TPMCafe
« Long Dark Night of the Servers | Home | Roman Hruska for President »

"Yoo Es Ay! Yoo Es Ay!"

user-pic

Like Dwight D. Eisenhower, John McCain has seen more than enough of war to have risen above the testosterone-stoked macho that some young men rush to prove in war - any war.

My father, who served in Europe in World War II in the 277th Battalion Army Combat Engineers, told me that it's those who haven't proven themselves who keep on touting militarism. "The biggest blowhards at the American Legion are the ones who spent as much of the war as they could at the PX," he said.

There was so much of this in the Republican Party last night that, at one point in his speech, McCain looked annoyed.

McCain knows the difference between flaunting heroism as some legionnaires do and making a political decision to showcase it. He and he Republicans overplayed the hero card because they have so little else to run on.

Several times during his acceptance speech, the party's militaristic id - or is it a guilty conscience? -- threatened to erupt. Whenever McCain touched even lightly on a military or patriotic theme, we heard from a somewhat unnervingly large contingent of young men whose repertoire of political expression consisted solely of shouting "Yoo Es Ay! Yoo Es Ay! Yoo Es Ay!"

They tried to dominate the rest of the crowd's reactions even when McCain was sounding poignant or somber, not pugnacious. No matter how subtle, subdued or highly dignified his appeals to patriotism, the rising and sometimes overwhelming response was "Yoo Es Ay! Yoo Es Ay! Yoo Es Ay!"

In a voiceover, Fred Thompson said, "When you've lived in a box, your life is about keeping others from having to live in that box."

"Yoo Es Ay! Yoo Es Ay! Yoo Es Ay!"

Someone mentioned how, a year ago, McCain's campaign was so strapped he'd had to let go of most of his staff, but that he'd come back in New Hampshire thanks to his grit and conviction that he would rather lose an election than see his country lose a war.

"Yoo Es Ay! Yoo Es Ay! Yoo Es Ay!"

Sentimentally but not very convincingly, McCain named three different, hard-pressed American families whose problems he'd taken to heart, without making make clear what policies he'd support to help them. He did vow, to a family whose son had fallen in battle and whose bracelet McCain now wears, that he would "make sure their country remains safe." As the parents grew moist, the crowd cried, "Yoo Es Ay! Yoo Es Ay! Yoo Es Ay!"

To introduce his theme of energy independence, McCain said, "We're gonna stop sending $700 billion a year to countries that don't like us very much."

"Yoo Es Ay! Yoo Es Ay! Yoo Es Ay!"

McCain said that he respects and admires Senator Obama and affirmed, "Despite our differences, we are all Americans. That's an association that means more to me than any other."

"Yoo Es Ay! Yoo Es Ay! Yoo Es Ay!"

I think I recognize some of the guys I saw doing this. Their buffoonish, boorish chanting is only one side of them, not necessarily the dominant one. They haven't all curdled into fascists, as some liberals might believe. There's a decency and clueless love in them that's trying to find a political home, and there's yearning for something that's slipping away.

The problem, of course, is that the Republican Party, Fox News and Rush Limbaugh are racheting up these hurts and pointing them toward war and nasty hatreds of dubious domestic villains. Yes, this is dangerous, and McCain isn't on top of it.

A couple of times during his speech, lone demonstrators who'd sneaked into the audience rose, shouted out, waved some signs, and were hustled to the exits.
In that vast hall, with the media focusing on the podium, the disruptions were easily minimized - until the guys decided to counter them by chanting, "Yoo Es Ay! You Es Ay! You Es Ay!" They did disrupt McCain's speech, far more than the demonstrators had. It was then that he looked annoyed, and rightly so.

He deflected the second uproar deftly enough, with a couple of words I haven't had time to check. But was there any good leadership on the floor? That brings us back to the Republicans' problem.

Compare McCain, who refused early release from captivity in Vietnam, to George W. Bush, who dodged the same war by getting into the National Guard on a phone call from his Dad and sneaked out of the Guard early. (Perhaps my father's wisdom about blowhards who never served casts some light on Bush's swaggering, "Mission Accomplished" flight-deck landing some 35 years after he'd left the Guard.)

It's almost as loathsome as the Swift-Boating of John Kerry, and it highlights the larger problem: Proportionately, the Republican Party has the most members of Congress and other high officeholders who've never served in the military. And its loudest war-mongers, like Rudy Giuliani and, now, Joe Lieberman, haven't served, either, although both were of draft age during Vietnam War. Neo-con war-hawks, who have battened onto McCain's campaign, have never served, unless you count their militaristic strategizing and strutting.

Ronald Reagan never served, beyond making war movies Stateside. (George H.W. Bush did serve heroically in combat, which may have something to do with his youngest son's desperate posturing.)

But the Republicans' "Yoo Es Ay!" problem is about more than young men's hormones and older men's uneasy consciences. It's even about more than just men, now that Cindy McCain has touted Sarah Palin at the convention as "a pistol-packing hockey mom." (The Republican Party, the Wall Street Journal's editorial pages, and the National Rifle Association have all encouraged women to pack heat.)

The Republicans' real problem is that they have too few other ideas that most Americans still believe in or even want to hear. Desperate for heroes, they don't even acknowledge that John McCain's war killed 58,000 Americans and countless others, in vain: After Vietnam defeated us, it entered the neoliberal global capitalist orbit, anyway, as it would have done had we never fired a shot. There's a war memorial in Washington, but my memorial is a T-shirt on my back whose label says, "Made in Vietnam."

To his credit, McCain worked to normalize relations with Vietnam. But Republicans are so much in denial about the Vietnam war - and so eager to milk McCain's sacrifice in it - that they don't even mention that the war was conceived and conducted mainly by liberal Democrats..

McCain knows this, of course, and he and John Kerry once bonded over it years ago in the Senate, despite their diametrically opposite conclusions about what the war had been for. At one point in his acceptance speech, McCain mentioned the vanity of young men like him who'd rushed into war to be "my own man," and he recounted that his torturers had cured him of it: "They broke me," he said quietly, to silence in the hall..

"I wasn't my own man anymore," he added. "I was my country's man." He claimed that his love of America had saved him, and that now "I will fight for her so long as I draw breath."

It was a difficult, fraught confession, somewhat dissonant and troubling.. McCain said not a word - as the young John Kerry had, years before -- against the senators and presidents who'd sent them to kill and be killed in a misguided, fraudulent, massively destructive, and futile venture. Its hardest lesson is that the American blood it shed does not retroactively justify, much less sacralize, America's betrayal by its leaders. One of them, Robert McNamara, understood this and, late in his life, he confessed it.

McCain seems to have drawn a different lesson. "I hate war," he claimed in his speech, insisting that good judgment and principles are as important as the will to fight. I can believe him and acknowledge that Iraq is not Vietnam. But the Republican convention was desperately, indiscriminately seeking political clarity in fogs of war and bellicosity in all directions, and McCain played to it.

He reaped what he sowed: His account of his brutal transformation in captivity from self-regarding flyboy to selfless patriot deserved strong, voiceless applause from a mature, deeply moved audience.

Instead it got, "Yoo Es Ay! Yoo Es Ay! Yoo Es Ay!"


60 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

I'm not sure Dwight D. Eisenhower is the best example of someone who has "seen more than enough of war to" -- well, to what?

He never saw combat, did he? I suppose he may have read the occasional after-action report, but then, we all can do that.

We all can't develop plans that win a World War against the likes of Nazis and Imperial Japan.

I never knew he didn't see combat, but he lived most of his life in the military, so Ike is more every bit the embodiment of that sacrificial spirit of that commitment as someone who got shot at in theater.

Ike was the last great republican president who truly gave a shit about this country. He tried to warn us about what was coming - what he had helped to create - and we wouldn't listen.

Don't belittle Ike for having served honorably. It's not right and it's not warranted.

user-pic

What sacrifice?

Eisenhower got a free education, a safe and cushy career, the opportunity to do major suck-up to the narcissistic likes of Gen. MacArthur, et als. (Ike was real good at that), an overseas mistress*, and the Presidency of the United States of America, the latter by barely lifting his little finger. And lots of golf at others' expense.

* Didn't some female Air Force officer get cashiered a few years ago for adultery (conduct unbecoming an officer v. "served honorably")?

Way to win friends and influence people. If you just want to convince the rest of the liberal fringe about how shitty a guy Ike was, that is fine, great job. If the idea is to actually convince the other side of something, your strategy is a loser.

You don't sound like someone who has ever been in the military, otherwise you would know no matter how "cush" the career path, there is plenty of sacrifice to be found outside of foxholes. Sacrifice by the family as well as the soldier.

You display a startling lack of context about the military, non sequiter reference to a "cashiered" lieutenant not withstanding. I know plenty of guys kicked out for adultery as well. Isn't the democratic icon Bill Clinton a serial adulterer? I think I remember reading about that someplace. Wait, JFK, too.

How is any of your misinformed opinions about Ike and the military and adultery even relevant to the discussion at hand?

user-pic

Hey, JasonEverettMiller; you got me wrong.

Eisenhower was one damn fine office politician. Hell; anyone who could stroke MacArthur's gigantic ego for that many years and still look himself in the mirror deserves a medal.

user-pic

Jason,

I wonder what % of married men, Republican or Democrat, are "serial adulterers". How many outside of your marriage screws makes you a serial adulterer?

Speaking as a liberal, I doubt the "liberal fringe", whatever that is, thinks Ike was a shitty guy.

I personally think any man who can't stay true to his vows should get a divorce. Once is too many times. I believe most married men feel the same way if they are in a good marriage.

I wasn't implying the "liberal fringe" believe anything, just that Ellen seemed to be preaching to the choir when there are visitors in the belfry.

I think a more common sense approach with certain constituencies might be required to achieve our common goals - a governing majority for Barack that includes republicans, democrats and independents.

Denigrating one of the best republican presidents of the 20th century is probably not the best way to make a point to disaffected republicans.

user-pic

Jason said:

I wasn't implying the "liberal fringe" believe anything, just that Ellen seemed to be preaching to the choir when there are visitors in the belfry.

I have no idea what the above means, but I agree about Ike being a good President, and he's the last Republican I voted for for President..

oh crap, I voted for Reagan the first time. I must have been delerious.

That I am a progressive republican and many progressive (or confused or pissed) republicans come to this site, yet many of your more vocal members on the left seem to be preaching to the choir, which hardly need to be converted to whatever message she is pushing.

The "visitors in the belfry" means those among you that may not belong to the "converted" to purely liberal ideology.

There are many around these parts that seem to bash the GOP out of reflect rather than reflection. Not all republicans are created equal, both presidents and moderate right of center voters.

user-pic

Jason,

I think you mistook Ellen as a liberal because she bashed Ike.

As for preaching to the choir, what do you expect in a lib area, you're going to some of that. And maybe its more commiserating than preaching.

People may reflexively bash GOPers because of the brand of GOP in control of the Federal Gov for the 6 years under Bush, not to mention the DeLay years.

For most of the time I've seen myself as liberal I valued level headed Republicans as a stop gap to keep me from going too far left, but that brand of Republican in Government has been rare
for too long.

As long as its civil in here, what more is needed?


As long as people of good will can discuss things openly and honestly, nothing is really needed.

Ellen is clearly "liberal" based on other things I have seen her write. Perhaps that is mistaken, but I don't believe so. As for this being a "liberal" site, I dispute that. I say this site is a progressive site that happens to have some liberals who hang out. I see as many independents as democrats and more than a handful of "recovering republicans" around as well.

As long as my goal is to see a more progressive GOP take shape in the coming years, I will admonish "liberals" (especially those on the Raging Left) to practice what they preach and to find a little more compassion and empathy for their fellow citizens.

Preaching to choir is fine as long as it isn't done in such a way as to blame ever ill in America on "conservatives" rather than taking responsibility for their own part in our little national drama.

user-pic

Jason,

from your point of view, define "liberal" then define "progressive" as it relates to Democrats.

I suspect that Democrats that call themselves progressive are really liberals in disguise. They won't use they word Liberal because the Republicans have been so successful over the years making the word a pejorative.

user-pic

Ellen,

are you getting nasty in your old age?

user-pic

Just a quote from Eisenhower:

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.

Neat, huh?

user-pic

David,

here's another Ike quote:

Outside his office at SHAEF HQ in Frankfurt to Bedell Smith;

"Keep those Paras out of my liquor cabinet."

Dude, your brutal.

Ellen, you really have it in for ol Ike for some reason. Sure, some of the things you say about him are true, but none are atrocious or disqualifying of his greatness as commanding general. You're not sore he defeated the Nazis, are you? There was no guarantee of winning that war against blatant fascism, and Ike was indispensable in that victory.

However, and here's my slight at Ike, he did have "combat" experience, as a colonel, I think, and along with General Pershing (who did fight in the First World War, as might have Ike in some capacity), viciously attacked the Bonus Army of U.S. World War I veterans who had encamped in D.C. in a courageous attempt to get recognition for their grievances against the U.S. government regarding a substantial bonus for service that they'd been promised but were never paid.

So, Ike, and Pershing, had their own Tienemann Square type blot on their records. I imagine that's one major way Ike got promoted up the ranks - for showing loyalty to command by attacking veterans, former U.S. soldiers, in the streets of the U.S. capital.

This is similar to Colin Powell's promotions up the ranks after actively helping to cover up the My Lai massacre and others during his self-acclaimed heroic Vietnam days as an officer. Ike's still a hero of sorts. Colin Powell? Not so much. Instead he's been shown to be the goat and amoral coward he always was.

user-pic

Can we presume that the "USA" chants were programmed by the convention managers -- sort of like the way they handed out flip-flops to conventioneers last time around?

Along the lines of that question, IOZ has a witty take on the absurd stupidity on display.

user-pic

I have a somewhat different assessment of my fellow Vietnam Veteran, John McBush. He does not hate war. On the contrary, he loves it. He only fears that his unfulfilled life will now slip away from him without his ever getting a chance to do Vietnam all over again -- only this time (as Rambo pathetically and desperately needs to say) "we get to win."

In the real Vietnam that John McBush never understood, we who served on the ground (instead of in the air) had a term for endless, ineffective, incremental escalation. We called it "mission creep." Now, John McBush calls this same discredited tactic "the surge," as if yet another Orwellian euphemism will magically make a difference where political/military blundering has failed. As Tallyrand said of the discredited French monarchy and its stupid policies, so I say of John McBush and the Republican Party's cynical imperial/military fetish-floggers: "They learned nothing and they forgot nothing."

Panama-John McBush sees his last grasping opportunity to play commander-in-briefs eluding him. And if he has to beat us all to death with his "noun, plus a verb, plus P.O.W." mantra, then he will. Along with his REMF hero, Deputy Dubya Bush, Panama-John eagerly sailed the Titanic ship of state directly into an iceberg floating clearly up ahead, and now proudly boasts of rearranging a few deck chairs in the orchestra pit as the doomed luxury vessel lists radically to starboard and settles down by the stern towards its watery grave.

For someone who comes from a family of admirals, Panama-John McBush knows precious little about successful sailing. He certainly never seems to have understood First Mate Starbuck's admonition to the crew of Ahab's Pequod: "I will have no man in my boat who is not afraid of a whale." Like the REMF (Rear Eschelon Mother Fucker) Deputy Dubya, Panama-John fears neither whales nor wars -- which explains why our country cannot possibly afford for this fearless harpooner to get anywhere near the tiller of our national boat.

user-pic

Michael Murry says;

He only fears that his unfulfilled life will now slip away from him without his ever getting a chance to do Vietnam all over again -- only this time (as Rambo pathetically and desperately needs to say) "we get to win."

Michael, I agree. I think he may feel all that he suffered went for naught as the war was lost. I think he wants to win a war as a way to ameliorate what he feels about Vietnam.

For someone who claims to hate war, his rhetoric doesn't sound it.

He scares me.

I think McCain is deeply troubled and feels totally humiliated (with not insignificant reason) by his POW experience and is less in love with War than he is in the project of proving himself the combat hero he never got to be. Just my take.

But whether he is in love with war or he isn't, the effect is the same, he is a war monger, and he plays to a war loving crowd.

I was glad to see this post on that offensive USA chant. I was troubled by the faces I saw on camera that went with that chant and I wondered what it was that seemed so different from the Democratic convention the week before.

And the difference was, in a word, anger. Where last week I saw people transported with a kind of relief, tempered with joy, I saw twisted faces last night, looking out at the camera with fuck you written all over them. They reminded me of the angry mobs of Muslims you see yelling at American cameramen.

Even ewhen these Republicans started dancing (and what a sight that was. all those white people dancing), so many of them (particularly women) turned to look at the camera with their fuck you faces.

Fuck you. we're not just going to win, we're going to BEAT you.

Yoo Es Ay. Is that what being proud of this country means? Belligerance? Wake me when it's over -- if it's ever over.

user-pic

anna am

I saw them too and wondered why so many were there and not in Iraq or Afghanistan.

user-pic

Yoo. Es. Ay.

I didn't like it at the '84 Olympics, either.

user-pic

I believe it originated in the 1980 Olympics in Lake Placid, when the USA hockey team won the gold medal.

-- ARG

user-pic

Excellent post, Michael Murry. Thank you. Very well said.

I often skip the comments entirely, or just skim through. Glad I found this one, though.

-- ARG

user-pic

Damn, Micheal Murray - that was eloquent as hell.

user-pic

Damn, Micheal Murray - that was eloquent as hell.

Nice observations. I half-way expected the crowd to break out any moment with a rousing chant of “WE’RE #1, WE’RE #1!!!” As an American living abroad, watching this on international news for all the world to see, I'm glad they didn't.

user-pic

Mammamia,

that's what they did when Reagan conquored Grenada. WE'RE #1

ACH!

user-pic

I was surprised just how strongly the Republicans tried to play up the war-on-terrorism theme. In fact, other than the usual references to cutting taxes, I heard no other significant theme during the convention. I guess the Republicans have come to realize that the only way they can win is if Americans fear hordes of Islamic terrorists invading their backyards. In 2004 this strategy barely worked. Four years later, with an economy in disarray, it seems almost laughable.
Maybe I'm not as much of an elitist as the Republican strategists, but I simply don't believe the American people are so dumb as to be fooled by such silly fear mongering.

user-pic

The key to victory is not to make fun of Americans who scream "USA". Not every American has the sage perspective of Mr. Sleeper's Dad. The key is to keep bringing this election back--one voter at a time--to the economic issues that should, but which may not, be determinative of this election. I know folks like Ellen tend to look down at the "I feel your pain" approach to political discourse, but that is how you win the election (by convincing Joe Foonyotz down the street, as opposed to Professor Know-it-all up on Academic Hill--that you're the guy/lady. Leading with challenges to contrived patriotism is like taking the shovel that will used to dig one's own gravel, and using it.

By the way, on Ike, wasn't he on the field of battle during the First World War?

user-pic

Try this again.

Last sentence, first paragraph:

"Leading with challenges to contrived patriotism is like taking the shovel that will used to dig one's own grave, and using it".

user-pic

I give up on editing. You may not agree with me folks but hopefully you catch my gist!

user-pic

Hey, there's my old pal Bruce again.....and again.....and again :-)


Bruce, you're spot on about the economy as the issue, and....the DOW is down another 102 points as of right now. This is scaring me.

He probably was, Bruce, but Wikipedia didn't mention it, so Ellen couldn't know. As always, you are a voice of reason on the left who doesn't advocate preaching to the choir when there are visitors in the belfry.

user-pic

Thanks Jason. Ellen is actually correct. Ike didn't have a combat role in WWI.
http://www.dwightdeisenhower.com/biodde.html
I think I lost my initial post to you, but if another one comes up, you'll know why!

user-pic

I agree with your point that attacking ersatz patriotism is a losing strategy for the Democrats. I find, however, the relentless chanting of U S A not patriotic, but aggressive, threatening, bellicose. It demands conformity and suggests a primitive, ugly, and moblike impulse toward violence. If it alarms me--a patriotic American--I wonder how it is perceived by people in other countries. I like to think of my country as magnanimous, kind, helpful, inclusive--seeking to bring peace and harmony among nations--sharing its good fortune with others. This chant suggests something opposite--a desire for dominance and a disdain for others.

I guess, quite simply, I'd like to see Americans act more like gentlemen and less like soccer hooligans. And, somehow, I'd like to see the Democrats elevate the national discourse so that such primitive displays of aggression are not quite so common. I don't think attacking bellicosity disguised as patriotism is a good political strategy--but let's hope we can find some way to channel American behavior in a more promising direction.

Your comments are, I think, exactly to the point, near perfect, and while I realize bslev is making a valid point, it still makes me think about how the lynch mobs back in the day were only acting out their own form of patriotism too.


user-pic

Sorry, I agree with Purple State and you that faux patriotism can be a dangerous thing, but I don't think of lynch mobs when I see a bunch of Americans expressing pride, rightly or wrongly, in their country, and I don't think of lynch mobs when a bunch of Yankee fans scream Derek Jeter at the game either. That said, to reiterate my main point, Democrats lose elections because we tend to wind up on the wrong side of electoral arguments (even when we're right on the merits), such as taking on folks who scream the initials of this country, even though this country has lots of warts.
That dog won't hunt in the next 60 days or whatever.

user-pic

Bruce,

CNN and others are reporting* that the chant was used to silence protestors. Steve Bell (the cartoonist of the Guardian) in his sketchbook today also mentions that the crowd broke into the chant as peace protestors were removed.

It's not just people expressing pride in their country. It's an aggressive way of shutting out dissent. And while we Red Sox fans know that Yankee fans can indeed be belligerent, the most they launch at their enemies are beer cups. The USA chanters, however, would prefer to send J - E - T - S, jets, jets, jets.


*Reference:

‘USA’ chant is code for protesters
Posted: 11:30 PM ET
ST. PAUL, Minnesota (CNN) — In response to early rumors that demonstrators might try to interrupt Republican presidential nominee John McCain’s acceptance speech Thursday night, a number of delegations agreed to chant “USA” in order to quell the sound of protesters.

On at least three occasions during the early part of his speech, members of the audience began chanting “USA” in response to protesters, who were then escorted out of the hall.

From the Guardian:

user-pic

Bruce,

CNN and others are reporting* that the chant was used to silence protestors. Steve Bell (the cartoonist of the Guardian) in his sketchbook today also mentions that the crowd broke into the chant as peace protestors were removed.

THe chant is not just people expressing pride in their country. It's an aggressive way of shutting out dissent. And while we Red Sox fans know that Yankee fans can indeed be belligerent, the most they launch at their enemies are beer cups. The USA chanters, however, would prefer to send J - E - T - S, jets, jets, jets.


*Reference:

‘USA’ chant is code for protesters
Posted: 11:30 PM ET
ST. PAUL, Minnesota (CNN) — In response to early rumors that demonstrators might try to interrupt Republican presidential nominee John McCain’s acceptance speech Thursday night, a number of delegations agreed to chant “USA” in order to quell the sound of protesters.

On at least three occasions during the early part of his speech, members of the audience began chanting “USA” in response to protesters, who were then escorted out of the hall.

From the Guardian:

user-pic

Those Red Sox fans are a real danger and have absolutely no right to free speech. My father-in-law, Boston twang and all, is one of 'em. In any event, I ain't gonna be cornered by anyone into defending delegates to the Republican National Convention and what they bellow. I'll go out on a limb and observe that they were a fairly homogenous looking bunch of nerds whom I have little to no interest in defending.

I do have, I think, a pretty good finger on the pulse of certain folks whose support we must have for a Democratic victory in November, and I can represent to you that in union halls that still hang the POW flag underneath the stars and stripes, there is little sympathy for any criticism directed at USA chanters, unless of course they are Red Sox fans. :)

Glad you're still around Purple State.

user-pic

Now that I think about it Bruce, when I'm down in your Meadowlands next week, I'll leave my Patriots jersey at home and take your advice not to chastise Fireman Ed for his unattractive chanting.

Nice to hear from you, as always!

user-pic

Bruce,

For myself, I dont care if people yell USA USA, but I can't help shaking my head when its yelled for political reasons or for crappy operations like Reagan's invasion of Grenada and their handfull of Cubans.

You're right, too many people we need look down on those who cast apsersions on people who do yell
USA.

user-pic

I hear you John. And I agree with you.

I don't think the Democrats public face has been taking on the USA chant, bslev, so I think we're safe that they're not coming down on the wrong side of this issue.

And while I don't claim that the USA chant is exactly the same thing as, say, singing the Horst Wessel song, I do think there was an unwholesome sort of anger pervading the Republican convention that I do not think equates with sports fans cheering for a hero.

Your right to do so, however. We all free associate in out own ways, I suppose.

user-pic

anna am

wow, Horst Wessel, old one.

When our outfit left Normandy we boarded an LST going back to England. It was loaded with German POWs. Not long after we sailed the Germans started singing that song and it was so catchy many of us used to whistle it now and then for the rest of the war. I'm whistling it now. :-)

user-pic

Whistle whatever suits your fancy John. You've earned it my friend.
Bruce

He never saw combat in WWI.

user-pic

By the way, on Ike, wasn't he on the field of battle during the First World War?

No, he was stationed stateside, training tank crews.

I don't think all heroism occurs on the front lines, though. He bore the ultimate responsibility for the planning and execution of the D-Day invasion of Normandy, an undertaking more massive than any invasion in history. That is a crushing responsibility, knowing that you will be sending thousands of young men to their deaths, knowing that the fate of the war may well depend on getting that one action right. Sure, he's not the one actually facing the bullets, but had the operation failed, I think he might have felt it would have been better to have been one of the guys who fell on the beaches.

I totally agree with this point. I remember listening to the inspiring story of the young Navy Seal who sacrificed his own life in order to save his fellow seals.

I was moved and at the same time could not help but wonder how many of the chicken hawks and trust fund kids in the arena honestly think of themselves that way.

They would never join the service or the police force, but they sit around watching 24 and the History Channel and consider themselves tough guys because they support tough-talking (if ineffective) politicians.

It is truly pathetic, these people's delusional thinking.

There are real heroes out there, but whereas we Liberals feel they should only to be called on when absolutely necessary and when it will benefit the country, the Reps gleefully take advantage of their willingness to serve others first and ask questions later.

I totally agree with this point. I remember listening to the inspiring story of the young Navy Seal who sacrificed his own life in order to save his fellow seals.

I was moved and at the same time could not help but wonder how many of the chicken hawks and trust fund kids in the arena honestly think of themselves that way.

They would never join the service or the police force, but they sit around watching 24 and the History Channel and consider themselves tough guys because they support tough-talking (if ineffective) politicians.

It is truly pathetic, these people's delusional thinking.

There are real heroes out there, but whereas we Liberals feel they should only to be called on when absolutely necessary and when it will benefit the country, the Reps gleefully take advantage of their willingness to serve others first and ask questions later.

I wonder if the people chanting USA are roused by McCain's wounded Vietnam pride because they were Bush's political footsoldiers and they were wounded by GWB's failures and are now looking for redeption. To me that would explain both the passion and the disconnect.

~looking for redemption~

user-pic

Jim Sleeper,

if, by chance, your dad is still alive, give him my regards, it was probably the engineers who most stopped the German advance in the Bulge.

user-pic

Michael Murry's service may or may not equip him to look into John McCain's soul, but I think that we need to focus on the fact that the Republican Party risks becoming something even worse than John McCain. My closing anecdote emphasizes that he reaped what he sowed, so it's not as if I'm crediting him with anything like good leadership; I just think that the real problem here is the party, not the man.

user-pic

Jim Sleeper doing his Rob Pilatus impersonation.

I might be incorrect but at least from the coverage that I watched on MSNBC, much of the "USA!" dipshit chanting by the republicans occurred when McCain was interrupted (rightly so!) by protesters - one being an Iraq war vet holding a sign and then two or three other occasions from the wonderful ladies at code pink. But i'm finding the lack of coverage of these substantial protests quite curious. They appeared, at least to me, to really throw McCrankypants off of his game.

user-pic

"McCrankypants" hahahahahahahaha

What does McCain mean when he says "They broke me"? I submit the following excerpt from an email sent to me this past spring by a friend connected with US forces overseas, someone who personally knows a few of those generals you saw on TV during the first Gulf War (and during the current war before the mission was "accomplished"), reporting on the progress of US airstrikes in Iraq, and who for obvious reasons must remain anonymous:

Article V

"When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number, and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause."

McCain gave the enemy the name of his unit, how many planes they flew and where they had attacked. In addition to that he made a videotape for them stating he had bombed innocent civilians. That was a long way from the "Name, rank and serial number". Reportedly he said he did that because he thought he was going to die. Well, so did all of the other POWs. This is not to excoriate McCain for this behavior, which was perfectly understandable under the conditions and many if not most of us would have done the same. The behavior is hardly heroic, however. McCain gets a pass on this because ironically of the Swift Boating of John Kerry who earned his medals in battle and because no one else running has served at all. Other medal winners like John Kerry, Bob Kerrey, Bob Dole and Max Cleland earned their medals in battle.

McCain says he violated the Code of Conduct only when the North Vietnamese brutally tortured him. He further claims that he was so distraught afterwards that he tried to commit suicide. He has never explained why his "aid to the enemy" continued for more than three years. A number of other POWs cane forth to say that he was never tortured and that he made as many as 32 videotapes for the North Vietnamese to use as propaganda. They are apparently sealed under the national security blanket.

Of course the Dems cannot or should not say any of this stuff in public. What it appears to be is evidence that John McCain was a very ordinary guy in the 60s (who finished near dead last in his class at he Naval Academy) and who caved under the threat of torture. That was a human thing to do. Understandable and worthy of sympathy, but hardly heroic.

Still that is the press narrative about McCain and you cannot get thee press off message.>

Leave a comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

The Coffee House
TPMCafe's regulars

House Brew
From Your Cafe Editor

Special Guests
Big names and big brains

Special Features
Pressing topics and trends

Table for One
An expert's week-long talk.

All Reader Posts
TPM readers discuss.

Book Club Calendar

Coming Soon



Nov. 30-Dec. 4



January 12-16



« Book Club ArchiveFull calendar »

Recent Reader Posts

All Reader Posts »





Masthead

Editor-in-Chief
Josh Marshall



Subscribe to TPMCafe's feed.
Subscribe to TPMCafe's reader blog feed.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address