The strange courtship between McCain and the religious right is discussed in a New York Times piece here.
A McCain adviser acknowledged on Monday that the campaign had failed to look into Mr. Hagee’s background adequately and said that as a result the campaign’s procedures for vetting endorsers had improved.
Mr. McCain, who does not talk about religion publicly, has a rocky history with conservative Christians. Eight years ago, he called the Rev. Jerry Falwell and the Rev. Pat Robertson “agents of intolerance.”
But as he prepared to run for president again, Mr. McCain was the graduation speaker at Mr. Falwell’s Liberty University in 2006, met with Mr. Hagee in Texas and spoke at his Night for Israel in Washington in 2007.
Should we believe that first line? If this is how McCain works with such awful advisement as this, then, once again, it is clear that his judgment is way off kilter. You don't have to look at Hagee's background to figure out who is is and the type of Christianity for which he stands. What an absurd statement. How about a simple Google or Amazon search? Why ask a guy to endorse you if you know so little about him? Seriously. Don't piss on us and tell us that it's raining! Even all the young earth creationists can't be that stupid. Here are the first three filtered hits in Amazon for "John Hagee" and it took me all of thirty seconds:
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
Would you not, if you are a rational person, maybe check out a book or a website to see what these titles are all about? You don't need an FBI background check (which by the way they can get in a moment's notice and probably sent to a mobile device in seconds). So ask yourself this: Do you want a president whose administration will be this incompetent and stupid? Or do you want a president who does not care to examine the endorsements he is getting more carefully? Or, do you want someone to lead us who will continue this bait and switch crap? Aren't you a little sick of it? I hope to God, literally, that Obama does not get tainted by crap like this or something that may be even be mistaken for the stench of it. The Jeremiah Wright issues were much ado about nothing but a bunch of white folk who don't care to understand the life in the black church anyway.
C'mon McCain, stop insulting our intelligence with this tripe. Everyone's s@$# stinks including your own. Some just choose to wipe up after themselves. At this point it's too late for you to hide it since we have all caught a strong whiff.
(HT: Melissa Rogers)
No related posts.
So what I gather you are writing is that McCain is just like the other (two) candidates running for President. When something comes up, the first thing all three grab is "we hadn't paid attention to that."
So McCain asked Hagee to support him (NEWSFLASH: MCCAIN WANTS AMERICANS TO VOTE FOR HIM" wow… headline…)
Obama never really LISTENED to his Pastor's overheated Rhetoric. (Again, NEWSFLASH: PEOPLE SLEEP THROUGH THE SERMONS)
Hillary didn't vet the Hospital Story after hearing it from a cop. (Um… newsflash–HILLARY DISTORTS TRUTH.)
Okay, so Hillary doesn't look so good in this one…but all in all, the argument seems to be that sometimes a candidate's staff, or even the candidate, doesn't pay attention.
Something tells me, Drew, that generally you are not a McCain supporter, and you felt that this might be something you could "rip" on.
Perhaps the biggest intellectual flaw in your argument (and in so many others) is to assume that an endorsement by someone for a candidate is a sort of "quid pro quo" and implies endorsement by the Candidate for that someone. More often, it simply means that the candidate wants votes. Apparently, those are needed to win elections. Who knew?
So what I gather you are writing is that McCain is just like the other (two) candidates running for President. When something comes up, the first thing all three grab is "we hadn't paid attention to that."
So McCain asked Hagee to support him (NEWSFLASH: MCCAIN WANTS AMERICANS TO VOTE FOR HIM" wow… headline…)
Obama never really LISTENED to his Pastor's overheated Rhetoric. (Again, NEWSFLASH: PEOPLE SLEEP THROUGH THE SERMONS)
Hillary didn't vet the Hospital Story after hearing it from a cop. (Um… newsflash–HILLARY DISTORTS TRUTH.)
Okay, so Hillary doesn't look so good in this one…but all in all, the argument seems to be that sometimes a candidate's staff, or even the candidate, doesn't pay attention.
Something tells me, Drew, that generally you are not a McCain supporter, and you felt that this might be something you could "rip" on.
Perhaps the biggest intellectual flaw in your argument (and in so many others) is to assume that an endorsement by someone for a candidate is a sort of "quid pro quo" and implies endorsement by the Candidate for that someone. More often, it simply means that the candidate wants votes. Apparently, those are needed to win elections. Who knew?
"to assume that an endorsement by someone for a candidate is a sort of “quid pro quo” and implies endorsement by the Candidate for that someone."
That's not what I am arguing.
It has been reported that McCain sought out the endorsement of Hagee. Hagee has been quoted as much. This means that someone is lying – McCain either did or did not seek out Hagee's endorsement. If McCain's elusiveness towards the connection with Hagee is evidence of untruth by virtue of passivity to the evidence of Hagee's character, then he should outright reject the endorsement. That's the problem. Not to mention the fact that Joe Lieberman called Hagee "a man of God" while speaking to his "ministry" last summer. The connection between McCain and Lierberman is palpable and consistent.
The issue that I am raising is this: If you were running for an office and someone endorsed you, would you not do even the slightest bit of homework to see what that endorsement is all about – even if you did not seek it out – before accepting it? It was a horrible move on the part of his campaign. Although not as cheesy as Hillary's 3am commercial (sick of seeing that swill yet?). At least McCain's media productions look good. I am sure that a handful of PSU students could do a much better job than Hillary's people in that regard.
"to assume that an endorsement by someone for a candidate is a sort of “quid pro quo” and implies endorsement by the Candidate for that someone."
That's not what I am arguing.
It has been reported that McCain sought out the endorsement of Hagee. Hagee has been quoted as much. This means that someone is lying – McCain either did or did not seek out Hagee's endorsement. If McCain's elusiveness towards the connection with Hagee is evidence of untruth by virtue of passivity to the evidence of Hagee's character, then he should outright reject the endorsement. That's the problem. Not to mention the fact that Joe Lieberman called Hagee "a man of God" while speaking to his "ministry" last summer. The connection between McCain and Lierberman is palpable and consistent.
The issue that I am raising is this: If you were running for an office and someone endorsed you, would you not do even the slightest bit of homework to see what that endorsement is all about – even if you did not seek it out – before accepting it? It was a horrible move on the part of his campaign. Although not as cheesy as Hillary's 3am commercial (sick of seeing that swill yet?). At least McCain's media productions look good. I am sure that a handful of PSU students could do a much better job than Hillary's people in that regard.
I guess I missed where, in your blog post, you mention that McCain is denying seeking the endorsement. I note that you write the campaign says they didn't do a sufficient background check. The article you quote consistently points out that McCain and his staff sought out the endorsement, and that McCain, as soon as the DAY AFTER the endorsement, pointed out that he was in no way endorsing Hagee. The quote, in fact, is "a statement Mr. McCain made the day after the endorsement, when it was greeted with a barrage of criticism: 'In no way did I intend for his endorsement to suggest that I in turn agree with all of Pastor Hagee’s views, which I obviously do not.'"
So to summarize:
1. McCain sought out Hagee's endorsement of the McCain Campaign.
2. McCain pointed out that he did not endorse Hagee's views
3. McCain's staff admitted they should have done a better job.
So really, what's the issue here? I mean, besides your obvious disdain for McCain (and perhaps–Republicans/conservatives?)
I guess I missed where, in your blog post, you mention that McCain is denying seeking the endorsement. I note that you write the campaign says they didn't do a sufficient background check. The article you quote consistently points out that McCain and his staff sought out the endorsement, and that McCain, as soon as the DAY AFTER the endorsement, pointed out that he was in no way endorsing Hagee. The quote, in fact, is "a statement Mr. McCain made the day after the endorsement, when it was greeted with a barrage of criticism: 'In no way did I intend for his endorsement to suggest that I in turn agree with all of Pastor Hagee’s views, which I obviously do not.'"
So to summarize:
1. McCain sought out Hagee's endorsement of the McCain Campaign.
2. McCain pointed out that he did not endorse Hagee's views
3. McCain's staff admitted they should have done a better job.
So really, what's the issue here? I mean, besides your obvious disdain for McCain (and perhaps–Republicans/conservatives?)
Not a disdain for McCain. Not a disdain for republicans/conservatives. I have been a registered republican three times actually.
Issue is that he sought out the endorsement of a wacko like Hagee and paraded it. the statements of his campaign that they should have done a better job are rubbish. It was clearly his hook into a rather belligerent faction of the religious right. Any association one decides by an intent of will to make with folks like Hagee and Parsley will receive my disdain. Again, if McCain says that not only that they made an error about what Hagee stands for and then follows through by severing ties with him completely – I have no issue with it.
I was a big fan of McCain before he began pandering to Bush's base. I would like to see conservative politics reform so that it is not infected with the virus of the religious right. I have reasons for why the Jeremiah Wright issue was misconstrued and overblown. Does not give license for Wright to say anything he wishes and get away with it because of his "culture", but there is a rationality there that I understand. Not so much with Hagee or Parsley. If Obama reached out to Hagee, I would be writing the same thing just with his name here rather than McCain's.
Not a disdain for McCain. Not a disdain for republicans/conservatives. I have been a registered republican three times actually.
Issue is that he sought out the endorsement of a wacko like Hagee and paraded it. the statements of his campaign that they should have done a better job are rubbish. It was clearly his hook into a rather belligerent faction of the religious right. Any association one decides by an intent of will to make with folks like Hagee and Parsley will receive my disdain. Again, if McCain says that not only that they made an error about what Hagee stands for and then follows through by severing ties with him completely – I have no issue with it.
I was a big fan of McCain before he began pandering to Bush's base. I would like to see conservative politics reform so that it is not infected with the virus of the religious right. I have reasons for why the Jeremiah Wright issue was misconstrued and overblown. Does not give license for Wright to say anything he wishes and get away with it because of his "culture", but there is a rationality there that I understand. Not so much with Hagee or Parsley. If Obama reached out to Hagee, I would be writing the same thing just with his name here rather than McCain's.