STFarmy

In the same vein as GJA's recent post with Factcheck's article about the Obama Birth Certificate (which I was also going to post), here's a recent article from them about the McCain Cross story. I don't imagine either link will help either candidate too much; partisanship tends to override logic. But in the interest of trying to clear up these stupid little unimportant things that detract from real debate about the issues, I will post it.

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactchec...dote_from.html

Short excerpt:
Q: Did McCain lift his cross-in-the-sand anecdote from Solzhenitsyn's "Gulag Archipelago"?

John McCain told a story about a Vietnamese guard who made a sign of the cross in the dirt while he was a POW.

The story is very similar to a story about Alexander Solzhenitsyn from his times in the Soviet Gulags.

Did John McCain steal this story?
A: There's no such story in "Archipelago." There is a somewhat similar story attributed to Solzhenitsyn, which we've traced back to Rev. Billy Graham by way of former Richard Nixon aide Charles Colson. But that's not proof that McCain's story isn't true.

The stories aren't exactly the same. In McCain's telling, a Vietnamese prison guard shows him kindness one night by secretly loosening his cruelly tight bonds, then draws a cross in the sand with his foot to indicate that he is a fellow Christian. In the various versions attributed to Solzhenitsyn, the cross is drawn by a fellow prisoner, not a guard, and with a stick, not his foot. The story certainly does not appear in the place that some of McCain's detractors are suggesting that he got it.

PatsFanInVa

I addressed this in an earlier thread about the Saddleback church thingie in general. Here is the information. Very interesting that the story attributed to Solzhenitsyn appears in Communion in 1997, and McCain first tells it publicly in 1999 (after 26 years); That McCain produced an ad with the cross being drawn with a stick, consistent with the Solzhenitsyn/Veronis version, in 2007; and that he told of his captivity to the tune of 12,000 words, in the first person, in 1973, and did not mention this story - despite the entire account being about captivity in Vietnam, and despite the fact that the account touched on faith several times, and on things that happened at Christmas in at least two separate places.

So a good friend from the time said he "vaguely remembers" McCain telling this story, "among others", after 37 years, and in the heat of a presidential campaign in which McCain is apparently caught red-handed appropriating someone else's experience?

I suppose it's possible. I'll be fairer to McCain than we would be to Obama or (God help us) Kerry. First let's look at the accounts themselves, McCain first:


Quote:
It was Christmas day, we were allowed to stand outside of our cell for a few minutes, and those days we were not allowed to see or communicate with each other although we certainly did. And I was stadning outside for my few minutes, outside my cell. He came walking up. He stood there for a minute and with his sandal on the dirt in the courtyard he drew a cross and he stood there and a minute later, he rubbed it out and walked away. For a minute there, there as just two Christians worshiping together. I'll never forget that moment to this very day

The Solzhenitsyn story is recounted in a 1997 story, "The Sign of the Cross", by one Luke Veronis:


Quote:
Leaving his shovel on the ground, he slowly walked to a crude bench and sat down. He knew that at any moment a guard would order him to stand up, and when he failed to respond, the guard would beat him to death, probably with his own shovel. He had seen it happen to other prisoners.

As he waited, head down, he felt a presence. Slowly he looked up and saw a skinny old prisoner squat down beside him. The man said nothing. Instead, he used a stick to trace in the dirt the sign of the Cross. The man then got back up and returned to his work.

As Solzhenitsyn stared at the Cross drawn in the dirt his entire perspective changed.

-- From Luke Veronis, "The Sign of the Cross"; Communion, issue 8, Pascha 1997.

(I do not know whether Gulag has this story or not; regardless, "Factcheck.org" seems sloppy enough that I'll wait to read through it myself before believing their conclusion. The fact is that the story appears in Veronis' account. McCain seemed not to have an account until two years later.)

McCain chose not to tell his cross story in this 12,000 word account in US News and World Report in 1973:
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/....html?PageNr=1

McCain tells a story on page 9 about a message he wanted to deliver on Christmas, and he has a story on page 13 about not being allowed to worship on Christmas, and then he has another story about confronting the Vietnamese about him and his men holding church services. He has many mentions of faith, in a first-person account of his treatment in Vietnam, and despite the fact that he'll "never forget the story," he did not think it needed to be mentioned in this exhaustive first account of his captivity. He neglected to tell or write this story, in fact, until his 1999 book, written for the 2000 Presidential Campaign.

In 1999, running for the presidency, I take it that McCain realized something very similar had happened to him, although he never wrote or spoke publicly about it until shortly after the 1997 Veronis account. I do not have Faith of My Fathers. I understand that McCain, in the 1999 account, was still telling the story in the third person, as he did on the campaign trail in Virginia in 2000, when he spoke of a "scared American POW," not "I".

By the time of this 2007 campaign commercial, he loses such modesty and tells the story in the first person. He evidently also considers it artistic license that the cross is depicted being drawn with a stick (consistent with the Solzhenitsyn story), not, as he claimed in the Saddleback version, a sandal:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WTu7...161/239/569299

But again, it is possible that these two events happened to these two men. It is possible that while Solzhenitsyn told his story in 1973, McCain chose to wait twenty-six years and to first tell his cross story in 1999, in the midst of a presidential campaign, just two years after Solzhenitsyn's story is recounted in Communion. There may simply be no reason for the 26-year lag between the occurence and the telling, although McCain tells 12,000 words in 1973 and a good many between that date and 1999, regarding his captivity at the hands of the Vietnamese. It's also possible that McCain, out of modesty followed by the brashness necessitated by our crass electroral process, drifted from third person to first person in telling the story. It's possible that McCain thought the 2007 ad was better visually with a stick -- whcih coincidentally is the instrument used in the Solzhenitsyn story.

God works in mysterious ways, after all.

However, in this particular case, the Almighty seems to have seen to it that McCain's story would appear the work of a plagiarist: something that could have happened to him, but in fact happened to somebody else entirely.

And that's a pity, since if all these coincidences did, in fact, occur - unlikely though that may be - the good Senator indeed lived a rich, rewarding moment of faith in those bleak days.

But the facts suggest that however many such touching moments he lived, none of them made as perfect a story as that singular moment lived by Solzhenitsyn.

But the whole forum was about faith, after all. If you have faith, you can believe him. It's not the literal truth of the story that really matters, right?

Wait, that's the bible. Never mind.

PFnV

PonyExpress

Bud Day, America's most decorated living veteran, and Orson Swindle- both POWs imprisoned with McCain- remember him telling the story in 1971.

McCain was accused of "plagiarism" despite the fact no written account of any cross incident appears in Solzehnitsyn's work.

I think Obama supporters were upset he didn't perform very well at the event and were trying to create static.

Obama is a candidate very vulnerable to innuendo because he has an unusual background for a presidential candidate. Obama supporters wanted to give McCain supporters a taste of their own medicine.
The end result of this will be a brutal campaign which is going to polarize the electorate, whoever wins or loses.

False innuendo is an effective but dishonest way to achieve polarization. It is a tactic used by political organizers on both left and right to energize constituents. The truth is irrelevant. Usually "3rd parties" are used to spread the word. Today those parties seem to be British newspapers; "grassroots" bloggers; and 527s.

The idea in this case is to spread rumors about McCain which will create conflicting ripples of information, cancelling out the rumors about Obama.

I don't think it will be effective, because Obama is much more of an unknown quantity.

Still, I believe Obama is odds on favorite to win, because his on camera persona is very likeable. He can dispel all his negative baggage with a single effective staged convention speech. A portion of the electorate puts alot of stock in "style". These are usually younger people who have not yet been burned by a used car salesman.

PatsFanInVa

Nah, Pony, what happened is this:

McCain very likely thought that he could get away with re-hashing this story in his 1999 book. Several sources say the story as it appeared in Communion Magazine is a sermon in printed form. It is possible he even saw the sermon from which the account was written, and was unaware of the written account.

The clincher is, his own campaign released an ad in 2007 in which McCain tells the story as voiceover, and a stick draws the cross in the dirt -- just like in the Solzhenitsyn story.

It's sort of a desperate reach to say,

Hey! A guy who was in Vietnam who we know is for hire in presidential campaigns says it's true!

What is Bud Day, some kind of superhuman Spirit of Nam for you guys?

By the way, yes, he is an official tool of the McCain campaign:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0..._n_110003.html

So much "Truth" to manufacture, so little time!


Here's what your other "source," Orson Swindle, says (from your earlier post):

It's been 35 years since McCain came out of Vietnam. He first (publicly) "realized" he'd had this experience in 1999, 2 years after somebody else describes the Solzhenitsyn version.

I'm just amazed the right-wing media gives him a free pass on this one, but it's not much more telling than the free pass he gets for cheating on the "sound proof booth" theory at the church function.

He's the white knight, sweetness and light, and has never lied or been angry with anybody. He's "The One," right? Oh and poor, poor Cindy! What's an heiress to do! LOL... you guys are a self-parody.

The McCain excuse machine is in high gear I see... the thing is, McCain has so much more that needs excusing.

PFnV

patsfan13

Read about Bud Day, he has far more credibility than you or any left wing hack. Leave it to a lefty to attack the character and credibility of one of the bravest men to ever wear the uniform of a US Military man.

Yeah he ia a superman..

__________________
"Some guys play in all-star games, some guys don't. I don't know who picks all those all-star teams. In all honesty, I don't know who picks the combine, for that matter," Belichick said. "How does (Miami-Ohio offensive lineman Brandon) Brooks not get invited to the combine? How did Vollmer not get invited to the combine? I don't know. We can't really worry about that. We just have to try to evaluate them the best we can."

PatsFanInVa

First of all, my friend, I am what I am, not a "hack" or any other such personal insult. I'm a guy who disagrees with you on a message board.

Secondly, I have absolutely no doubt that Bud Day, John Kerry, John McCain, and hundreds of thousands of others involved in the Vietnam war had a tremendous amount of courage.

I have no problem saying any personal bravery I've every exhibited pales in comparison to that of Bud Day, because I have never been in combat. I've intervened in a violent crime, but that did not feel courageous to me, and I don't like the idea I'll have to do so again. I don't look for such situations and they scare the hell out of me.

However, physical courage does not cause a halo to surround a figure in my estimation. I am aware that some men can risk their own personal death, and yet not be any more honest because of it, nor indeed display any other particular virtue.

There is no reason to believe that Bud Day is a beacon of integrity, particularly in the field of politics. Day was instrumental in the "swift boat" attack ads, which largely gathered up right wing partisans who happened to serve in the same unit as Kerry, with anything negative to say about Kerry. Bud Day was also enlisted by the McCain campaign in June 2008 for the specific purpose of fending off bad news about McCain's own military service.

Bud Day may be brave, but he may also be a liar. The facts in this case suggest that to be the case.

Or haven't you ever heard of a "bold faced lie"?

Now, I am glad that the right wingers here are stuck on Bud Day as their personal Messiah or Bud the Baptist or whatever he is. It got me to looking around the internets a little.

Turns out Bud got retained in June of 08 to be in a McCain "Truth Squad" to protect him from the kind of Swift-boating Day practiced on fellow veteran John McCain.

It struck me as odd that McCain would want a "truth squad" to protect him from charges stemming from his military service. I also had no idea how many propaganda films he actually made for the Vietnamese until I looked around a bit. And I cannot say in any way that I would do otherwise under the circumstances. You can not say that until you are in that situation.

It is interesting however, that many other Vietnam vets have a very different idea of McCain's captivity in Vietnam than the version he tells us, calling him "songbird" and "The Manchurian Candidate." Oh and by the way, in one ironic twist for our local cyber-citizens, the word that keeps coming up as his nickname among the Vietnamese? The Prince.

Interesting video here:
http://www.pensitoreview.com/2008/02...th-vietnamese/

Why McCain, an ex-POW, would be so against the POW/MIA cause is beyond me. I personally think that by the 1990s, he was right -- it was most likely a non-issue.

You guys would call me a pinko punk for agreeing w/McCain's stance ... and maybe you'd be right. Maybe I should feel differently about that one, it just strikes me as unlikely that after decades, out of pure spite, they'd still have POWs and MIAs. They would not have any continuing use for them, is my thought.

But what's weird is that McCain would hold that point of view, and go past my own yawning reaction to a vigorous attack on the POW/MIA cause -- even to the point of demanding that the bill mandating Pentagon transparency on some POW/MIA information be quashed. (After nearly unanimously passing in the House)

It's also very interesting that, whatever Bud Day says, others remember McCain as "Songbird" and "The Manchurian Candidate."

This will make a hell of a historical novel one day in 100 years, when the politics we argue are about as pertinent as the inner workings of the Bull Moose Party seem to us now.

Here's why: John McCain is starting to look positively Shakespearean. This is "everyman appeal" with a dark side. "Everyman" lies and schemes and plots, but we don't look that closely at "everyman." I guess sex is an incredibly big deal to right wingers, so they saw this kind of thing in Clinton. But McCain has a sex scandal to rival Clinton's back there too, and it's hardly even a footnote in our right-wing dominated media.

What fascinates me about McCain is how this timeline is shaping up: After an abysmal performance at the naval academy, where he was known as a Bush-like "party boy", McCain ends up flying fighter bombers, losing four of them in accidents and one in combat. This is a wonderful light lead-up to what comes next -

He is captured and produces propaganda for the enemy -- and this last part, I will say again, may have been under tremendous duress. Now it is becoming tragic rather than comic... although his mistreatment is questioned by others who were there. I am certain even if he was treated with kid gloves, as other veterans acknowledge, it was no day at the beach.

However, let's look at his reactions (this is where the drama of it all kicks in): Ashamed by his own deeds, he attempts suicide. And when he comes home... He rises from the ashes, resurrected in the role of Right Wing crusader. He has finally found cause and purpose. He has grown up by embracing politics.

Immediately upon returning home he tells his 12,000 word story to US News and World Report, in which he identifies how those who differed with his ideas on the war were actually traitors aiding the enemy.

This is the part that's juiciest from a dramatic perspective: a man who has made dozens of propaganda films and recordings returns home and describes other sevicemen's actions and reactions as treason. (Not to mention the opinions of his countrymen.)

Can we say "projection"? "Shadow figure"? Day, who nursed his injuries and shared a cell with him, becomes his comrade in (injured) arms, who remembers the bad old days as vividly as good old John. Together they will rewrite that war, show our loss as the work of traitors and spies, and show treason and spying to be the essence of all their political opposition...

Etc.

Right. All drama aside...

Here is what a group of Vietnam vets have to say about Day, who, according to the below, proclaimed himself the most decorated American since Douglas McArthur:

http://www.usvetdsp.com/may08/day_bud_moh.htm

I don't like the page, and this group probably has little use for people like me. They are anti-Obama by their ad selection as much as anti-McCain in content. As I have mentioned, I do not agree with them on their issue -- the POW/MIA issue -- I agree with McCain. To my mind the likelihood is low that we will turn up a US serviceman who has been pining for home for forty years.

The point of the exercise, however, is to illustrate how the halo associated with military service, military medals, and the like, can be less blinding to some than to others. In this particular case, those who are unaffected by the halo are also Vietnam vets.

Anybody who chooses to risk his own life for others deserves our admiration: A fireman, a cop, a soldier, a fire medic... sorry I am sure I have missed some lines of dangerous but necessary work.

I have known military vets, cops, and firemen, just like most people have. They don't walk on water, they put on their pants one leg at a time (please, no clever amputee references,) and their excrement, I would imagine, still stinks.

To bring this back to politics: Veterans like everybody else, have their own motivations, their own politics, and their own places on the spectrum. Since the Vietnam vets referenced above differ from McCain and Day, for instance, it seems that "what really happened" is not laid to rest by the simple notion "He was there man, you weren't."

Indeed it is Bud Day and friends who pioneered this aspect of our modern political landscape, when they vociferously and energetically went after John Kerry's war record -- evidently unaware that others might not view them as gods, just because they say they are.

It is also possible that people who have fought in wars lie:

http://www.vetvoice.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1566

Evidently McCain's voting record is not popular with Veterans' groups like DAV and VFW, and there are veterans who were in captivity with McCain who do not support his version of events.

Guess what? This is America. We're not supposed to worship a crown or a uniform or a medal. We're supposed to ask questions whether or not that's comfortable.

PFnV

Harry Boy

You should hear some of the ***** I've told my wife over the years---+

__________________
Harry Boy (Genius)

In The Absence Of Law And Order Society Will Surely Destroy Itself

PatsFanInVa

Ha Harry... and chances are somebody's told those stories before too

patsfan13

The author who trashes Day also thinks BO is a muslim:

http://usvetdsp.com/jan08/obama_lou%20tribe.htm

http://www.usvetdsp.com/dec06/obama_muslim.htm


Id he credible on this issue also?

__________________
"Some guys play in all-star games, some guys don't. I don't know who picks all those all-star teams. In all honesty, I don't know who picks the combine, for that matter," Belichick said. "How does (Miami-Ohio offensive lineman Brandon) Brooks not get invited to the combine? How did Vollmer not get invited to the combine? I don't know. We can't really worry about that. We just have to try to evaluate them the best we can."

PatsFanInVa

Hey PF13, thanks for noting that... after I already noted these guys are as anti-Obama as anti-McCain. Sort of a rerun from that point of view.

I find McCain's "hero" reputation interesting however... he served, and maybe to serve at all, you need to be a little bit of a hero.

But the more I read about both him and Day -- who remember, is only notable because he led the assault against Kerry's record -- the more it looks like Johnny Mac's basic motivations are twisted beyond all recognition. He came home from the war and immediately began projecting the crime of treason he accuses himself of, onto rivals on the left.

He also votes against veteran rights and benefits frequently. And again, I agree with him on occasion. We have a cult of military-worship in this country. However, I would not eliminate care for our wounded (as McCain now wants to.) He takes it way further than I would... and I just find that plain weird. It doesn't add up. It's like there's an underground sub-plot between him and the veteran groups, and not a very happy one at all.

So I do find it interesting that guys who served with him thought so little of him... and that (perhaps not coincidentally) he seems to think so little of veterans groups.

PFnV