[goMac]

http://www.seeingtheforest.com/archi..._cross_i_1.htm

The link contains various evidence that the cross in the dirt story was plagiarized, including looking for the first mention of it by McCain, the original story by the original author, and McCain's past iterations of the story.

If this is true, it could be pretty damning for the McCain camp.

[vmarks]

There's nothing in your link that substantiates any plagiarism.

There are a few accounts of the retelling of the story, there's a mention that is unsourced or substantiated suggesting a different telling in 2000, and that's about it.

Suggestion Solzhenitsyn originated it, and no one could ever have had a similar experience, is again speculation.

I think what was really damning from that evening was Mr. Obama's "above my pay grade to answer" remark.

[besson3c]

Why, because you expect a politician to be able to tell us when life begins? Are honest answers damning?

[spacefreak]

Yet another dismal performance by Obama, complete with "uh... uh" between every phrase. So now we hear the whining from the left about McCain somehow cheating, stealing stories, and the usual (day after) "What Obama really meant to say was...".

[besson3c]

Just what is the criteria for who "wins" these silly things? If Obama or McCain said everything with amazing eloquence and confidence and you disagreed with what they were saying, would they still "win"? If somebody stammers, does that really take away from the point they are making if you agree with what they are saying?

It is beyond me why people insist on assigning winner and loser labels to these sorts of discussions. They aren't even head-on debates, but just open discussions... One would think that the format itself would sort of negate worrying about a victor.

I wish the election were over, whatever the results are, I'm already really tired of this stupid partisan football crap. Politics are so messed up in this country...

[vmarks]

I expect Mr. Obama to be able to answer any question that is framed "legally, in your opinion" - and he failed. Note that I never said either 'won' or 'lost' the debate. I said that Mr. Obama failed to answer the question in a way that reflected well on him. He failed himself, and he failed his supporters with that answer. His failure is separate from any of Mr.McCain's failures, especially in the setting from the other evening, which was not conducted like other debates have been.

Meanwhile, ON TOPIC, Mr. McCain's website has a response to the nonsense in the link goMac posted.

http://www.johnmccain.com/mccainrepo...8-2f30ffc39459

In the least credible and most vicious corner of the internet, liberal bloggers at the Daily Kos are accusing John McCain of plagiarizing from Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. The story Solzhenitsyn told was of a prisoner who drew a cross in the dirt in a Soviet Gulag. McCain's story is of a guard who drew a cross in the dirt in a Vietnamese prisoner of war camp.

The only similarity between the two stories is a cross in the dirt, but it is hardly an unlikely coincidence that there were practicing Christians in both Russia and Vietnam, or that in the prisons of those two Communist countries the only crosses to be found were etched in the dirt, as easily disappeared as the Christians who drew them.

But those desperate to discredit Senator McCain's record will have to impugn his fellow prisoners as well. Orson Swindle, who was held as a prisoner of war along with McCain, tells the McCain Report that he heard this particular story from McCain "when we first moved in together." That was in the summer of 1971, Swindle said, though "time blurred" and he couldn't be sure. He said it was some time around then that the Vietnamese moved all "36 troublemakers" into the same quarters, where they "talked about everything under the sun."

It may be typical of the pro-Obama Dungeons & Dragons crowd to disparage a fellow countryman's memory of war from the comfort of mom's basement, but most Americans have the humility and gratitude to respect and learn from the memories of men who suffered on behalf of others. John McCain has often said he witnessed a thousand acts of bravery while he was imprisoned, and though not every one has been submitted into the public record, they are remembered by the men who were there (one such only recently reported by Karl Rove though it escaped mention in any of Senator McCain's books). But as Swindle said, this is a "desperate group of people trying to make something out of nothing."

I think the D&D smear was a little dumb, but the rest is not all bad.

[BRussell]

It's probably not a true story, but so what. People's memories aren't perfect, and *gasp* people sometimes embellish the truth. How about the war and the deficit?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by vmarks 

I expect Mr. Obama to be able to answer any question that is framed "legally, in your opinion" - and he failed. Note that I never said either 'won' or 'lost' the debate. I said that Mr. Obama failed to answer the question in a way that reflected well on him. He failed himself, and he failed his supporters with that answer. His failure is separate from any of Mr.McCain's failures, especially in the setting from the other evening, which was not conducted like other debates have been.

Saying that you aren't certain of something that nobody should expect a politician to be an expert on is a failure? Comon vmarks, you usually aren't this partisan about this stuff. Obama is a politician, not a scientist. There is no way he would know when life begins, so what good is sharing a worthless gut feeling? We have enough of that already...

[vmarks]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Saying that you aren't certain of something that nobody should expect a politician to be an expert on is a failure? Comon vmarks, you usually aren't this partisan about this stuff. Obama is a politician, not a scientist. There is no way he would know when life begins, so what good is sharing a worthless gut feeling? We have enough of that already...

No, but he is a lawyer. The question was clearly framed to ask for his legal opinion. Is he unable to give it?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by vmarks 

No, but he is a lawyer. The question was clearly framed to ask for his legal opinion. Is he unable to give it?

What? His interpretation of Roe vs. Wade? Is this unclear to anybody? I'd have to go back and listen to the thing again (which I don't intend to, it was pretty dumb), but I think what the moderator was addressing was his judgment behind the law and the issue itself, which you can't really address without addressing the moral underpinnings of abortion.

If the moderator truly was asking for Obama's legal interpretation of current abortion law, maybe this could be characterized as a misunderstanding rather than a failure? The moderator could have interrupted and got Obama to address the legal interpretation of the law if that was really what he was wanting... It's not as if people are unused to politicians not answering direct questions, even if Obama was knowingly bypassing the question. If he was, it would be more accurate to characterize his dodge of the question accordingly, but I don't think that most people with opinions on the issue of abortion are unclear as to what current abortion law is.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

What? His interpretation of Roe vs. Wade? Is this unclear to anybody? I'd have to go back and listen to the thing again (which I don't intend to, it was pretty dumb), but I think what the moderator was addressing was his judgment behind the law and the issue itself, which you can't really address without addressing the moral underpinnings of abortion.

If the moderator truly was asking for Obama's legal interpretation of current abortion law, maybe this could be characterized as a misunderstanding rather than a failure? The moderator could have interrupted and got Obama to address the legal interpretation of the law if that was really what he was wanting... It's not as if people are unused to politicians not answering direct questions, even if Obama was knowingly bypassing the question. If he was, it would be more accurate to characterize his dodge of the question accordingly, but I don't think that most people with opinions on the issue of abortion are unclear as to what current abortion law is.

Actually he answered it very directly and at length. I don't see how anyone could have any problem with him answering the question the way he did. :shrugs:

[edit] And how is this about the cross in the dirt story?

[vmarks]

He spoke at length, but he gave an answer which has served him badly.

Good question as to how this related to the Christmas account McCain gave, other than McCain's account served him well, on an entirely different question.

McCain's Christmas recollection is way better than John Kerry's Christmas in Cambodia memory.

[placebo1969]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Why, because you expect a politician to be able to tell us when life begins? Are honest answers damning?

That was not the question. The question was:

The Rev. Rick Warren: “At what point does a baby get human rights?”

Back on topic, I vmarks already posted a link from someone who was there in Vietnam with Sen. McCain which should end this rather pathetic attempt at smearing the man.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by placebo1969 

That was not the question. The question was:

Isn't that just a variation of the same basic question - when a life is considered human, when it starts, etc.?

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by placebo1969 

Back on topic, I vmarks already posted a link from someone who was there in Vietnam with Sen. McCain which should end this rather pathetic attempt at smearing the man.

Nah, the link didn't end anything. The history of the story is pretty interesting - Solzhenitsyn didn't write it, but evangelicals have been telling the story since long before McCain told it, McCain didn't originally tell it, and McCain himself even told the story as if it was someone else before he started telling it as happening to him.

It's pretty clear that McCain is either misremembering it or embellishing it. Again - so what? It's as relevant to his presidency as whether or exactly when Kerry crossed the border into Cambodia was as relevant then.

[goMac]

More doubts in the story...

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.co...rt-in-the.html

McCain's various stories only talk of one guard - "the only real human being that I ever met over there". And yet the guard who loosened his ropes in May 1969 could not have been present the following Christmas, as McCain had been transferred to another location (unless the transfer occurred between Christmas and New Year of 1969 and unless the guard was transferred to exactly the same camp at the same time).

[chris v]

I believe the odds of McCain being able to read & comprehend Solzhenitsyn to be somewhat thin, so if it was plagiarized, it was handed to him by a staffer, & he probably didn't know where it came from.

[chris v]

It may be typical of the pro-Obama Dungeons & Dragons crowd to disparage a fellow countryman's memory of war from the comfort of mom's basement...

I .... WHAT?? What did they just call me? Obama could eat a baby on TV tomorrow, and that A-hole still wouldn't get my vote, now.

[vmarks]

I do think the D&D remark was bad form. After all, Republican voters play, too.

A grue is running for office. Roll d20 and d12 to see which lever you pull in the voting booth.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

I don't really get where they were trying to go with the Dungeons & Dragons remark.

Now, the "from the comfort of mom's basement..." crack, granted.

[besson3c]

My sources say that McCain defecated on that cross in the dirt.

Story at 11.

[chris v]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

I don't really get where they were trying to go with the Dungeons & Dragons remark.

Now, the "from the comfort of mom's basement..." crack, granted.

You'll probably say whassamatta, can't take a joke? Things are often funnier to those who aren't the butt of the joke. "Look at that cripple! Haha! Wah, cripple-dude, whatsamatta -- can't take a joke?"

To say that anyone who vocally supports the opposition candidate online does so "from their mom's basement" is as crassly insulting as Hillarys "Hard-working, white voters" drivel. I'm a member of Daily KOS (though I've never posted a diary -- just a few comments) and I've been working my ass off 40+ hours a week (mostly 60+) since I was a Jr. in high school, often at two jobs, while sidelining other stuff (music, computer repair, what have you) nights & weekends, and moved out of my parent's house when I was 17. That one really was personally insulting, and below-the-belt. And I've never played D&D in my life. Crass, base, pandering. Period. Unbecoming.

[vmarks]

Originally Posted by chris v 

You'll probably say whassamatta, can't take a joke? Things are often funnier to those who aren't the butt of the joke. "Look at that cripple! Haha! Wah, cripple-dude, whatsamatta -- can't take a joke?"

To say that anyone who vocally supports the opposition candidate online does so "from their mom's basement" is as crassly insulting as Hillarys "Hard-working, white voters" drivel. I'm a member of Daily KOS (though I've never posted a diary -- just a few comments) and I've been working my ass off 40+ hours a week (mostly 60+) since I was a Jr. in high school, often at two jobs, while sidelining other stuff (music, computer repair, what have you) nights & weekends, and moved out of my parent's house when I was 17. That one really was personally insulting, and below-the-belt. And I've never played D&D in my life. Crass, base, pandering. Period. Unbecoming.

You will of course remember Dan Rather and Mary Mapes' denigration of bloggers as hacks sitting around in their pajamas.

Charles Johnson who exposed the falsehood of Rather's story turned around, banded together with other bloggers and founded Pajamas Media.

See, you can take an insult and turn it into something positive.

[chris v]

Originally Posted by vmarks 

You will of course remember Dan Rather and Mary Mapes' denigration of bloggers as hacks sitting around in their pajamas.

Charles Johnson who exposed the falsehood of Rather's story turned around, banded together with other bloggers and founded Pajamas Media.

See, you can take an insult and turn it into something positive.

True, that.

Live! From Mom's Basement Media! Breaking the news as it's fixed!

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by chris v 

That one really was personally insulting, and below-the-belt. And I've never played D&D in my life. Crass, base, pandering. Period. Unbecoming.

I was actually being factious about the "parent's basement" comment. I agree with you, it was pretty crass.

However, identifying the Daily Kos as "the least credible and most vicious corner of the internet" I think was spot on. It's hard for me to believe anyone who reads that mess really gets all that upset over crass, base, pandering comments- though granted, they aren't running for president.

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by goMac 

http://www.seeingtheforest.com/archi..._cross_i_1.htm

The link contains various evidence that the cross in the dirt story was plagiarized, including looking for the first mention of it by McCain, the original story by the original author, and McCain's past iterations of the story.

If this is true, it could be pretty damning for the McCain camp.

They sound like different stories to me. I really doubt McCain was making this up. I'm even more skeptical that he reads Solzhenitsyn.

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Saying that you aren't certain of something that nobody should expect a politician to be an expert on is a failure? Comon vmarks, you usually aren't this partisan about this stuff. Obama is a politician, not a scientist. There is no way he would know when life begins, so what good is sharing a worthless gut feeling? We have enough of that already...

First of all, yes vmarks is usually this partisan.

Secondly, he's right to point out that this was obviously a dodge. One doesn't need to be a scientist to answer when life begins. A scientist will tell you: never. It's all life. And he was asked "legally" and Obama is a lawyer.

Obama, though, clearly didn't want to go off on a nuanced legal explanation as a complete tangent to a discussion on faith. Clearly what he was saying was that the question is too large for any one politician to answer, and I, for one, agree with the dodge. There is nothing left to do for our society but dodge this issue, but defer it to a higher authority that probably doesn't exist anyway. The issue is too decisive and too insoluble for anything else.

vmarks is right that it was a dodge, but wrong that it was a disservice to anyone. Leaving the contentious issue of abortion alone as much as possible is the only thing we can do as a people. We should live with our individual choices on the issue and let others do as they feel is right. I think Jesus spoke to this once...something about stones and judgment?

[chris v]

drat: Your Mom's Basement is already taken.

[vmarks]

Originally Posted by Helmling 

First of all, yes vmarks is usually this partisan.

Secondly, he's right to point out that this was obviously a dodge. One doesn't need to be a scientist to answer when life begins. A scientist will tell you: never. It's all life. And he was asked "legally" and Obama is a lawyer.

Obama, though, clearly didn't want to go off on a nuanced legal explanation as a complete tangent to a discussion on faith. Clearly what he was saying was that the question is too large for any one politician to answer, and I, for one, agree with the dodge. There is nothing left to do for our society but dodge this issue, but defer it to a higher authority that probably doesn't exist anyway. The issue is too decisive and too insoluble for anything else.

vmarks is right that it was a dodge, but wrong that it was a disservice to anyone. Leaving the contentious issue of abortion alone as much as possible is the only thing we can do as a people. We should live with our individual choices on the issue and let others do as they feel is right. I think Jesus spoke to this once...something about stones and judgment?

Had Mr. Obama deffered to G-d, or Jesus, or a higher power, that would be one thing. Instead, he said "it's above my pay grade" when the Presidency is the highest office in the land. There is no higher pay grade in American government.

Strangely, Mr. Obama must have been demoted at some point, because he was of sufficient pay grade to answer this very question in 2001. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24354

"On the Illinois Senate floor, Obama was the only senator to speak against the baby-protecting bills. He voted "present" on each, effectively the same as a "no."

"Number one," said Obama, explaining his reluctance to protect born infants, "whenever we define a pre-viable fetus as a person that is protected by the Equal Protection Clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we're really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a -- a child, a 9-month old -- child that was delivered to term. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place. I mean, it -- it would essentially bar abortions, because the Equal Protection Clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an anti-abortion statute.""

Partisan would mean I had some allegiance to party politics. I've put my allegiances to principles, not parties.

[besson3c]

vmarks: I think the problem with people perceiving you as being partisan is what you choose to nit pick over. For example, literally picking apart the pay grade comment just honestly seems like you are going for partisan political points. You do realize that we could pick apart the literal definitions of things McCain and Bush say, right? What good does this accomplish? Unless you can repudiate the idea that the pay grade comment was just an expression not to be taken literally - a figure of speech, there is really no point in calling him on how much money he'd be making as president.

There may be a double standard here, but really, to me this kind of thing is just adding to the noise. Your posts are usually very well conceived and logical, but I find these sorts of emotional additions very distracting at times. There is enough political football in this lounge already, occurring on both sides of the spectrum.

[SpaceMonkey]

The president's job is not to decide when life begins. His job is to enforce existing law, so in that sense he was right to dodge the question. I don't see anything in the material on the 2001 vote that you quoted that makes me think he was answering the question of when life begins. He was pointing out that the bills contradicted legal protections for abortions. Sure, lurking behind the scenes as the crux of the entire abortion/anti-abortion argument is the issue of when life begins, but it's not something he specifically tackled then or now. The issue isn't whether or not a fetus is "alive," it's whether or not it is a legally-protected individual.

[vmarks]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

vmarks: I think the problem with people perceiving you as being partisan is what you choose to nit pick over. For example, literally picking apart the pay grade comment just honestly seems like you are going for partisan political points. You do realize that we could pick apart the literal definitions of things McCain and Bush say, right? What good does this accomplish? Unless you can repudiate the idea that the pay grade comment was just an expression not to be taken literally - a figure of speech, there is really no point in calling him on how much money he'd be making as president.

There may be a double standard here, but really, to me this kind of thing is just adding to the noise. Your posts are usually very well conceived and logical, but I find these sorts of emotional additions very distracting at times. There is enough political football in this lounge already, occurring on both sides of the spectrum.

I don't mind at all that 'above my pay grade' is an expression. Sometimes, it's even a very useful expression.

Here, it was used badly and fell flat, by someone I'm told is supposed to be an eloquent speaker.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by vmarks 

I don't mind at all that 'above my pay grade' is an expression. Sometimes, it's even a very useful expression.

Here, it was used badly and fell flat, by someone I'm told is supposed to be an eloquent speaker.

So what is your point? That because Obama is a good speaker that he should have used a different expression? How many yards does this point get you, and how close are you to the end zone now?

[wallinbl]

Originally Posted by vmarks 

Had Mr. Obama deffered to G-d, or Jesus, or a higher power, that would be one thing. Instead, he said "it's above my pay grade" when the Presidency is the highest office in the land. There is no higher pay grade in American government.

What the hell do you think he meant? In a discussion largely about faith and with a Christian pastor, he was clearly deferring to the Christian God.

Your other point about his historical statements have merit, but the one I just quoted is pretty ridiculous. Everyone knew what he meant. Including you.

[chris v]

Originally Posted by vmarks 

See, you can take an insult and turn it into something positive.

Thanks for the inspiration!

http://momsbasementmedia.org/

Now, to see if I do anything with it... *researches blogging software*

Mom's Basement Media will be the next evil conglomerate, roving the landscape, swallowing all independent media in its path! Either that, or it'll be an obscure blog no one reads, or it'll be under construction for a year. One of the three.

[vmarks]

Originally Posted by chris v 

Thanks for the inspiration!

http://momsbasementmedia.org/

Now, to see if I do anything with it... *researches blogging software*

Mom's Basement Media will be the next evil conglomerate, roving the landscape, swallowing all independent media in its path! Either that, or it'll be an obscure blog no one reads, or it'll be under construction for a year. One of the three.

Congratulations on your forthcoming success/obscurity/lack of motivation!

I support you fully/half-heartedly/apathetically, in that order!

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by vmarks 

Had Mr. Obama deffered to G-d, or Jesus, or a higher power, that would be one thing. Instead, he said "it's above my pay grade" when the Presidency is the highest office in the land. There is no higher pay grade in American government.

Strangely, Mr. Obama must have been demoted at some point, because he was of sufficient pay grade to answer this very question in 2001. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24354

"On the Illinois Senate floor, Obama was the only senator to speak against the baby-protecting bills. He voted "present" on each, effectively the same as a "no."

And, honestly, "baby protecting?" Isn't that going a bit far?
"Number one," said Obama, explaining his reluctance to protect born infants, "whenever we define a pre-viable fetus as a person that is protected by the Equal Protection Clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we're really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a -- a child, a 9-month old -- child that was delivered to term. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place. I mean, it -- it would essentially bar abortions, because the Equal Protection Clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an anti-abortion statute.""

Partisan would mean I had some allegiance to party politics. I've put my allegiances to principles, not parties.

I was teasing about the partisan thing. I didn't see the comment in context, but from reading your post I assumed he was joking and that "above my pay grade" meant God.

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by vmarks 

Had Mr. Obama deffered to G-d, or Jesus, or a higher power, that would be one thing. Instead, he said "it's above my pay grade" when the Presidency is the highest office in the land. There is no higher pay grade in American government.

Strangely, Mr. Obama must have been demoted at some point, because he was of sufficient pay grade to answer this very question in 2001. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24354

"On the Illinois Senate floor, Obama was the only senator to speak against the baby-protecting bills. He voted "present" on each, effectively the same as a "no."

"Number one," said Obama, explaining his reluctance to protect born infants, "whenever we define a pre-viable fetus as a person that is protected by the Equal Protection Clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we're really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a -- a child, a 9-month old -- child that was delivered to term. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place. I mean, it -- it would essentially bar abortions, because the Equal Protection Clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an anti-abortion statute.""

Partisan would mean I had some allegiance to party politics. I've put my allegiances to principles, not parties.

Ok, now, after following the link, I see what you're after, and really, isn't this all transparent enough that it's not even worth our time? This bill in question was obviously an attempt to start Illinois down a "slippery slope" toward banning abortion. Obama saw this clearly and opposed it for this reason, not because he had no interest in saving babies. I mean, what exactly was the point of the bill? To protect babies out of the womb? What danger did they face exactly? Late term abortions are already only practiced in extreme cases and if the offspring are viable, then they're already going to receive care. So, like I said, this is pretty transparent and we shouldn't go pretending it's anything that it's not. It's purely partisan, and the "party" in question is the Pro-Life party which has grown into a force with its own political machine and its own other-worldly logic.

[vmarks]

"above my pay grade" is not a clear reference to G-d. Not in that audience, and not how the expression is commonly used. It didn't seem like a joke, and it fell flat. It sounded odd and unfortunate to my ear when I heard him say it. The man spoke poorly.

Onto the issue you raised in your post:

Illinois was not ever on its way to banning abortion, and that was not the intention of anyone pushing that bill. In fact, Obama's campaign has pretty much admitted that Obama has lied about that bill and his position on it.

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/08/1...fanticide-lie/

Also worth a read, since I do want to be on-topic in this thread:

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/08/1...y-plagiarized/

I imagine that you won't like those links simply for their readership. That's ok by me. I think that they're interesting for what they show. Unfortunately, they won't alter much:

Studies show that people remember the first information presented to them, regardless of corrections received later - the corrections do not persist, the first incorrect information does. So, people that have heard your "Obama was fighting to protect abortion rights" and goMac's "McCain plagiarized Solzhenitzen" will remember them for a long time, regardless of the truth of the matter.

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by vmarks 

"above my pay grade" is not a clear reference to G-d. Not in that audience, and not how the expression is commonly used. It didn't seem like a joke, and it fell flat. It sounded odd and unfortunate to my ear when I heard him say it. The man spoke poorly.

Onto the issue you raised in your post:

Illinois was not ever on its way to banning abortion, and that was not the intention of anyone pushing that bill. In fact, Obama's campaign has pretty much admitted that Obama has lied about that bill and his position on it.

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/08/1...fanticide-lie/

Also worth a read, since I do want to be on-topic in this thread:

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/08/1...y-plagiarized/

I imagine that you won't like those links simply for their readership. That's ok by me. I think that they're interesting for what they show. Unfortunately, they won't alter much:

Studies show that people remember the first information presented to them, regardless of corrections received later - the corrections do not persist, the first incorrect information does. So, people that have heard your "Obama was fighting to protect abortion rights" and goMac's "McCain plagiarized Solzhenitzen" will remember them for a long time, regardless of the truth of the matter.

Well, I never disagreed with you one the Solzhenitzen thing. That was silly.

But I still think that you--and the obviously partisan sources you're linking to--are trying hard to cast this thing as being about infanticide for the same reason the bill was pushed in the first place. Whatever other asides you put on it, who was championing this bill? Was this bill motivated by an upswell of public concern over babies being born under these conditions? (I'd wager that there are fewer than ten such aberrations on record.) Or was it being pushed by life-long champions of the pro-life movement?

We both know what's going on here--why are we pretending that Obama wants to kill babies?

[vmarks]

Why does the candidate's campaign have to admit that the candidate lied, when the day prior the candidate was accusing everyone around him of lying?

[D. S. Troyer]

Originally Posted by vmarks 

"above my pay grade" is not a clear reference to God.

Yes it was. That's the way I understood it, that he cannot know what god thinks.
I'm assuming you meant god.

[Snow-i]

i didn't know god got paid...

[finboy]

Originally Posted by vmarks 

I think the D&D smear was a little dumb, but the rest is not all bad.

Oh come on, this is pure genius:

It may be typical of the pro-Obama Dungeons & Dragons crowd to disparage a fellow countryman's memory of war from the comfort of mom's basement

[D. S. Troyer]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

i didn't know god got paid...

He rakes in billions a year and pays no taxes. But he always needs more.

[Snow-i]

sounds more like the government to me. same one that gets to paid to decide things like these?

[stupendousman]

I don't think that McCain has to worry much about accusations of plagiarism being any kind of central point of debate against him now that Biden has been named VP candidate. Joe's past problems with stealing speeches makes any mention of this cross thing look silly.

[subego]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

You do realize that we could pick apart the literal definitions of things McCain and Bush say, right?

I've totally seen vmarks do this.

Just sayin'.

[vmarks]

Words have meanings. Heaven forbid that we should take people at their word when they speak sincerely!

I don't have a problem dissecting the speech of anyone who wishes to represent me in any capacity. I don't expect anyone else should, either.

[goMac]

And apparently McCain's story about his wife meeting Mother Theresa is also false.

http://www.politicalbase.com/profile...g/&blogId=3191

Damn those people in their mother's basements. How is McCain supposed to keep lying when they keep double checking the facts using the internets?