Oh my...describing you as a member of the suicide squad really got under your skin didn't it?
No you didn't. You just stated that the author was not credible based on the title of another book he wrote.
Uh-huh. OK, imagine that you once left the scene of an accident, but did so because you were rushing a passenger to the hospital and they would never survive if you waited around for a cop. Later, you become famous and write about the incident in your best-selling memoir. Now, imagine that later in life, someone writes an article called "TigersEye left the scene of an accident," never mentions your passenger (even quoting the account you wrote, but omitting any mention of the real reason you left) and cites a bunch of unnamed sources saying you were drunk, and a guy who says he took photos of you drunk at the wheel but unfortunately he can't produce the photos.
Do you feel like that would be an honorable thing for them to do? Would they be a good reporter? Would their article be a good source? Would someone be wise to put any stock in it or describe it as part of your "record?" And even if your account wasn't true (I don't doubt McCain's, because of Bud Day and other witnesses) wouldn't they still be liars or incompetents?
Tap dance all you want, but one of my business professors kept a giant "B.S." stamp on his desk just for students who approached sourcing like you do.
But I haven't made any judgments, as you have accused me of, I have just put up the stories I have found.
You can't really run away from your insulting characterizations by laughingly speculating that it got under my skin. You started out being a jerk, like McCain, and that is just a simple fact.
I'll bet he wasn't dumb enough to apply it on works his students didn't submit or didn't claim was theirs.