Posted on 02/04/2008 12:32:58 AM PST by ThePythonicCow
Once again, I'll take flak for denigrating his military record. But he's the one still making a big issue of it, emphasizing it in his current campaign commercials. He'd have been grounded long before he got over North Vietnam if his father hadn't been an admiral.
This same article was posted once before on FreeRepublic.com, on Feb 25, 2000 as the thread http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a38b758995c99.htm. That thread is now locked, as are all threads older than a certain date.
The original source for that earlier thread, Insight Magazine still has the article in its archives. Search for the title " Will `Ace' McCain Flame Out Again?" in the archives there to find it, in the archive of the 3/20/2000 edition of Insight Magazine. The full text of the article requires a paid subscription there, though it is freely available at the the above bnet link.
The Navy definitely has a “blue-blood” aristocracy element where reputations are hereditary. The son of an Admiral is automatically launched on a career track that will eventually take him to his own flag, providing he doesn’t screw up too badly.
Not all follow the rules, though. My boot camp company had the son of an Admiral who refused all family pressure to apply for the academy or even consider NROTC. After one particularly hectic family fight he decided to do the Navy his own way — and enlisted.
Always wondered what happened to him.
Bump!
My Dad had five wartime crashes in four years, was a doctor's son, and the Navy gave him five more planes to take into enemy airspace. This isn't like driving a VW beetle, y'know.
He destroyed his own instead of the enemy? That sounds familiar.
The questions arise when one begins to look into the details a bit more. If some of the crashes resulted from pilot error, then that pilot is likely to be grounded. At least when I was in the U.S. Air Force, it was like that.
Certainly, in other situations, such as if you were in Great Britain in World War II, then if you could still fly, you went back up. And certainly, perhaps in the U.S. Navy more than the junior service Air Force, it matters who is one's daddy.
The more damning part of this story of McCain, in my view, was his low ratings and the apparent cause of at least a couple of the crashes being pilot error. And even that part would warrant no more than a passing amused smile and appreciation for his luck at staying alive, if he had the good grace to be more modest about his exploits.
The good fighter pilots I knew (and McCain was not flying fighters, but rather ground attack bombers) were more likely cool, low key men. McCain seems to have a record of being a brash publicity whore, which isn't what I'd want on my wing ... or in the White House.
I don’t want McManiac anywhere near the presidency. But to blame him for the 4th incident, in which a ‘freak accident’ occurred, is unfair. It sounds as if his plane wasn’t even moving and this ‘crash’ (author’s words) could have happened to anyone.
I don’t know the details of how he was shot down, but it may be unfair, as well, to blame him for that unless he did something stupid.
O’Meara doesn’t need to use Democrat or DU tactics to make Juan’s record look worse than it was. It makes her look bad, instead. That said, I think “Ace” is a nutcase ready to explode and I hope it happens before he gets into the White House.
BUMP!
BUMP!
That has been in spite of blue-bloods like McLaim. It’s the rest of the non-annointed Navy that makes the Navy run as a successful entity.
I’ve known about McCain’s fitness as a Naval aviator for a number of years. During my military career I’ve seen the “legacy” officers who were given the desireable jobs and promotions because of who their father or grandfather was and who were as clueless as the day is long. He’s a fraud who has always felt he was entitled. I served with another officer who was personally a great guy but who had 4 DWIs, one while on duty, to his credit over a 20 year period. This person was still promoted all the way along to the rank of full colonel because of who he was connected to.
Substitute "students" with "presidents", and "airplane" with "Oval Office" and you'll pretty much predict how history will judge a McCain Presidency.
“The questions arise when one begins to look into the details a bit more. If some of the crashes resulted from pilot error, then that pilot is likely to be grounded. At least when I was in the U.S. Air Force, it was like that.”
McCain certainly wasn’t responsible for the ‘crash’ on the U.S.S. Forrestal.
“By 1967, McCain was ready for battle and assigned to the USS Forrestal as an A-4 Skyhawk pilot. While seated in the cockpit of his aircraft waiting for takeoff, a freak accident occurred when a rocket slammed into the exterior fuel tank of McCain’s plane. Miraculously, McCain escaped from the burning aircraft, but dozens of his shipmates were killed and injured in the explosions that followed.”
Listing that as being McCain’s fault defeats the entire argument the writer was trying to make.
That you would misread this as blaming McCain for this one defeats the entire argument that you were trying to make.
How in any way did McCain "lose" the aircraft on the Forrestal? It is very disingenuous to list that as an aircraft McCain lost.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.