Either way it isn't comparable.

6/14/2008 10:48:05 AM

Bumped for the edification of Socks``

7/21/2008 8:34:48 PM

a politican making a gaffe in unprepared remarks? You're right. This negates everything else McCain has ever said on any issue.....no really!!

PS* On the more substantive issue at hand, I don't have to agree with McCain on every issue to vote for him. Eeek!!

[Edited on July 21, 2008 at 8:59 PM. Reason : ``]

7/21/2008 8:54:39 PM

This is just a weeeeee bit bigger than a gaffe - I'd suggest you read McCain's full remark in context (quoted in this thread). And if you want to still insist that it is, then, well, you're an idiot. And there's just no cure for stupid. (Sorry.)

7/21/2008 8:58:19 PM

^ No. It's a gaffe. And 3 words don't negate all the good things McCain has done, all the good ideas he's proposing, or the characteristics that make him a good leader. Sorry.

And don't call me an idiot. I might lose sleep.

7/21/2008 9:01:18 PM

Quote :

""The United States Supreme Court yesterday rendered a decision which I think is one of the worst decisions in the history of this country. Sen. Graham and Sen. Lieberman and I had worked very hard to make sure that we didn't torture any prisoners, that we didn't mistreat them, that we abided by the Geneva Conventions, which applies to all prisoners. But we also made it perfectly clear, and I won't go through all the legislation we passed, and the prohibition against torture, but we made it very clear that these are enemy combatants, these are people who are not citizens, they do not and never have been given the rights that citizens of this country have. And my friends there are some bad people down there. There are some bad people. So now what are we going to do. We are now going to have the courts flooded with so-called, quote, Habeas Corpus suits against the government, whether it be about the diet, whether it be about the reading material. And we are going to be bollixed up in a way that is terribly unfortunate, because we need to go ahead and adjudicate these cases. By the way, 30 of the people who have already been released from Guantanamo Bay have already tried to attack America again, one of them just a couple weeks ago, a suicide bomber in Iraq. Our first obligation is the safety and security of this nation, and the men and women who defend it. This decision will harm our ability to do that.""

Now, maybe my counting skills aren't what they used to be, but that's sure as hell more than 3 words. And it's just a weee bit more than a simple gafee - it's a profound lack of understanding of what Habeas Corpus is.

So, Socks``, would you care to entertain us with your understanding of what HC is? (With an emphasis on the word "entertain." Because you don't know what you're talking about. Still.)

7/21/2008 9:05:05 PM

^ Why? I'm not arguing that the statement is correct. Indeed, I agree that calling the cases he described "Habeas Corpus Cases" (three words) is incorrect and not necc. related to the Supreme Court's decision.

I just don't see three words (or at most one statement) as fundamental evidence that McCain should not be President. Hell, not even the anti-McCain punditry or the Obama camapaign picked up on it. And don't say it's too nuanced. If they can harp over Sunni v. Shiite (a mistake McCain, indeed, did not make), they could harp on this if they wanted. But no one thought it was worth it. I tend to agree.

I've said stupid things from time to time and so has Barack Obama (he apparently had no clue that Iran is indeed support Sunni militants in Iraq or that al Qaeda is already present in Iraq, not to mention the tounge twisters he got himself into over meeting with foreign leaders without preconditions). This doesn't mean John McCain is unfit to lead. And if you would like a litany of reasons for why I think he would make a better President, check out my thread on John McCain for President 2008.

I think that wraps this up.

7/21/2008 10:10:34 PM

Quote :

"Why? I'm not arguing that the statement is correct. Indeed, I agree that calling the cases he described "Habeas Corpus Cases" (three words) is incorrect and not necc. related to the Supreme Court's decision."

Let's put it this way - if you want to be president, you should know what Habeas Corpus is. Should you not, you are not qualified to be a citizen, much less president.

The claim McCain made was not just about matters irrelevant to the Supreme Court decision at hand - one he went to great lengths to call "the worst in its history" - it betrays a fundamental lack of understanding over just what HC is. (And here's a hint: it doesn't relate to any of the conditions McCain lists.) So, either he is massively ignorant about a fundamental point of Western law, or he is so nakedly engaging in gross demagoguery as to call into question any kind of "integrity" he actually has.

Quote :

"I just don't see three words (or at most one statement) as fundamental evidence that McCain should not be President. Hell, not even the anti-McCain punditry or the Obama camapaign picked up on it. And don't say it's too nuanced. If they can harp over Sunni v. Shiite (a mistake McCain, indeed, did not make), they could harp on this if they wanted. But no one thought it was worth it. I tend to agree."

"No one I know of voted for Nixon!"

You realize there's a world existing outside of your bubble, right? Where people actually did discuss this quote? (Which might be why there's a thread about it?)

Look, this isn't "I will veto every beer" bullshit - this is a fairly strong statement on real policy with real consequences which McCain based upon some pretty serious failure to understand what HC even is.

But hey - maybe not knowing one of the fundamental principles of our Constitution doesn't disqualify one to be president. In fact, loudly demagouging on something you're so absolutely and fundamentally incorrect on practically guarantees you the office, apparently.

7/21/2008 10:34:47 PM

McCain and Obama have both made their fair share of gaffes and flubs, but the Habeas Corpus statement was no such thing. He either doesn't know what it means or he's willfully deceiving the public.

7/21/2008 11:27:16 PM

Quote :

"I'm afraid that it's a very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Iraq-Pakistan border. "

http://mediamatters.org/items/200807210001?f=h_popular

gaff or no?

7/22/2008 6:51:42 AM

Quote :

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety"

Pretty simple. Why is anyone trying to defend McCain on this? Whatever we think his reason is for saying what he said, it shouldn't matter. He's running for president and should be held accountable for his words and actions. It's scary to see some people taking up for politicians who say things or vote in favor of removing our constitutional rights. Same thing goes for people taking up for Obama on the FISA bill.

Quote :

"Yes because bastards like this deserve to be treated like humans."

Actually they do. I like to think it's what makes us better than them.

[Edited on July 22, 2008 at 10:16 AM. Reason : .]

7/22/2008 9:59:28 AM

...that, and our hygiene.

7/22/2008 10:04:37 AM