McCain Camp: We have underused P.O.W. Expect more.

[Elfdart]

If I were a graphic artist type, I would love to make a mock McCain campaign ad, set to the music of Verhoeven's Starship Troopers.

Join now, for the Young Republicans! Do your part!

*images of kids stomping on pictures of Barack Obama and throwing bundles of arugula into the garbage*

Stop the left-wing liberal menace! It is up to you, citizen! YOU can make a difference!

McCAIN! He is a citizen! He is a soldier! And HE WILL WIN!

Actually, the movie that comes to mind with Dungeon Master McCain is But I'm A Cheerleader!, only in this case it's But I Was A POW!

The problem with a mock ad like the one you suggest is that it would probably suffer from the Archie Bunker Effect. In other words, Republitards would see it and say "KEWL!"

[Illuminatus Primus]

Frankly, I don't think that their arguments mean anything. I don't know if they even mean anything they say. You're probably too young to remember the extraordinarily detailed arguments people would write about why Clinton's sexual dalliances were not just relevant to his presidency, but in fact struck at the very heart of what it took to be a good president. And it wasn't about the fact that it occurred in the Oval Office; it was about the kind of values that the man had.

But now that they are backing a Republican adulterer who started banging his new prettier wife while still legally married to his disabled first one, these same people are writing that such emphasis on a man's personal life is a huge red-herring to his ability to be president and any attempt to focus attention on it is scurrilous and disgusting. And they are retroactively rewriting all of their old "bash Clinton" arguments to say that it was never about the adultery; it was about doing it on "company time" (as if GWB has used his time so diligently) and lying to Congress (as if GWB and his cronies haven't done that either).

Bill Maher once said that Republicans think the most important feature of a president is that he fuck his own wife. I think he actually gave them too much credit; they have no real standards at all, so long as you vote for their guy. Any and all arguments they make to that effect are mere arguments of convenience, and reflect principles which they will discard at the drop of a hat as necessary.

Pure tribalism. That and they want to hear rhetoric about their hated enemies. As long as he wears the clan colors and denounces our rivals, that's all he needs.

[Ender]

Frankly, I don't think that their arguments mean anything. I don't know if they even mean anything they say. You're probably too young to remember the extraordinarily detailed arguments people would write about why Clinton's sexual dalliances were not just relevant to his presidency, but in fact struck at the very heart of what it took to be a good president. And it wasn't about the fact that it occurred in the Oval Office; it was about the kind of values that the man had.

But now that they are backing a Republican adulterer who started banging his new prettier wife while still legally married to his disabled first one, these same people are writing that such emphasis on a man's personal life is a huge red-herring to his ability to be president and any attempt to focus attention on it is scurrilous and disgusting. And they are retroactively rewriting all of their old "bash Clinton" arguments to say that it was never about the adultery; it was about doing it on "company time" (as if GWB has used his time so diligently) and lying to Congress (as if GWB and his cronies haven't done that either).

Hell, look at the attacks on Kerry for living of his rich wife's money. Which are absent for McCain.

[Ender]

What exactly does being put in a bamboo cage and being poked with a stick for 5 years have to do with you being President? I mean if anything it's a good reason why you shouldn't be.

You keep claiming this, but have not put forth reasoning why. Why should being a prisoner of war strip you of the right to run for office?

[salm]

What exactly does being put in a bamboo cage and being poked with a stick for 5 years have to do with you being President? I mean if anything it's a good reason why you shouldn't be.

You keep claiming this, but have not put forth reasoning why. Why should being a prisoner of war strip you of the right to run for office?

It shouldn´t strip you off the right but i´d make really, really sure that the person in question hasn´t taken any permanent mental damage. After all torture is known to be able to fuck you up mentally quite a bit.

[Ender]

What exactly does being put in a bamboo cage and being poked with a stick for 5 years have to do with you being President? I mean if anything it's a good reason why you shouldn't be.

You keep claiming this, but have not put forth reasoning why. Why should being a prisoner of war strip you of the right to run for office?

It shouldn´t strip you off the right but i´d make really, really sure that the person in question hasn´t taken any permanent mental damage. After all torture is known to be able to fuck you up mentally quite a bit.

Any person utterly fucked up by torture as you describe isn't going to have it together enough to mount a campaign. This Manchurian Candidate paranoia is the product of too much Hollywood and cheap fiction crap. Seriously, the idea that being a POW should keep someone from being eligible to run because "they might be messed up in the head" is about as valid as "they might be a pod person". Yeah, ok, it is a possibility that the guy is a raving aluminum foil hat, my dog talks to me, gnomes are stealing my underpants, sprinkler rainbows are the result of chemicals in the ground, lunatic who just concealed it really really really well for 35 years. But the long odds on it make you look like the loon you claim he is.

Being a POW alone is not a valid reason to get you into office. But I really want to hear why it should also disqualify you from it.

[Flagg]

What exactly does being put in a bamboo cage and being poked with a stick for 5 years have to do with you being President? I mean if anything it's a good reason why you shouldn't be.

You keep claiming this, but have not put forth reasoning why. Why should being a prisoner of war strip you of the right to run for office?

You keep claiming I'm saying rights should be taken away when I've already responded that I'm not talking about his right to run, but about votes. Don't fucking strawman me.

The man obviously has serious psychological issues which manifest themselves on a regular basis in angry outbursts and shameful displays of douchebgaggery. That should make any voter not cast a ballot for him.

[Pablo Sanchez]

The man obviously has serious psychological issues which manifest themselves on a regular basis in angry outbursts and shameful displays of douchebgaggery.

Your reasoning is totally specious. The man has a temper, and he acts like a dick, but the same can be said of lots of people with no mental problems, including a number of perfectly sane presidents. Lyndon Johnson had a temper and swore like a sailor, but mentally he was sound as a pound.

[Flagg]

The man obviously has serious psychological issues which manifest themselves on a regular basis in angry outbursts and shameful displays of douchebgaggery.

Your reasoning is totally specious. The man has a temper, and he acts like a dick, but the same can be said of lots of people with no mental problems, including a number of perfectly sane presidents. Lyndon Johnson had a temper and swore like a sailor, but mentally he was sound as a pound.

True, he may just be an out of control cunt and the torture had nothing to do with it.

[Ender]

What exactly does being put in a bamboo cage and being poked with a stick for 5 years have to do with you being President? I mean if anything it's a good reason why you shouldn't be.

You keep claiming this, but have not put forth reasoning why. Why should being a prisoner of war strip you of the right to run for office?

You keep claiming I'm saying rights should be taken away when I've already responded that I'm not talking about his right to run, but about votes. Don't fucking strawman me.

Claiming I am strawmanning you when you are quoting yourself saying that being a POW means you shouldn't be president is a bad fucking plan.

The man obviously has serious psychological issues which manifest themselves on a regular basis in angry outbursts and shameful displays of douchebgaggery. That should make any voter not cast a ballot for him.

Which is absolutely irrelevant to the fact he was a POW, for the above reasons I provided. Now fucking justify why being a POW should disqualify you from being president?

[SilverWingedSeraph]

You keep claiming this, but have not put forth reasoning why. Why should being a prisoner of war strip you of the right to run for office?

You keep claiming I'm saying rights should be taken away when I've already responded that I'm not talking about his right to run, but about votes. Don't fucking strawman me.

Claiming I am strawmanning you when you are quoting yourself saying that being a POW means you shouldn't be president is a bad fucking plan.

The man obviously has serious psychological issues which manifest themselves on a regular basis in angry outbursts and shameful displays of douchebgaggery. That should make any voter not cast a ballot for him.

Which is absolutely irrelevant to the fact he was a POW, for the above reasons I provided. Now fucking justify why being a POW should disqualify you from being president?

I believe Flagg's meaning was "Why the hell would you want to brag about being a POW, in an attempt to win votes? Shouldn't any sensible person NOT VOTE FOR YOU for this reason?". His initial post wasn't very clear, but he did clarify afterwards.

[Flagg]

You keep claiming this, but have not put forth reasoning why. Why should being a prisoner of war strip you of the right to run for office?

You keep claiming I'm saying rights should be taken away when I've already responded that I'm not talking about his right to run, but about votes. Don't fucking strawman me.

Claiming I am strawmanning you when you are quoting yourself saying that being a POW means you shouldn't be president is a bad fucking plan.

Ignoring the fact that you keep talking about his "right" to be running for president is a worse one.

The man obviously has serious psychological issues which manifest themselves on a regular basis in angry outbursts and shameful displays of douchebgaggery. That should make any voter not cast a ballot for him.

Which is absolutely irrelevant to the fact he was a POW, for the above reasons I provided. Now fucking justify why being a POW should disqualify you from being president?

Nothing. Nice that you keep ignoring the whole TORTURE THING, too. Yes, someone who was held captive and TORTURED for 5 years should probably not be elected president due to the serious emotional damage resulting from such abuse. Being a POW has nothing to do with it.

[Darth Wong]

You keep claiming this, but have not put forth reasoning why. Why should being a prisoner of war strip you of the right to run for office?

You keep claiming I'm saying rights should be taken away when I've already responded that I'm not talking about his right to run, but about votes. Don't fucking strawman me.

Claiming I am strawmanning you when you are quoting yourself saying that being a POW means you shouldn't be president is a bad fucking plan.

Ender, there's a difference between saying "he shouldn't be president" and saying "he should be stripped of the right to run for president". What you're doing is a strawman.