting drinking and maturing.
Of course, apologies, contrition and redemption have long been central to Mr. McCain's political identity.
More to come.
The 10 millioneth story about McCain not talking enough or talking too much about his military service. Big deal, the world knows the left would rather not have to confront someone with military credentials. Why, we have had other presidents who had little or no military service and some who may have dodged their obligation? Trying to pre-emptively make this go away won't work, the public already knows he was a POW and attempts to attack it directly, ala bowelmovement.org's General Betrayus, will undoubtibly bring about another round of disastorous results for the left. All of this foolishness makes it easier for the conservative base to rally around him.
By the way, has this site ever mentioned that his sons serve in the military and one I believe who has served in Iraq? Maybe he's just not braggadocios or maybe he has never ducked sniper fire in Bosnia or bowled a manly 37 and knows he just can't 'man up'.
I'd say somebody is bucking for dumbest post of the new month. Okay, he's trying to top himself for dumbest post of the month. This one was a real humdinger.
They've got to have their straw man, J.J. They pretend that someone attacked McCain's military service because that is what THEY would do...that is what they did, and do, if the military man is a Democrat.
McCain himself does not bring up his son's military service thinking it is private and I respect him for that. But his policiy positions are a disaster.
huliahayne,
I'm willing to take my lumps...How so?
(I'll put it up on the mantle too!)
Look, I don't care how you might try blur to the bright contours of reality because it's really simple: the occupation of Iraq is very bad for Americans. That McCain is a hero will not ease the painful fact that he is willing to continue the horrible occupation of Iraq forever.
Here in the reality based community, 81% of us believe the country is on the wrong track. It's Iraq and our economy people are upset with; it's Iraq and our economy that conservatives have ruined.
Forget the conservative base rallying around him, that well is drying up daily. How is it again ya think this ignorant squandering of our trust and commonwealth is gonna rally the country behind him?
sitsaroundthehouse,
I'm no McCain fan, his conservative credentials are pretty shallow. However, when the left attacks it allows him to firm up the wavering conservative voters all the while still appealing to the independents and moderate dems. I'm just trying to help you guys but if you insist on just 'staying the course'.....
Screw that.
"Of course, apologies, contrition and redemption have long been central to Mr. McCain's political identity." NYT article.
He'll need many more apologies and contrition for his stinkin' thinkin' before he's done.
I truly respect Mr. McCain for his Military Service, and especially for his service in Vietnam. And were it only his experiences in Vietnam we were considering, then we would award Mr. McCain the highest honors, and without reservation. But the day that we consider our Presidency to be merely something we honor a man with (as opposed to making nothing honorary at all about our choice for that Office, and instead to focus chiefly on the candidate's qualifications and other abilities and merits to the job)... if we lose sight of choosing based on qualification and ability, in favor of making the Office an honor, to an honorable man deserving (as Mr. McCain is) of being honored, that's when we lose our way in these matters.
Because even the Military itself does not work that way. Those who are advanced in rank and responsibility, are advanced based on their qualifications and abilities (and based on time-in-rank and time-in-service, as measures of experience)... but it is not based on the idea that such advancement is merely an honor, as though we would make Military Command into a Hall of Fame, or some other place of Memorials, and Honors.
I don't presently get it, exactly what qualification or ability it is, that is evidenced by having been a POW... mind you, I am in no way unappreciative of Mr. McCain's status as a former POW, and of all that includes, most notably that he not only served in a combat theater, but served close enough to enemy lines as to say he crossed those lines, and paid a price for it... not the price of his life (as so many have), but of his Liberty, and much more.
And I do not say that this (being a former POW) can be no qualification to Military Command, or even to the Office of the Presidency, but just that it doesn't seem to be so, on the surface... it seems to require a little explanation, if any will make it.
Anyway, I don't think it matters much, and I certainly don't mean any disrespect toward Mr. McCain... I think him to be worthy of the highest honors, it's just that I am not basing my choice for President as though I thought the Office were Honorary, and that my vote was something to be cast, simply to honor an honorable man.
I think that's a disasterous way to conduct a Democracy, especially at a time such as the present.
I find Mr. McCain's education to be much more interesting, and to perhaps possess far more in the way of ability and qualification, than does the experience of being a POW seem to be to me...
That's a rare privilege, to attend the U.S. Naval Academy. And it's a rare accomplishment, and quite an honor, to graduate from there, and to be an Officer and to serve in the U.S. Navy, as Mr. McCain did and has done.
And it's with a wee bit o' "mischief" (as the above item cites the NYTimes as referring to Mr. McCain's "mischievous streak") that I mention to you here, that Mr. McCain graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy (a highly honorable achievement), but with less than honors... 894th, out of a Class of 899.
That's my little bit of "mischief" here... there's no disrespect intended, I'm just having a little good natured fun is all.
I'm sure John would appreciate that... he's had his share of that kind of fun, I hear.