McCain Truth has his own Truth Squads

This whole issue about the Obama Truth squad and the browsing of a post link lead me to the following quote:

But a review of McCain’s own truth squads shows he has a district attorney from New Mexico and the South Carolina attorney general ready to respond to misleading ads from Obama and Democrats in their respective states

www.news-leader.com...

Whats that? McCain has his own squad members from New Mexico and South Carolina? You cant sling mud without getting some on you.

Peace


[edit on 28-9-2008 by HIFIGUY]

reply to post by HIFIGUY


The major couldn't help but notice that this claim comes sans names, links or other documentation regarding "McCain’s own truth squads."

It appears that the source you have quoted, Chad, who had no problem with providing links to the other aspects of his blog, was remiss in providing such documentation in his heaping plate of rumor and innuendo.

The Major is sure this is merely an oversight by the parties involved and names and specific quotes will be forthcoming.

Dismissed.



[edit on 28-9-2008 by Major Discrepancy]

On a conference call with reporters, Swindle said the leaflet contained "half-truths and misinformation and was done to try to destroy John McCain in the upcoming election." At the bottom of the flyer attached to a McCain campaign news release is the name Swift Boat Vets For Truth, Kinston, N.C.

McCain "Truth Squad" makes first attack

Today, a "Truth Squad" for the presumptive Republican nominee forcefully rejected General Wesley Clark's comments that McCain lacks foreign policy experience, and suggested Barack Obama do the same.

Led by John Warner, a Virginia Republican who serves with McCain on the Senate Armed Services Committee, the squad blasted Clark and sought to reenforce the military reputation of McCain, a former Vietnam POW who once headed a Navy aviation squadron.

McCain "Truth Squad" hits back at Clark, Obama

It's pretty clear McCain is using truth squads too.

Good for Obama and McCain! To those of you who have a problem with groups who fact check. . . . Thpbt!

Maybe this, from McCain's website will help the major.

www.johnmccain.com...

U.S. Senator John McCain's presidential campaign today launched a McCain Truth Squad to counter recent attacks on John McCain's military service and credentials in national security affairs. The campaign also unveiled a new web site, www.johnmccaintruthsquad.com, to set the record straight against Internet smears of John McCain's service.

Complete with names.

McCain's Truth Squad in Kansas City

Goes After Wesley Clark

Palin Truth Squad

McCain Truth Squad on Smear Watch

Yay, TRUTH!

Now, the question is... Why doesn't anyone have a problem with McCain's Truth Squad?

(Now THAT'S feigned confusion. )

[edit on 28-9-2008 by Benevolent Heretic]

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Well done Heretic, as usual you are a veritable fountain of information.

I read a few of the links you provided and started thinking about how I feel about "truth squads" in general, on both sides.

If the squad's purpose is to primarily correct misstatements and/or outright lies about a candidate without further comment, more power to 'em. I often look at some of the charges bandied about and would like some clarification to some of the more outstanding claims.

Where I begin to have a problem is when the "clarification" is just the means for a return attack with their own outrageous claims.

I think the population in general, well me at least, would welcome responses to an issue with a clear rebuttal, supported by facts, and stop at that, without firing their own biased comments into the fray.

Wishful thinking I agree, but the attacks that we experienced during the last election with the infamous swift boat group were extremely distasteful to me. Where the real problem lies here is groups outside the direct control of the campaign (or so we're told) put out bizarre ads that are then responded to by truth groups, who put out their own attacks, which are then countered by the other team's truth group, who then put out their own ..........

The whole thing is out of control and I could do without the confusion it creates.




[edit on 28-9-2008 by zlots331]

What does it really matter?

Both campaigns have "Truth Squads". As long as neither intimidate or restrict free speech, I don't see a problem.

If they are just correcting errors with ads and/or comments from the other side, both campaigns should be able to do that. If they go further than corrections, then they could pose problems. JMO.....

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Now, the question is... Why doesn't anyone have a problem with McCain's Truth Squad?

The Major is always amused when the hoop & fire routine starts, as it is a sure sign the Kool-aid is spiked. Now that the myopic have chimed in please allow the Major to provide some clarity. John McCain has a "truth squad" and it comprises of supporters who will refute any ads or other claims that are untrue. Some of the members in the John McCain "truth squad" hold elected office, though none listed hold elected law enforcement office. Nor have any of John McCain's "truth squad" members announced their intention to use their elected office to impose their agenda on those exercising their First Amendment rights. Holding any opinion about any candidate isn't illegal, yet. For any who may bandy about the term defamation, should be well aware of the high standards necessary when a public official is involved, and that it is a falls under civil courts, not criminal so there would be no need for a law enforcement official to be in involved. Unless one is living in a country with less freedom.

In reference to the South Carolina State Attorney General:

Mr. McMaster, South Carolina’s attorney general, said that his office was investigating whether some of the phone calls violated a state law that prohibits making automated calls directly to people and not to just their answering machines.

news.aol.com...

Inferring that executing his duties of office somehow makes the Mr. McMaster a member of John McCain's "truth squad" is patently dishonest, or the result of a far more common affliction prevalent in today's society. The Major will leave each reader to ascertain which of the two is most likely.

The Major is yet to receive the documentation regarding the New Mexico DA who is claimed to be actively engaged in "truth squad" activities on John McCain's behalf.

The Major is also curious were the ACLU stands on this one.

Dismissed.

Originally posted by Major Discrepancy

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Now, the question is... Why doesn't anyone have a problem with McCain's Truth Squad?

Some of the members in the John McCain "truth squad" hold elected office, though none listed hold elected law enforcement office.

You lost me. What does this have to do with the original question? I could care less what office they hold. Its just the way the whole process stinks.

Nobody is prosecuting anybody. The story got twisted and spun (naturally).

Reporter: Obama Truth Story Got Twisted

There are many links in there that show what happened and I don't have the desire to explain it to the major or anyone else. Google the News on Obama Truth Squad.

As a citizen, I believe that elections should be about issues. I also have enormous respect for our First Amendment and freedom of speech. My sole purpose in participating in this initiative is about getting truthful information to the voters. This has never been or never will be about prosecuting people.

Clearly there are those who are attempting to twist the purpose of this initiative for their own benefit. This attack is a great example of how the truth is distorted in campaigns and what we’re trying to stand up against.

Source

Another opinion I have about the whole truth squad issue brings me to PACs (political action committees). Both of these groups appear to be an historically new phenomenon.

The truth squads just seem to be an extension of the PAC movement. Along with lobbyists, PACs can do whatever they want, outside the normally accepted campaign limitations (if there is such a thing).

I mean, I don't believe there are any financial limitations regarding how much money can be spent, where contributions come from, or what can be said.

False claims can be thrown out that have absolutely no merit, or as seems to be the discomforting norm lately, be outright lies. Then all the campaign they purportedly support has to do is issue a statement that they didn't "approve " the message. Too late. The subliminal damage has already been done.

Plus, I believe that the statement that they knew nothing about the ad in question is pure BS.

Maybe I wandered off topic a little but I just think that the two institutions go together.




[edit on 28-9-2008 by zlots331]

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Now, the question is... Why doesn't anyone have a problem with McCain's Truth Squad?

(Now THAT'S feigned confusion.

)

I'm calling you out!

I BELIEVE YOU HAVE JUST LIED TO THE ATS COMMUNITY.

Am I not "anyone"?

Originally posted by loam
First, let me make something very clear. I actually make an effort to deny ignorance.

Let's begin with:

But a review of McCain’s own truth squads shows he has a district attorney from New Mexico and the South Carolina attorney general ready to respond to misleading ads from Obama and Democrats in their respective states.

Source.

Maybe this will avoid the predictable accusations of partisanship in reference to my post.

If the above is true, I find those facts equally appalling.

I posted the above on 28-9-2008 @ 13:02, which you expressly responded to here and posted on 28-9-2008 @ 13:44.

Odd that you would little more than two hours later make the claim in *this* thread "Why doesn't anyone have a problem with McCain's Truth Squad?"

Obviously, your statement is a BOLD FACED LIE.

I guess you probably think that because this is in a different thread, it's ok to create an impression that supports YOUR manufactured version of the truth.

Or maybe it's because you couldn't make headway in that thread, so you decided to try again here.

It's funny too how in this particular thread you make no mention of the fact that you're ok with these little fascist truth squads, whether they are Obama's or McCain's.

Isn't it the height of hypocrisy to actually engage in an ample amount of your own hypocrisy while making the point against hypocrisy???





In all the years I have been a member on ATS, I think the posts you have made in these two threads today deserve special recognition beyond any other for their blatant promotion of ignorance.

I'm on to you Benevolent Heretic.


reply to post by HIFIGUY


And I'm on to you too HIFIGUY.

I find it interesting that you don't even credit me or my point of view for something you apparently didn't even know about until I pointed it out to you in another thread.

Out to spread some ignorance of your own, I see...

------------

BRAVO, both of you, for writing posts suggesting a complete lack of integrity with regard to what you write.

:shk:





So much fun denyin' ignorance with you folks.





(Sue me. It's an emoticon kind of post. )

[edit on 28-9-2008 by loam]

Wow, wtf?

What are you talking about? I was interested in what this thread was talking about but now I don't know if my opinion is safe.

I believe we were talking about the OP of this thread.

Anyhow, I still believe truth squads are a wonderful idea, handled appropriately, to clarify outrageous claims by both sides. Its just when they go over the top that I become distressed.

Hang in there heretic, I believe in you regardless.

Originally posted by zlots331

Wow, wtf?

That's exactly and I mean EXACTLY what I said when I read that.

Hang in there heretic, I believe in you regardless.

Thanks. Sometimes ya just gotta walk away.

* BH walking away* . . . . . . . . .

reply to post by zlots331

Originally posted by zlots331

Wow, wtf?

What are you talking about? I was interested in what this thread was talking about but now I don't know if my opinion is safe.

Of course your opinion is safe. But don't expect an explicit misrepresentation to go unremarked.

Read both threads if you really want to understand where I'm coming from.


reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
* BH walking away* . . . . . . . . .

*wavy, wavy*

I didn't really expect you to specifically defend this statement: "Why doesn't anyone have a problem with McCain's Truth Squad?"



[edit on 28-9-2008 by loam]

Originally posted by loam
I didn't really expect you to specifically defend this statement: "Why doesn't anyone have a problem with McCain's Truth Squad?"

When McCains Truth squad of veterans demean another veteran, the bystanders realize this is a situation of glorifying of ones self. Particularly, of McCain glorifying himself.

So then I ask you, which of McCains witnesses were Generals, versus the accusation which was made by a General? I know Obama distanced himself from this, but hey, one military mind is as good as another right?

Sometimes, you have to take opinion lightly. McCain is a war veteran, and a survivor. He surely has done more then I, and to that, I salute him.
But what way of thinking in McCains mind makes him think that he had to assemble a group to defend him? Should not his service be merit alone?

At what point in America, do I need a war time commander when the inside of the walls are coming down with mismanagement? This problem was caused by a single track minded war time mentality with a disregard to internal affairs of the nation. Simple as that.

Even the Romans were passing laws as Rome fell. Oblivious to the affairs that plagued the empire.

Peace

I thus the "hypocrisy express" is exposed again... I mean to think that most of these accusations about Obama can be traced to a Republican governor on his OWN site, I mean when will people actually start doing their research from independent neutral outlets? I mean for petes sakes Obama never even "abused" any law enforcement

Its unbelievable that there are voters that must make excuses for why they dont like candidate, its never about the relevant issues to POTUS.