Arianna: McCain told me he didn’t vote for Bush in 2000 (Maverick double-standard...?)

Hot Air ^ | 05/05/2008 | Allahpundit

[Defiant]

Operation Chaos2!!

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

But don't you see the irony? The guy you want us all to vote, by your logic, wanted Al Gore to be President.

Ah. The actual bleedin' POINT, at long and headachey last. ;) Bless and keep you, Defiant.

[mountainbunny]

If we non-supporters of McCain are continually hectored and browbeaten by increasingly shrill declarations that "you owe the Republican party your vote, if only for the sake of our troops!"... then: why shouldn't be "Maverick" McCain be held to precisely that same standard?

Yes. Thank you for this. Your comments (above) are particularly insightful.

I just can't bring myself to voting for McCain. Lots of reasons why, many/most have been or will be enumerated here.

I guess it boils down to the fact that I don't "owe" the GOP or McCain anything, especially not a vote for someone with the massive issues McCain brings to the table.

If anything, they owe me a candidate I can feel good about voting for. Or, if not good, then at least not sick to my stomach.

And yeah. If I owe it to America, or to the troops, or to future citizens, why doesn't the GOP/McCain owe the same, and more?

[newzjunkey]

If you refuse to support McCain you'll have to bare a measure of responsibility for Obama or Clinton winning. I don't like McCain, I don't trust McCain, but come November I'm not voting for either Democrat. Likely neither of our votes will decide the election just as either McCain not voting for W in 2000 didn't decide Arizona's electoral votes. The wife says she voted for her husband as a write-in meaning she voted for a Republican. There's no allegation of John McCain voting for AlGore only that he didn't vote W.

I did (grudgingly) vote W in two generals but I'm definitely not sorry I voted for someone else in the primary season.

[Aln in Eastern WA]

A big part of the anti-McCain argument is that the worst that can happen is, with Barack Obama, the US would have a slightly more liberal president. The reality, though, is that with a President Obama, radical Islamic extremists would have a neutral or even sympathetic president instead of one, like Sen. McCain, who has promised to take the fight to the terrorists and “never surrender.”

I attended a GOP county convention this year and was stunned by the number of appeasers (supporting Rep. Paul) who showed up, sounding a lot like Rev. Jeremiah Wright in their views on US foreign policy and on the men and women of the US military. I felt ripped off...if I wanted appeasement, I could have attended the Democrat caucus. But I understand this discussion much better, having talked with strongly anti-military conservatives (or appeasers) at that recent meeting.

There are real reasons to be frustrated with Sen. McCain. I found his interference on the Wright ads in NC last month difficult to comprehend. Many posters have pointed out legitimate problems with his record in the Senate since 2001. But it is beyond delusional to argue that the outcome of the presidential race doesn’t matter in 2008.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

Yes. Thank you for this. Your comments (above) are particularly insightful.

Thank you, mountainbunny. I was actually beginning to worry that we'd go an entire page's worth of comments before people actually began responding to the original points/queries in #1, rather than simply drumming their collective heels on the linoleum and shrilling "NoNoNoNoNoNoNOOOOOOOOO!!!" in their most piercing registers. ;) 'Preciate it!

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

If you refuse to support McCain you'll have to bare a measure of responsibility for Obama or Clinton winning.

I would take this argument a good deal more seriously, I suspect, from someone who actually knew the simple difference between "bear" and "bare."

More to the point, however: horse apples. ;) Even baseline, grammar school-level logic should serve to (re-)(re-)(re-)(RE-)illustrate the inherent silliness of said assertion. To wit: if (by your logic) any ballot not cast on behalf of Juan McCain is, de facto, one to the benefit of Cankles and/or The Obamessiah... then what, pray tell, is a ballot not cast on behalf of either Obama or Hillary?

Logic 101: if "A" equals "B," then "B" (likewise) must equal "A"... or else your theory is, quite simply... welllllllll...

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

But it is beyond delusional to argue that the outcome of the presidential race doesn’t matter in 2008.

Great Galloping Guacamoles! I actually said that? REALLY -- ?!?

Where?

[calcowgirl]

"Why would she make something up? Because she's a flake, and a poser, and an attention seeking diva. And that's on the record."

LOL. That is good!

Will McCain be offering an apology for Salter's remarks?

[lkco]

At first when McCain was inevitable, I said “No Way. I'm writing in my guy in November no matter what.” Then after learning more about Obama and watching the battle between him and Hillary I thought “Okay. I just won't vote for President in November.”

Then I learned even more about Obama, and had the “pleasure” of listening to Hillary even more, and then came the possibility of a Ron Paul conversion to Obama (Ron wasn't my guy, but still had me curious for a while) so I've decided no matter what, voting for McCain is still better than voting for Hillary or Obama.

I live in Washington too. Sometimes the best vote is for the least left candidate ... not necessarily the most right ... just the least left. At this point I just want to make sure I can live to vote another day ... with Obama I can't even be sure of that. Just imagine what the world would be like with a Jimmy Carter presidency if Iran had nukes back then.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

Oh, you’re wicked, you are. ;)

[Enchante]

The difference between “plausible” and “credible”

---

I said I find the tale “plausible” because it fits with some things we know about John McCain and what we might believe his state of mind to be in the fall of 2000.

However, I could sit here right now and spin out 1,000 “plausible” fictions about any of the candidates, i.e., fictions that do not conflict with what we know about them and which seem to create some “plausible” story that in reality “we” know to be fiction because I just concocted them, here, tonight. A plausible story only becomes “credible” when there is some actual basis in evidence such as reliable witnesses, documentary or audio-visual substantiation, etc.

Arianna Puffington adds nothing at all to the credibility of any story — it’s just as though I made it up right here and told you it was a fabrication. She has zero credibility with any respectable person.

The fact that Hot Air chooses to repeat the story only says to me that they want to see if they can stir things up, obtain some new info or witnesses, etc. However, they have not yet added the slightest substantiation to the story.

If you want to pursue Arianna’s fantasies feel free of course, it’s your right as a free American...... but in the absence of any substantiating evidence I don’t think the story will merit any respect.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

The fact that Hot Air chooses to repeat the story only says to me that they want to see if they can stir things up, obtain some new info or witnesses, etc.

... and the fact that you could actually proffer such an outlandishly absurd-on-its-very-face accusation, re: Hot Air -- whose devotion to all things McCain actually qualifies as nakedly and unapologetically servile, for pity's sake! -- only tells me (and anyone else familiar with their work) that you simply haven't Clue One as to the genuine nature of just whom, precisely, you are accusing, or their stance on the candidates.

If and when you make yourself more familiar with said track record... then, naturally, your opinion will change.

If you want to pursue Arianna’s fantasies

Ah. Now you're simply making things up, for (one presumes) the sheer, simple pleasure of banging your fingertips repeatedly against the keys. Good for you, then! ;)

I am "pursuing" no one's fantasy, thank you kindly all the same. I posted a news story from a right-wing site long recognized as being a thoroughly credible one; and posed a pair of theoretical questions based thereupon, beginning with the the blatantly obvious qualifier: "Assuming that the core accusation at the heart of this story is true." This, you have repeatedly (and inexplicably) opted to ignore, for reasons which are, thankfully, neither my care nor my concern.

Again: CALM. DOWN. ;)

[calcowgirl]

It took me a couple minutes to stop laughing over the “Great Galloping Guacamoles!”.

LOL.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

They persist in being silly; I reserve the right to meet them, in kind. ;)

[AnotherUnixGeek]

I just can't bring myself to voting for McCain. Lots of reasons why, many/most have been or will be enumerated here.

I guess it boils down to the fact that I don't "owe" the GOP or McCain anything

Neither do I. I will be voting for McCain, however. I'm certain he'll continue to seek success in Iraq. Obama and Clinton have both announced that they will flee Iraq as soon as they can.

I'm also confident that I'd rather have McCain handling any upcoming conflict with Iran.

Finally, there's a good possibility that the next president will have two Supreme Court nominations to make. McCain has said publicly that he will seek nominees in the mold of John Roberts and Sam Alito. Obama and Clinton have guaranteed more Ruth Bader Ginsbergs.

We all have our own choices to make. I'm unhappy with McCain on several issues, but I know who I'd rather have making the decisions above.

[A CA Guy]

If Arianna said it then it was probably a lie.

About the only thing the woman is known for is turning her ex husband gay.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

If Arianna said it then it was probably a lie.

"If a serial liar lies about another serial liar in the forest... does it actually make a sound?" ;)

[A CA Guy]

I think McCain got us mad enough just telling us what he things and intends to do. I don’t think he ever had to bother to lie.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

I don’t think he ever had to bother to lie.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one, evidently. ;)