Looks Like Sully Is Serious

Andrew Sullivan, despite his long history of deploring the "Swiftboating" of John Kerry, remains determined to call into question John McCain's story about a Vietnamese prison guard drawing a cross in the dirt at Christmas.  Here is his initial post and three follow-ups.  Whoa.  Where is this freight train headed, asks Megan McArdle.

I know what you're thinking - unless we can interview every prison guard in Vietnam we can never prove this story to be false, and anyway, who cares?  But let's give Excitable Andy a chance to frame the issue:

And of course, none of this would be salient were it not for the obvious motive for coopting the story. McCain has never been a very devout man. He doesn't come across that way in his first account of the story; and he doesn't come across that way now. But as the Christianists took over the GOP, he must have understood that this was a problem - especially against Bush in 2000. So in 1999, the story, already poignant and true in its particulars, changes into a much more grandiloquent and sectarian affair, echoing deep evangelical themes and tropes.

And it would not be salient if McCain hadn't deployed the anecdote in his own words - with a misleading image - in a campaign ad, and used it again in front of an evangelical audience Saturday night. And it would not be salient if religious fanatics had not a strangle-hold on the Republican party, seeking doctrinal assurances and echoes of their own type of faith in political candidates.

...And why are we not allowed to ask these questions, when they relate to one of the most important questions anyone can ask about a president: the question of integrity? If McCain has fabricated a religious epiphany for political purposes, it is about as deep a betrayal of core integrity as one can imagine, and the latest example of how pernicious the religious domination of political life in America has become.

Hmm.  When John Kerry was running on his military resume yet refusing to release his records or his diary, these questions were deplorable.  Times change.

As to the notion that McCain is inventing his religiosity, I addressed that in my first post.  but ai am happy to try again for folks interested in an answer (I expect Sully's question is strictly rhetorical).  The fact is that John McCain, in describing his captivity to US News and World report in 1973, described the importance of God and faith in his prison experience in several passages, excerpted below:

I was finding that prayer helped. It wasn't a question of asking for superhuman strength or for God to strike the North Vietnamese dead. It was asking for moral and physical courage, for guidance and wisdom to do the right thing. I asked for comfort when I was in pain, and sometimes I received relief. I was sustained in many times of trial.

Later McCain described the church riot:

In March of 1971 the senior officers decided that we would have a showdown over church. This was an important issue for us. It also was a good one to fight them on. We went ahead and held church. The men that were conducting the service were taken out of the room immediately. We began to sing hymns in loud voices and "The Star-Spangled Banner."

The "gooks" thought it was a riot situation. They brought in the ropes and were practicing judo holds and that kind of stuff. After about a week or two they started taking the senior officers out of our room and putting them over in another building.

Shrewd of McCain to have planted those passages in 1973 in anticipation of the rise of the religious right.  And his talk to Reagan's prayer group in 1974 showed similar foresight:

"In 1974, his last year as governor, Reagan invited McCain to speak at the annual prayer breakfast in Sacramento. 'Nancy cries when we send out the laundry,' said Reagan in his introduction, 'so I want to tell you, she'll never make it through listening to a talk by our next guest, Commander John McCain.' Never glancing at a note, McCain told a prison parable, of being in solitary, a hole in the ground, [Note: In the entire official records, McCain was never, yes never, ever in solitary - in a hole in the ground. POWs at the Briarpatch were, but not McCain - in any of the prison camps where he spent time.], unbearable heat, suicidal thoughts intensifying. By chance he discovered some scratchings on the wall, the words of a previous inmate: 'I believe in God, the Father Almighty.'"

"Reagan was right. Mrs. Reagan had the Kleenex out within five minutes. She wasn't alone. 'There must have been three hundred or four hundred people, maybe more than that, all these people sobbing,' said Nancy Reynolds. 'Not just sniffling. Ronald Reagan was sitting up there bawling. We were all dazzled,' she continued. 'He was a natural speaker, as she was beginning to realize, a natural politician.

Now, McCain's critics (IIRC, it was at DKos) have read that passage and cite it as evidence that the cross-in-dirt story is fabricated!  Their point is that the cross story would have been at least as powerful a tale as the story McCain told.  My response is this - if McCain was inventing stories of his religiosity in 1974, that is hardly consistent with Sully's theory about McCain inventing a religious tale to solve his political problem with the religious right in 1999.

Whatever.  Sully was not interested in the facts when Kerry was the subject, and I doubt he is interested in the facts now.  Although we will never have proof of the "cross in dirt" story, there is certainly evidence that McCain found comfort in his faith during his time in captivity, as revealed in those passages from 1973/74.  Hence, Sully's concern that McCain may have "fabricated a religious epiphany for political purposes" can be set to rest (but I bet it won't be!).

While we are here, let's tackle Sully question about "The Nightingale's Song" - three of McCain's Christmases in Vietnam are described with no mention of the cross-in-dirt story.  Inexplicable?  Well, "Nightingale" gives a sentence to the church riot on p. 194 but I can find no mention (using Amazon's search) of McCain linked to praying or prayer, nor do I find the "Father Almighty" story McCain told in 1974.  Does that mean that McCain de-fabricated them as of 1995, or is it possible that the author had little interest in that aspect of McCain's prison experience?

With that said, I know we will be able to rouse Andrew's new-found curiosity about loose ends and war stories.  Why was it that Zaladonis, a ship-mate of Kerry's in Vietnam, was interviewed repeatedly by Douglas Brinkley and by the Boston Glove reporters in 2003 yet never mentioned that he was with Kerry when Kerry won his first Purple Heart?  Zaladonis only provided the detail that he was with Kerry for Kerry's first combat, first medal, and the scariest night of Zaladonis' life when Kerry came under criticism in 2004.  Odd?  Kerry never released the records (such as his Purple Heart application) or his War Notes that might have shed light here.  Troubling?  Isn't that question at least as valid as the questions Sully is proposing today?

Or if Sully is worried that McCain is lying about his religious conviction (There are no atheists in foxholes but plenty in POW camps?), maybe we can get him as interested in the little matter of Obama's tie to Bill Ayers.  That is a topic where we know that the Obama camp has been lying to reporters; here is The Politico from last April:

Information about the pair's connection has been dribbling out over the past few months. Obama first met Ayers in 1995, during Obama's first state Senate campaign, and the two met with a small group of local liberal activists at Ayers' house. Exact details of the meeting are unkown because Obama and Ayers have declined to discuss it.

The Politico dates that meeting to the second half of 1995; Obama became chair of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge in January 1995.  The Challenge was dedicated to education reform and co-founded by Bill Ayers, who worked closely with the chairman for several years thereafter.  Right now Stanley Kurtz is trying to get the Chicago Annenberg Challenge archives but despite initial permission his access has now been taken away.  Why the cover-up? 

And why am I confident that questions that cut to the heart of Kerry's character, or Obama's, are still viewed by Sully as nothing more than deplorable right-wing distractions despite his own ludicrous assault on McCain's assertions of faith?

Comments

[M. Simon]

sbw,

The problems may be simple: don't have sex, don't use drugs, don't drink alcohol. They are not easy when everything in nature is working the other way.

In fact civilization is just like war: the problems are simple. They are not easy.

In the main we can do one of two things: discourage early sex or discourage drug/alcohol use. For most folks it is one or the other. Eliminate both and you get a lot of angry youth (mostly males). So we have to decide what we want and what we are willing to give up to get it. The problems of war.

[Semanticleo]

It's not the mild mannered McCain I worry about. It's his evil twin.

'Accelerate' the Idiocracy!

[Ranger]

The occupant in the WH (no matter who that may be) will have little power over future events.

Thanks, in great measure, to you know who.

Posted by: Semanticleo | August 19, 2008 at 11:18 AM

Yeah, because history began in January 2001.

It's not like the current administration inhereted a mess in the Balkans that was also negatively impacting America's standing in the world, especially negatively impacting relations with Russia, (you do recall several of our embasies were attack during the Kosovo War, don't you?) and had lead some international relations scholars to start refering the the US as a "rogue democracy."

It's also not like the administratin inhereted a mess in the middle east, where a failed sanctions policy against Iraq had lead to the collapse of the compliance inspection regime and required that stationing of large numbers of US troops in Saudi Arabia. Oh, and the human suffering from the failed sanctions regime and the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia was being used by some guy named Osama to recruite 70,000 people to pass through terrorist training camps in Afgahnistan.

And that's just for starters.

[Great Banana]

The occupant in the WH (no matter who that may be) will have little power over future events.

Thanks, in great measure, to you know who.

Who, Hillary?

Also, I love how Cleo is already making excuses for Obama's future failures - can't blame Obama if he wins, he couldn't do anything, etc., etc.

[bgates]

why is adolescence so anxiety prone? It is nature's way of encouraging mating.
Tell nature it didn't work.

F'n nature.

[bad]

The occupant in the WH (no matter who that may be) will have little power over future events.

No point in voting then. In fact, vote for McCain to prove your point.

[M. Simon]

But MADD hasn't worked as hoped, just as did not Prohibition. Binging is troublesome, and I don't think it's the escape, it's the rapidity. But what do I know, I gave that up long ago.

Binging is caused by prohibition. The desire for relief from anxiety is nature's way of telling you to mate. It subsides for most by 25. Which is why we worry when our sons/daughters haven't mated by 30.

Once you get the right theory a lot of things become clearer.

[moptop]

"Sullivan is the result of gay affirmative action. Were he straight, he wouldn't be published."

Sullivan used to could write. I think though that his former opinions were affecting his ability to get laid, and, well, first things first.

[Rick Ballard]

"Rick, maybe you could point us to the parable where Jesus condemns same-sex marriage?"

In Mk 10:6-8 He provides this definition and explanation of marriage: "But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female. For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.' So they are no longer two, but one."

One may wish to ascribe permission to lack of proscription but that is a peculiarly illogical path. As is the path which seeks to nullify the verses immediately following the ones quoted. It can be and has been done (using the Pauline exception) but no such exception exists for same-sex marriages. It can be entertaining to some watch someone twisting scripture to fit a desired outcome but this board probably isn't the correct forum for such a discussion.

[Trochilus]

Getting back to the topic, how about if someone there, say Orson Swindle, a fellow POW, for example, actually remembered John McCain telling the story to him in prison. . . back in 1971? And imagine if he shared that story with Byron York who posted it on The Corner?

As I recall, the Gulag Archipelago was first published in the West in 1973. Now, it is possible, I suppose, that an underground (Samizdat) Russian language version of the portion of the book containing that story -- which was written earlier over the course of a decade -- could have been snuck into the Hanoi Hilton, and shared with John McCain.

Maybe the guy who drew the cross in the dirt brought it in?

[Idaho]

pofarmer brought up Maureen Dowd in comparison to Sullivan, which echoes what I have always thought. I have rarely read Sullivan's articles or blog posts, and I have never been able to get all the way through the one or two MoDo columns I tried to read; mostly I am familiar with them through their appearances on Meet the Press et al. In that forum, I've never heard either of them say anything wise, witty, insightful, or thought-provoking. Only canned snippets of snark and the occasional bit of blustery outrage. I fail to see why either of them have a column or a following.

[M. Simon]

Tell nature it didn't work.

F'n nature.

I didn't permanently mate until I was 38. Four fine children were the result. But my testosterone levels didn't start to decline significantly until I reached my 60s. Not everyone is so fortunate.

General policies need to be based on general behavior. They need to cover 99% of the population to be enforceable. Look at the problems we have with just 5% of the population re: drugs. Or 15% of the population re: alcohol.

Or 30% of the adolescent population.

[M. Simon]

One may wish to ascribe permission to lack of proscription but that is a peculiarly illogical path.

Some one should have told that to the ratifiers of the IXth Amdmt.

However you have Robert Bork on your side. Which is something.

[BarrySanders20]

Sullivan says:

...And why are we not allowed to ask these questions, when they relate to one of the most important questions anyone can ask about a president: the question of integrity? If McCain has fabricated a religious epiphany for political purposes, it is about as deep a betrayal of core integrity as one can imagine, and the latest example of how pernicious the religious domination of political life in America has become.

Insert "Obama" in place of "McCain" and don't we have a more interesting issue? It is appropriate to question Obama's reasons for joining Rev. Wright's congregation, then dropping it, as the one consistent theme was whether it was politically wise for Obama to do at the time.

In Sully's words: "it is about as deep a betrayal of core integrity as one can imagine."

[Captain Hate]

I fail to see why either of them have a column or a following.

I've thought for a long time that Sully, by presenting himself as a conservative (despite how his actions may indicate otherwise), attracted an instant following of MSM types because they could always claim to be buds with a conservative. I have no clue into why anybody would choose to employ or associate with Modo, a thoroughly negligible individual.

[Porchlight]

M. Simon, I don't agree. Boredom and the desire to experiment/have fun are just as powerful motivators as anxiety. I seem to remember college binge drinking and drug use as largely stemming from a very basic desire to party.

For me (as for most of my acquaintance) that extended all through my 20s, and here in the party town where I live, tons of folks in their 30s and 40s are still partying. The bad habits/addictions a person can pick up while partying can last a lifetime and can cause quite a lot of pain. But that doesn't mean pain was the reason they started.

[M. Simon]

kim says:

OK, Simon, it's your problem, now fix it. Why not write him again and give him permission to use your stuff? Sully changed, he can change back. Be as persuasive as we know you can be. Heh, tell him the globe is cooling for starters; he'll eventually come around.

HST (the writer) once e-mailed me that he liked my stuff. Gawd I miss him. Our politics diverged at many points by he was a great observer of the scene.

However, I believe Sullivan exceeds my power of persuasion. In such cases I suggest drugs to dull the pain. The sex isn't working for Sully. Nor is the insanity.

I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. Hunter S. Thompson

[MarkO]

I see a real benefit in reminding voters that McCain was a POW who refused early release, which is what will come up every time someone tries to claim that he is now making up the sort of story needed only by someone who has never done anything heroic in his life. (Who would that be?)

This story is not even about McCain. It is about a guard who showed more compassion and understanding than Sullivan can muster. Why would McCain make up a story that doesn’t even feature him as the person of integrity? In reality, it is a story of the common good among all people, just the sort of thing the One should be seeking.

Maybe that is the reason for the anger.

Anyway, let the word go forth. Where was John when this happened? Why didn’t he leave when he could?

And the One? Organizing communities. Whatever that is.

[M. Simon]

Boredom and the desire to experiment/have fun are just as powerful motivators as anxiety. I seem to remember college binge drinking and drug use as largely stemming from a very basic desire to party.

So tell me why is sex more interesting than boredom. Why does boredom decline in the 20s?

What is boredom? A craving for excitement. What is more exciting than sex to teenagers? Another of nature's ways of promoting reproduction.

[M. Simon]

Boredom and the desire to experiment/have fun are just as powerful motivators as anxiety. I seem to remember college binge drinking and drug use as largely stemming from a very basic desire to party.

So tell me why is sex more interesting than boredom. Why does boredom decline in the 20s?

What is boredom? A craving for excitement. What is more exciting than sex to teenagers? Another of nature's ways of promoting reproduction.

[jean]

M.Simon. I'm really missing something in all your talk about pain, drugs, and sex.From what I understand to keep a child out of pain a parent should tell a 13 yr old either have sex or drink or drugs ,but not all.I guess as a parent I would prefer some anger from my child than condone destructive behavior

[M. Simon]

Let me add that every generation of teenagers thinks they have invented sex. They also seem to think they invented drugs and alcohol.

[bad]

This story is not even about McCain.

The left misses everything but the "Hilton" part. What's the big deal about choosing to stay at a luxury hotel? Edwards has made this choice multiple times and no one is lauding his heroism.

[jean]

Yes every generation thinks they in.vented sex.It is our duty to try and keep them from destroying their lives.

[M. Simon]

BTW boredom is a form of depression. And what do we do to relieve depression? Sex, drugs, alcohol.

Pot is one of the least harmful anti-depressants known to man.

Now I admit that struggling with depression builds character. Despite that, the mass of humanity prefers short cuts. They will risk jail or death or pay exorbitant doctors fees for relief.

We can acknowledge that or we can pretend we can make the "New Moral Man" by fiat. How did that work with the "New Socialist Man"?

In economics we acknowledge human nature. Why not in other spheres? Which is why I say that the right and left are equally prejudiced. It is just that in the main I prefer the prejudices of the right.

McCain for President.

[Pofarmer]

I don't think adolescents with Alcohol is going to LESSEN their desire to have sex. I know that sure didn't work for me.;0)

[Porchlight]

What is boredom? A craving for excitement. What is more exciting than sex to teenagers? Another of nature's ways of promoting reproduction.

I totally agree. I was responding to your statements above that people take drugs to relieve pain/anxiety and that binging is caused by prohibition.

As people get older a couple of things may happen: 1) They still love to party, but it gets in the way of other more important responsibilities, or 2) They get bored of partying and move on to other things. These phenomena are also known as "growing up."

[bad]

the story of two Johns at the Hilton:

McCain at the Hilton: deceitful, his actions in serious need of examination.

Edwards at the Hilton:

[Porchlight]

BTW boredom is a form of depression.

Sorry, this is just silly.

[Pofarmer]

I'm really missing something in all your talk about pain, drugs, and sex.From what I understand to keep a child out of pain a parent should tell a 13 yr old either have sex or drink or drugs ,but not all.I guess as a parent I would prefer some anger from my child than condone destructive behaviorM

I guess going to church and teaching good values and hanging around with folks with the same kind of values isn't an option in this utopia.

[Pofarmer]

2) They get bored of partying and move on to other things.

But, I thought boredom was the whole reasong for partying in first place?? Man, oh man, now I am really getting confused.

This also reminds me why sociology isn't considered a "hard" science.

[M. Simon]

M.Simon. I'm really missing something in all your talk about pain, drugs, and sex.From what I understand to keep a child out of pain a parent should tell a 13 yr old either have sex or drink or drugs ,but not all.I guess as a parent I would prefer some anger from my child than condone destructive behavior

OK. But understand your choice and why you make it. And let other parents make other choices. There is a possibility that your approach may not work in other situations. You know. The locality problem referred to by Hayek.

Drugs may be just the thing for soldiers returned from the battlefield. Or victims of child abuse.

So far we know of no cure for PTSD. All we can do is give drugs that provide comfort. If a doctor provides them well and good. If you get them from the gypsy drug store woe unto you.

You see why I call the Drug War Republican Socialism? It is top down rule. And as we all know from economics such rules are inefficient and cause unintended consequences.

Republicans are very wise about economics. It is a pity that their application of such knowledge is so narrow.

[MikeS]

The bit about Bush's third term is apt; it's just not a winner for Obama.

Yep. 'Cause it begs the response, which is for McCain to run against the troika of Obama, Pelosi, and Reid. Thing is those Dems are not retiring, Bush is, and Obama does agree with the policy prescriptions of Pelosi and Reid.

When discussing Bush's low approval ratings, the left forgets that he never had the approval of Dems. So, his low ratings are the result of losing the support of conservatives. He lost their support because he was too liberal, not the reverse.

[M. Simon]

BTW boredom is a form of depression.

Sorry, this is just silly.

The symptoms are the same.

BTW I have spent eight years intensively studying the problem. Reading papers. etc. Where do you get your info? From the MSM?

[bgates]

It can be entertaining to some watch someone twisting scripture to fit a desired outcome but this board probably isn't the correct forum for such a discussion.
You probably shouldn't bring up the subject, then.

[Porchlight]

2) They get bored of partying and move on to other things.

But, I thought boredom was the whole reasong for partying in first place?? Man, oh man, now I am really getting confused.

Young people are bored, they party to relieve boredom. Eventually that gets boring too, largely because partying is not a very deep or emotionally/intellectually satisfying behavior.

This is difficult to understand?

[M. Simon]

2) They get bored of partying and move on to other things. These phenomena are also known as "growing up."

And what makes you think "growing up" is not a function of body chemistry?

[jean]

Thank you profarmer.M Simon really struck a nerve with me.Having 20yr old who went off the tracks.I get so tired of all the babble and excuses.

[Pofarmer]

Young people are bored, they party to relieve boredom. Eventually that gets boring too, largely because partying is not a very deep or emotionally/intellectually satisfying behavior.

This is difficult to understand?

I need to find a little toungue in cheek symobol.

This is fun, but I gotta go to work.

[Porchlight]

The symptoms are the same.

Many unrelated diseases produce the same symptoms.

Where do you get your info? From the MSM?

Uh, common sense? It is pretty obvious that boredom is a natural and normal human condition. If I need to cite medical papers to prove this to you, I guess I'll have to be content to lose the argument.

[Porchlight]

Sorry, Pofarmer! My bad. :)

[Sue]

You see why I call the Drug War Republican Socialism?

Actually, no, I don't know why you call it Republican socialism. The drug war was Clinton's baby.

[sbw]

m.simon: The problems may be simple...

Rather than focus on sex or drugs, it's simpler to help teens develop the vocabulary to think about thinking, and to help teens realize their brain is like a thoroughbred that if they don't learn to ride, will ride them; that sometimes they think they are right, not because they are right, but simply because THEY think they are right.

If we focus on helping them discover a handful of tools that they can see harness their thoughts in their own long self-interest, wrestling with everyday problems will become easier.

[Tom Maguire]

In any event, Napoleon's famous advice springs to mind: "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."

Well, I feel as if my role here is to hit the ball back over the net. Sully and the Koslings can't keep this up long enough, IMHO. Noting Sully's hypocrisy after his handwringing about swiftboating is just gravy.

McCain had a perfectly logical reason not to reveal the story right away: it might endanger the guard.

Interesting idea.

[sbw]

***that they can see harness***

[bad]

stop

[boris]

they party to relieve boredom

People (with very few very recent exceptions) are descendents of ancestors that engaged in sex, got pregnant, and had children.

Among our ancestors were some contemporaries that avoided sex and pregnancy. As a result they have no descendents to inherit whatever traits they would have passed on.

If one accepts that behavior is influenced by inherited traits then it makes sense that people would act in ways that make getting pregnant and having children more likely. Obviously wanting sex would be indicated. However, most young people also wish to avoid pregnancy. The use of intoxicants increases the odds that having sex wins out over avoiding pregnancy. That suggests many of our ancestors were likely to be people who wanted sex and enjoyed using intoxicants, especially in their youth when they were more fertile and had less self control.

It doesn't have to be any more complicated than that. Party prone ancestors are a large fraction of the people we are all descended from and their party traits are just more likely to find expression in the young.

[Ranger]

If McCain has fabricated a religious epiphany for political purposes, it is about as deep a betrayal of core integrity as one can imagine, and the latest example of how pernicious the religious domination of political life in America has become.

Insert "Obama" in place of "McCain" and don't we have a more interesting issue? It is appropriate to question Obama's reasons for joining Rev. Wright's congregation, then dropping it, as the one consistent theme was whether it was politically wise for Obama to do at the time.

In Sully's words: "it is about as deep a betrayal of core integrity as one can imagine."

Posted by: BarrySanders20 | August 19, 2008 at 11:46 AM

Well, if we are going to look at epiphany, can we also look at Obama's? As I recall, one of Obama's most moving experiences in Rev. Wright's church was the "audacity of Hope" sermon. And what is the core of that sermon? "This is a world where... white folks greed runs a world in need."

[PeterUK]

"If Sullivan has fabricated a homosexual epiphany for political purposes, it is about as deep a betrayal of core integrity as one can imagine, and the latest example of how pernicious the sexual domination of political life in America has become."

[bmcburney]

The more I think about it, the less explicable it seems.

A year ago I would have thought that McCain would be exactly the candidate that Sullivan would pick to redeem the Republican party from the manifest evils of the W. regime (or, at worst, run a close second to Rudy). No one in public life today, certainly not Sullivan's current dream boy, has the extended record of open opposition to "agents of intollerance" that McCain has.

More importantly, McCain supposedly opposes W.'s supposed position on "torture" and, supposedly, Sullivan does too. Indeed, supposed "torture" is supposedly the issue which caused Sullivan to suddenly recognize that W. is pure evil in (nearly) human form. Yet Sullivan already has the white hot passionate hatred of McCain that required several years to build up to with respect to Bush. McCain has not officially been nominated but to Sullivan, like Kos and others, he is already worse than Hitler.

So, WTF? Per Sullivan fabricating an "epiphany for political purposes, it is about as deep a betrayal of core integrity as one can imagine." In this instance, I think Andrew may know something of what he speaks.

[narciso]

Christianist is supposed to be an analogue of Islamist, using dogma to propound an authoritarian theocracy through violence and/or threat of violence; with a
supplementary political tract. Kind of like what the Ilkwan Muslimeen(Muslimbrotherhood)
does through CAIR, Al Jazeera, AMC which Grover Norquist is tied to,ISNA. MPAC, Holy Land Foundation et al. Ralph Reed,Pat Robertson, Promise Keepers, Fox News, Sinclair Broadcasting, are all seen as the alternate track. It's a more elegant form of the epithet 'Christer'. McVeigh and Rudolph along with the mysterious Suspect X of the anthrax attack (formerly applied to Hatfill, now Ivins, and whoever else penetrates the tin foil)are supposed to be typical of the armed wing. The fact that McVeigh was an atheist, and Rudolph is a pagan; never makes a difference.

The double standard is still galling.Neither
McCain, Denton, Galante, Day, Swindle, and even the memoirs of Adm. Stockdale, are not enough to prove the point. Only the word of
the warden of Hao Lao "Hanoi Hilton" Mssr. Tuyen, is good with the Media. However, Al Ajmi, Dossairi, al Quahtani, Hamdan et al's
statements and that of their mouthpieces must be taken as gospel; and the government
sources must be considered suspect(torture, OSP, PNAC, Bilbergers, Order of the Stone Cutters, Illuminati)The illusion of the long dark night of fascism, that the late Jean Jacque Revel quipped "always is descending on America, but always lands in Europe is just that.Because Mark Felt didn't dot his T's on a 'black bag job' Ayers and Doehrn were allowed to be free and conduct a Gramscian infiltration of the legal, educational and political
establishment. Similarly because he had qualms about Nixon's poor copy of INTERTEL, he blabbed to Woodward, ended up deep sixing both the FBI and eventually the CIA; and almost cost he and Edward Miller their job. That gives the lie to the 'Deep Throat" revelations, not suggested by Santarelli, among many others. Ironically, it precisely because COINTELPRO,(Grathwohl volunteered to become an informant) MINARET (NSA surveilance),CHAOS(CIA)was so
ineficient ( I kind of agree with the Cigarette Smoking Man on this)unlike the mirage of a ruthless police state. If Lucien Conein (the Kansas born) French Corsican aide to Lansdale, had been smart and not protected Daniel Ellsberg, from an jealous Corsican caid in Saigon, No Pentagon Papers, likely no Plumbers, no Watergate; and that was an act of ommission not commission. Similarly if Conein had been on the Watergate burglars, they wouldn't have been caught (He as much as admitted that in later interviews If Liddy acted as forcefully as his bluster, no Woodward & Bernstein.(that's one of the fulcrums in the Watchmen series) Agee could have been snuffed out at any one his trips to the British Library archives; by a fortuotous accident. Would the SDS have even become the Weathermen, without the Kennedy and Johnson administration laxness in authorizing 'solidarity trips to Cuba' No competent henchmen anywhere, from Monica Goodling's hamhanded
google searching and pathetic interviewing
style to the handlers of the Niger
forgeries, who didn't proof read the document or at least order a revised copy from the TSD shop at Langley.

The same security establisment will allow an Al Quahtani, al Marri; let free, to pursue his next horror. Arafat, never paid for what he ordered in Khartoum, or even in Beirut, through the likes of Mugniyeh. The
case of Ahmadinejad's involvement in what amounts to an act of war. The likes of Bin Laden (or at least his network manned by Haqquani,) were not investigated by Bearden & co; precisely because he was vouched for by Turki, Badeeb, et al of the GID. Was it a coincidence, that fmr. Jiddah vice consul.
Cannistraro,'75 moved to the Afghan task force; after failing to supervise a simple cointerinsurgency for the contras, and backstopped any inquiry into the Afghan Arabs funding priorities. Small wonder with the likes of Larry Johnson, Marcincowski, Mary McCarthy (the Plame cheerleaders) running the Central American desk. Chavez a long time catspaw of both the Venezuelan Red Banner and the FARC, should have faced retribution long before 1991 and the 2002
act should have been his last. Ironically
,someone like Posada Carriles, who did nothing but actually believe the promises of the US Government, who neutralized the MIR, Red Banner, et al with ruthless efficiency (the real reason why Chavez has him in his crosshairs) actually believed that part about'bear any heartship, oppose any enemy, support any ally" (just words as Sorensen would say) unfortunately didn't get the glossy admiration of future Clinton and King biographer Taylor Branch in Harper's and Esquire, like the actual culprit Ricardo Morales, he is allowed to be harassed by INS, by the grandoloquent 5th Circuit; put up as the poster child by Arianna & Moore for exile extremism. Stories like the very Jason Blair/Stephen Glass efforts of Ms. Bardach, the Mo Dowd of the international set (the most ironic part, was that he was in someway responsible for the booms, that followed
DeNiro's Sam Rothstein character in Casino, all the way to Vegas) The guardians of Elian were treated worse than KSM (he was protected by the Al Thani's of Doha)with the approval of Craig and Holder; the former despite his Kennedy pedigree didn't mind flacking for the odious Mevs oligarchs, a detail left out of the glowing profiles during the Florida recount)while Jarrah, Atta, et al planned their "Big Wedding". One suspects the delay behind the
foulups with the Al Midhar and Al Hamzis is the CIA team (I-40) couldn't decide whether to flip them or grab them.

[Danube of Thought]

I had dinner last night with Ed Martin, who was shot down in an A-4 three months before McCain, and was thus present for the entire duration of McCain's captivity. He roomed with him for two years. I would imagine that sharing a prison cell in Hanoi with another man for two years would allow some exquisite insights into his character.

Martin said that John McCain has a more unshakable personal integrity than anyone he has ever known. But what would he know compared to Andrew Sullivan?

[ParseThis]

Nobody denies that McCain had to woo the christian right this time around - rather than antogonizing them as he did in 2000. But, what specific policy positions do you claim he changed? I don't see any real significant changes in social policies that he has taken to pander to the religious right - so what are you claiming?

I read somewhere that most people think John McCain is pro-choice. Hopefully, the media will shed some light on this. The religious right certainly has concerns about him -- that's why we keep hearing of his need to reassure them of what I'm not sure. It's frustrating, we need to really pressure the media to start giving McCain some coverage so we can learn who exactly John McCain is.

If McCain wanted to tell us more about his faith and put some heat on Obama, he might want to remind people that he did walk out of his former church. I'm sure it's not a decision he made lightly. We already know what's wrong with Obama's former church. If only the media would stop being biased we might learn what's wrong with McCain's. As I understand it, there are some churches that are truer than others.

Funny thing: Sullivan was following Hugh Hewitt collecting church fliers from Obama's church and posting them. Apparently, the readers got tired of it and told him to stop. I think they didn't like the idea, from what they were reading, that Rev Wright's church was more Christian than them.

Oh, and religion is the opiate of the masses.

[MarkO]

DOT: You know how I hate actual percipient testimony.

[bad]

Funny thing: Sullivan was following Hugh Hewitt collecting church fliers from Obama's church and posting them. Apparently, the readers got tired of it and told him to stop. I think they didn't like the idea, from what they were reading, that Rev Wright's church was more Christian than them.

There is nothing funny at all about Rev. Wright's church being more Christian than Sully's readers. It is what one would expect.

[Jane]

I had dinner last night with Ed Martin, who was shot down in an A-4 three months before McCain, and was thus present for the entire duration of McCain's captivity. He roomed with him for two years. I would imagine that sharing a prison cell in Hanoi with another man for two years would allow some exquisite insights into his character.

Martin said that John McCain has a more unshakable personal integrity than anyone he has ever known. But what would he know compared to Andrew Sullivan?

DoT,

You need a blog.

[bad]

DOT

You rock!!

[Captain Hate]

Oh, and religion is the opiate of the masses.

And the continual obsession of the left.

[narciso]

Isn't 'political consciousness'the opiate of the people' not religion. Don't more of the 'right thinking people', cling to that dogma rather than those with our bitterness and turn to 'guns and religion'. How else to explain how Sharpton, Michael Moore, Alec Baldwin are ever listened to for any political insight.

[ParseThis]

more Christian than Sully's readers

Hewitt's readers.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Oh, and religion is the opiate of the masses.

You know, I don't think this is the right crowd to argue by quoting Marx.

Well, Groucho, maybe.

[PeterUK]

Poor Sully, the Miss Havisham of journalism,jilted at the altar by George Bush.Nothing left to do other than sit and scheme amongst the rotting remains of her bridal feast,clad in her ragged wedding dress,the clocks stopped forever at twenty to nine.

[PeterUK]

Actually,opium is the opium if the masses.

[Daddy]

I don't know why you guys are getting so upset about Sullivan. David Gergen vouches for Sully's Conservative Bona Fides.

[bad]

Daddy, you so funny.

[Joanne Jacobs]

I don't understand why people are speculating about McCain's religious experiences as a POW when there are plenty of fellow POWs to talk to. All have great respect for McCain's behavior as a prisoner. One just said he remembers McCain telling him the story of the cross in the dirt when they were sharing a cell. All say McCain was abused for demanding the right to hold religious services.

Why not attack McCain's policies or even his temperament and age? Why attack him on integrity, which surely is his strong suit? It's not only destructive to political discourage. It's stupid.

[Sara]

I don't get it. No one outside the blogosphere has ever heard of Andrew Sullivan. Why are his words treated as if he is anyone at all? Like he is God incarnate. So what if the dummies on the left like him and a few on the right quote him thereby foisting his stupidness on the rest of us. He is a nobody. He is an over-the-hill overweight sloppy Queen who has a bug up his butt because McCain doesn't support same sex marriage. Like anyone gay or straight would want to be married to a slob and hack like Sullivan.

I have been waiting for McCain to show me the aggression and straight talk, the determination to win that he showed in 2000. There is nothing that will get a fire lit under McCain faster than to question his honor and integrity. Watching his speech yesterday in front of the VFW, it was clear that he was angry. Yes, he was at a sympathetic venue, which made it even more telling. You could see him bristling.

This is a very very stupid move by the left and by Obama's front men, to question McCain's honor. McCain won't let it slide because to question his honor is to question the honor of every man and woman who has served. His base is growing by leaps and bounds with every attack. Dumb of the Dems, but then that is their biggest claim to fame.

[MayBee]

The fact is that mandating a legal drinking age is a highly political decision which currently stands at 21 because the MADD people were extremely effective at publicizing tragedies brought on by immature individuals drinking and driving.

Right.
I absolutely agree with lowering the drinking age (18 or 19), but I hate MADD for making me feel like I am wishing some tragic driving death on someone just for thinking that.
As a parent of teenagers that don't drink, I understand they will most likely drink when they get to college. I don't want them arrested for that.
I would like them to share some wine with us when we go to a wonderful restaurant. They have been able to do that when we've traveled. I would certainly much rather they begin drinking that way than by sneaking beer when their friends parents are out of town.
I don't want my kids to drink and drive. Ever. Why that can't be treated as a separate issue is beyond me (but due to MADD, I suppose).

[Sue]

I'm sorry, but was McCain supposed to have a St. Paul moment? He was blind but now he sees? He may not be the strongest advocate for the Christian right but at least he isn't the Messiah. Why not let God decide if McCain is Christian enough? 'kay?

I can't believe I am starting to defend McCain. Dagnabbit! That really ticks me off that people are arguing stupid arguments where I feel like I have to defend him. I don't like him. Don't make me do more than vote for him!!!!!!!

[bad]

Joanne

If one and one's associates lack integrity, it is hard to conceive of it in other people.

[Captain Hate]

This is a very very stupid move by the left and by Obama's front men, to question McCain's honor. McCain won't let it slide because to question his honor is to question the honor of every man and woman who has served. His base is growing by leaps and bounds with every attack. Dumb of the Dems, but then that is their biggest claim to fame.

And our very own trolls have fallen into this trap without even being pushed! Hard to believe that Bob Shrum isn't involved in this.

[matt]

what is really weird to me is that few men have been under the microscope over the course of a lifetime as much as McCain, and how his opponent has hardly been under the microscope, and the differing responses by each side.

When put under the microscope, Obama wilts. When put under the microscope, McCain comes off pretty damned good. Ayers, Alinsky, Wright and other influences contrast starkly with influences such as the Naval Academy, Ronald Reagan, John Lewis, and even Gen. Petraeus.

When did we become a culture of such hypocrisy and lack of self examination?

[Sara]

McCain doesn't care if you love him, he doesn't care if you even like him, but to disrespect him is fighting words.

[Steve-o]

Hi Captain Hate. Christianist is just a left-wing alliteration of Corporatist. They just like the prejorative sound of the terms. There is no meaning beyond implying extremism. From their POV of course.

[chrisa798]

FWIW, I used to read Sullivan and distinctly remember that he turned against Bush solely because Bush opposed gay marriage (I think in 2004). This has eventually led him to drift incoherently to wherever he is now (I'd say leftward but that would attribute excessive coherency to him). The odd thing is that Sully would ever have thought W. would favor gay marriage.

As for Sully being an affirmative-action gay man, I don't agree. His cachet was in being a gay Catholic with some conservative leanings, but he was a compelling writer regardless of his sexuality. He'd still be a compelling writer were he not so mired in a morass of self-inflicted contradiction.

If I sound like a post-modern maroon, I blame the topic, the era, and all of you people.

[Kensington]

There's no point in searching Sullivan's site for a coherent explanation of "Christianist." He has none. It's just an insult for any Christian to the right of, well, Andrew Sullivan. He's a douche.

[bubba]

JFC already. Why is it that every fu@#ing time I pull up a story on a conservative site there is some reference to this douche bag? IT'S DEPRESSING AND I WISH YOU WOULD ALL JUST IGNORE THE MORON.

[hvs]

If "The Nightingale's Song" was only about McCain the "cross in the dirt" reference (or lack of)might be relevant. However, the book was a work on four other graduates of Annapolis also. Written thirteen years ago.

Anyone who has taken the trouble to read the whole book knows that McCain was a secondary focus of the author, although the sections devoted to him are quite interesting.

The link provided here is a shallow source for commenters...read the book. Sullivan certainly hasn't.

[drjohn]

You 'spose Andy will apologize?

[kim]

Sully is serious alright, they are calling in the Priest.
==============================