McCain uses POW ordeal to fight housing gaffe

[Bonestorm]

No, that he uses it to answer charges of elitism in the "You have many houses" angle is a pretty trivial complaint. This is, in fact, quite likely one of the few places it fits.

I don't get it. How is the fact that he doesn't know how many houses he owns justified by the fact that he was POW? It just doesn't follow. At all.

 

[Damocles]

I don't get it. How is the fact that he doesn't know how many houses he owns justified by the fact that he was POW? It just doesn't follow. At all.

How he acted in that situation, again, will likely resonate as not "elitism" to the intended audience.

Others failed to do their "duty", as Socrtease described it, in order to get out of the prisons earlier (who could blame them?) while he showed a decided sense of duty and what amounts to direct evidence that he was not thinking of how elite he was to the others.

At least that is how I believe this particular issue will be seen by that intended audience of middle-America.

Your complaints about it become trivial when the manner in which he uses it is salient and demonstrative against the negative attack being made.

In other words it will work against you to complain every time he uses it, rather than only when he trivializes it to answer why he wears green polyester.

 

[Socrtease]

How he acted in that situation, again, will likely resonate as not "elitism" to the intended audience (Read Simpletons).

Others failed to do their "duty", as Socrtease described it, in order to get out of the prisons earlier (who could blame them?) while he showed a decided sense of duty and what amounts to direct evidence that he was not thinking of how elite he was to the others.

At least that is how I believe this particular issue will be seen by that intended audience of middle-America.(See Above)

Your complaints about it become trivial when the manner in which he uses it is salient and demonstrative against the negative attack being made.(He uses it as his raison d'etre(don't use that phrase around the intended audience. It's French ya know.)

In other words it will work against you to complain every time he uses it, rather than only when he trivializes it to answer why he wears green polyester.

Unless he uses it as a response to someone saying he shirked his duty in Vietnam, he trivializes it. Unless you are the "intended audience" (See Above)

 

[Bonestorm]

How he acted in that situation, again, will likely resonate as not "elitism" to the intended audience.

Others failed to do their "duty", as Socrtease described it, in order to get out of the prisons earlier (who could blame them?) while he showed a decided sense of duty and what amounts to direct evidence that he was not thinking of how elite he was to the others.

At least that is how I believe this particular issue will be seen by that intended audience of middle-America.

Your complaints about it become trivial when the manner in which he uses it is salient and demonstrative against the negative attack being made.

In other words it will work against you to complain every time he uses it, rather than only when he trivializes it to answer why he wears green polyester.

But he doesn't use it to answer charges of elitism. He uses to answer the question "why couldn't you remember how many homes you own?"

His response: I was a POW.

That's trivializing it. That was in the Katie Couric interview.

Then, on Leno, well . . . here's the transcript:

LENO: Welcome back, Sen. McCain, for one million dollars, how many houses do you have?

MCCAIN: You know, could I just mention to you, Jay, and a moment of seriousness. I spent five and a half years in a prison cell, without—I didn’t have a house, I didn’t have a kitchen table, I didn’t have a table, I didn’t have a chair. . .

Again, it's not answering charges of elitism, it's answering fairly simple questions, "Why couldn't you remember how many homes you own?" and "How many homes do you own?" and "Dancing Queen? Seriously?"

 

[Damocles]

I'm bored. The question is put forward to charge him with "elitism", it answers the question to the intended audience. Your aggrieved response is exaggerated in this instance and trivializes your complaint. It makes it appear as if any time it is mentioned it should be dismissed without regard to the salience of the point.

Using it to answer why his favorite song is by ABBA, trivializes the POW experience, using it to answer charges of "elitism" does not.

 

[Kamala Trump]

Yes. It does cheapen it. Additionally, it doesn't even successfully refute the implied charge because one can still be an elitist or elite despite past suffering.

 

[Kamala Trump]

This answer is ridiculous and retarded damo, and you know it. Why do you carry his foul neocon water?

 

[Damocles]

Yes. It does cheapen it. Additionally, it doesn't even successfully refute the implied charge because one can still be an elitist or elite despite past suffering.

It was the action of the person during it that tends to show that he was not assuming that he should receive special treatment. In reality others did take that path offered to McCain. Even some here stated that they would have. I believe that it is salient to the point, at least to the minds of the intended recipients.

Personally, as I have stated, I believe that there is a certain elitism in anybody who runs for President as they perceive that their presence can solve issues that no other could. I don't think that a charge of "elitism" is important at all. The issue itself is trivial. They are going to have great power, what are they going to do with it is important, not a perceived sense of importance.

 

[Bonestorm]

I'm bored. The question is put forward to charge him with "elitism", it answers the question to the intended audience. Your aggrieved response is exaggerated in this instance and trivializes your complaint. It makes it appear as if any time it is mentioned it should be dismissed without regard to the salience of the point.

Using it to answer why his favorite song is by ABBA, trivializes the POW experience, using it to answer charges of "elitism" does not.

Damo - If the question was "why do you own so many homes?" you'd have a point, but it wasn't, so you don't.

Even assuming your point that whether he was a POW relates in some way to charges of elitism, please explain how a POW cannot be an elitist thirty years later. It makes no sense.

 

[Damocles]

Damo - If the question was "why do you own so many homes?" you'd have a point, but it wasn't, so you don't.

Even assuming your point that whether he was a POW relates in some way to charges of elitism, please explain how a POW cannot be an elitist thirty years later. It makes no sense.

Again, it depends on the targeted audience. What you want is for everybody to dismiss this experience and his response to it in every circumstance. Pretending that the question wasn't asked to underline his "elitism" is sad pretense.

 

[Bonestorm]

Again, it depends on the targeted audience. What you want is for everybody to dismiss this experience and his response to it in every circumstance. Pretending that the question wasn't asked to underline his "elitism" is sad pretense.

OK, I've already agree to accept your assumption that the question was asked to undermine his elitism (as opposed to, say, given him the opportunity to reassure people that he isn't becoming forgetful in his old age).

What I am curious about is how the fact that he was a POW 30 years ago somehow precludes him from being an elitist today. It simply doesn't follow.

By the way, I'm not sure how a pretense can be "sad," but that may just be me being elitist.

 

[Kamala Trump]

It was the action of the person during it that tends to show that he was not assuming that he should receive special treatment.

This one isolated incident doesn't undo a lifetime firmly in the elite. and showing signs of elitism. Trying to ram through amnesty and insulting people who complained. Fuck him hard.

In reality others did take that path offered to McCain. Even some here stated that they would have. I believe that it is salient to the point, at least to the minds of the intended recipients.

I don't. I think he did it for the later glory he knew he could garner. He knew they wouldn't kill him, for the same reason he was offered the out.

Personally, as I have stated, I believe that there is a certain elitism in anybody who runs for President as they perceive that their presence can solve issues that no other could. I don't think that a charge of "elitism" is important at all. The issue itself is trivial. They are going to have great power, what are they going to do with it is important, not a perceived sense of importance.

It is important. Where you're bread is buttered firmly effects how you see things on a day to day basis. You merely wish it were trivial.

 

[Damocles]

OK, I've already agree to accept your assumption that the question was asked to undermine his elitism (as opposed to, say, given him the opportunity to reassure people that he isn't becoming forgetful in his old age).

What I am curious about is how the fact that he was a POW 30 years ago somehow precludes him from being an elitist today. It simply doesn't follow.

By the way, I'm not sure how a pretense can be "sad," but that may just be me being elitist.

It shows an example of how, while in the most difficult of circumstances, he abandoned his, IMO, elitism in action in the Academy and demonstrated an assumed equality that others showed as well. While it is one example, it is a glaring example and one that is difficult to refute without looking like a total partisan hack.

 

[Damocles]

This one isolated incident doesn't undo a lifetime firmly in the elite. and showing signs of elitism. Trying to ram through amnesty and insulting people who complained. Fuck him hard.

I don't. I think he did it for the later glory he knew he could garner. He knew they wouldn't kill him, for the same reason he was offered the out.



It is important. Where you're bread is buttered firmly effects how you see things on a day to day basis. You merely wish it were trivial.

It does however show a rather large example of the point he is driving towards. His policy on illegal immigration was something he and I disagreed with, but that doesn't make him "more elite" than any other who supported it.

You think he thought of how he was going to run for President while in the POW camp and how this would benefit him? I think you over-simplify the experience because you work to seek things you see as "bad" in a person you disagree with on "globalism".

 

[Kamala Trump]

It shows an example of how, while in the most difficult of circumstances, he abandoned his, IMO, elitism in action in the Academy and demonstrated an assumed equality that others showed as well. While it is one example, it is a glaring example and one that is difficult to refute without looking like a total partisan hack.

It's merely an isolated incident. Every OTHER incident in his life points to elitism, denying that is the real hackery.

 

[Kamala Trump]

Like not knowing how many houses you have.


Saying "that's common amongst elites" does not dispute the charge, it confirms it.

 

[Damocles]

It's merely an isolated incident. Every OTHER incident in his life points to elitism, denying that is the real hackery.

I haven't denied that. I have stated that the experience and his reaction to it will resonate with the targeted audience and say much of what I have stated to them.


It isn't like I'm defending the guy, I'm not voting for him, I've stated so and why I'm not myriad times on this site. I'm speaking to whether it will "work" for him. If it will reach the target and say what he wants it to say. I believe that in this instance it will because of what I have stated above.

 

[Kamala Trump]

I haven't denied that. I have stated that the experience and his reaction to it will resonate with the targeted audience and say much of what I have stated to them.

I don't agree. Most people will see it a dodge and deflection.

It isn't like I'm defending the guy, I'm not voting for him, I've stated so and why I'm not myriad times on this site.

I believe you are, but I have no faith in that belief. Im gonna pray on it spiritually, but not religiously.

 

[Damocles]

I don't agree. Most people will see it a dodge and deflection.



I believe you are, but I have no faith in that belief. Im gonna pray on it spiritually, but not religiously.

I don't think "most people" are the target of the statement. Most people know that politicians will say things like this and it is unlikely to hurt him among "most people". While the targeted audience will "hear" exactly what I have stated.

 

[Kamala Trump]

I don't think "most people" are the target of the statement. Most people know that politicians will say things like this and it is unlikely to hurt him among "most people".

I believe my notion on what most people will take away is more accurate than yours.