McCain, word-for-word with admiral: Dislike for war

God, the left will make any stretch to attack McCain. First the Vicki Iseman non-story and now this.

Here's a newsflash to the left, ANYONE who has actually been through war will agree with McCain and Admiral Ziemer and use similar words to describe it.

I've seen similar descriptions by Herman Wouk ("war is hell") and even Stan Lee.

Old soldiers (McCain) never die, they just get more young soldiers (Iraq) killed:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QniWdOZAwik

Wow, the old man can't even talk about his signature issue (war) without stealing someone elses words.

McCain would be a worse President than Bush, if that's even possible.

Plagiarist! Plagiarist! Plagiarist! Plagiarist!

Oh right, when Republicans do it, it's okay. When a Democrat uses words his friend told him to use, it's plagiarism!!!

God, the left will make any stretch to attack McCain. First the Vicki Iseman non-story and now this.
Here's a newsflash to the left, ANYONE who has actually been through war will agree with McCain and Admiral Ziemer and use similar words to describe it.
I've seen similar descriptions by Herman Wouk ("war is hell") and even Stan Lee.

Posted by: Jeff | March 27, 2008 4:56 PM

Hey Jeffy,

The media has been giving "Teflon John" McCain a free pass for to long.
Suck it up!!!

McSame is McSame in more ways than I thought McSame could be.

Just more of the McSame.

War is awful unless of course, He "bombs, bombs, Iran and kills innocent Muslims for his Rev. Parsley. What a hyprocrite - anything to get the votes. He is a manipulative, desperate old man, stealing another's words, who wants to go out in a flame of glory, or in his delusional mind, victory in Iraq, which will never happen because this war was based on lies and immoral motives.

If McCain somehow manages to worm his way into the White House this fall we as a country would be sunk in our own mis-management forever.

Today's headlines from Iraq:

Fighting continues unabated in Basra

Across Iraq, battles erupt with Mahdi Army

123 Iraqis, 3 US Contractors Killed; 191 Iraqis Wounded

Thousands in Baghdad Protest Basra Assault

Growing clashes with US troops in Iraq

Baghdad's Green Zone attacked for 4th day this week

Bombers attack Basra oil pipeline

Iraqi spokesman kidnapped in Baghdad

U.S. military fatalities in Iraq; 4,004

George Bush today on his upcoming and latest new "way forward" in Iraq:

As this debate unfolds, I ask people on both sides to keep an open mind, and to take a close look at the situation on the ground.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/03/20080327-2.html

And from John McCain, the presumptive nominee for George Bush's third term:

"We're succeeding. I don't care what anybody says".

...even if it takes 100 years.

McCain has been getting a free pass for to long.

Another example of Doogie Zook's display of honor and appreciation for those who served the country:

McSame is McSame in more ways than I thought McSame could be.

Just more of the McSame.

Posted by: Doug "Hussein" Zook | March 27, 2008 5:18 PM

In other words, Doogie Zook is nothing but a poor man's John E and John Chuckman.

By the way, Loons, it was the media and the Hillary Campaign that made a stink about Obama plagiarizing the governor of Massachusetts.
And, finally, it is clear the two speeches were not plagiarized. A few similar words, yes, but as pointed out, many of those who have been in war, have said the same thing.

It's also nice to see the Chicago LIBune take more of its marching orders from a left wing think tank.
The Chicago LIBune, what a freakin joke!!!

Take ten soldiers who've actually been in a war and ask them their opinion of it and I have no doubt there words will sound exactly like McCain's and Ziemer's. Keep trying radical left, you've got nothin' here. You forgot to consider that maybe their words sound similar because they're true.

Only a graduate of the Medill School of Media Management would give a pass on plagiarism.

So sorry to disappoint you lefties but I must now explain how time works to you: 1995 was before 1996. McCain said this in 1995: "McCain told the VFW on March 7, 1995, from a text at his Senate Web-site:

"We do share a secret, but it is not a romantic remembrance of war. War is awful. When nations seek to resolve their differences by force of arms, a million tragedies ensue. Nothing, not the valor with which it is fought nor the nobility of the cause it serves, can glorify war. War is wretched beyond description. Whatever gains are secured by war, it is loss that the veteran remembers. Only a fool or a fraud sentimentalizes the cruel and merciless reality of war.''

You do know how time works don't you?

I love how the angry, reactionary left keeps falling into the trap. We've got loads of these clasping jaws for you guys.

Read the post, McCain gave the speech with those same words in 1995. You want to change your free pass BS story now or later?

Spoken like a true cheat. Everyone's a victim when a plagiarist is let off the hook. Patrick can't let Obama off the hook, ESPECIALLY when he's never said he knew Obama would take his speech beforehand. He obviuously didn't. That's not borrowing. That's stealing.

Posted by: Jeff | February 18, 2008 5:32 PM

Finally, an admission! Anyone with half a brain should know never to vote for a plagiarist.

Posted by: Jeff | February 18, 2008 1:46 PM

"Borrowing words" implies that Patrick knew about it first. Nothing he's said since this story broke suggests that. You have to ask someone if you can borrow something from them. Otherwise it's stealing.

I can't believe the level to which you sheep will cover up for this guy. He's been caught redhanded and even he admits he "should have given credit."

All the erroneous attacks on McCain in this thread are simple diversionary tactics.

Ask yourself this: If you're giving a speech called "words matter" shouldn't those words at the very least be your own?

Posted by: Jeff | February 18, 2008 2:28 PM

A dislike for war? This is all he has to run on. I think he may dislike having to remember whos who in the war...but it to him is a meal ticket.

Jeff.....My sons friend who was in Iraq was to be home in 2 weeks. He was killed by an IED 2 days ago. You have a lot of nerve assuming what the hell troops feel. Maybe you would like an opinion from his mother...I would be glad to give you her number so when you call she can rip you a new butthole.

Personally, I think every one of them has plagiarized Sherman’s "War is Hell" speech given at the graduation of the Michigan Military Academy on June 19, 1879. None of them have said anything that isn’t encapsulated in the substance of Sherman’s speech on that day.

But, so what? If the ideas are true, and the meaning of them are heart-felt, who cares about the source of the actual wording? Isn’t conveying the thought for others to hear to convince them more important?

In the legal profession, for an example, the taboo against plagiarism is virtually non-existent when it comes to writing briefs. Lawyers on the same side of an issue borrow arguments from each other without assigning any credit for their sources. There is a tacit understanding that it is perfectly acceptable to cut and paste the exact wording of someone else’s brief into one’s own, as long as one insures that the underlying research is accurate. The reason is obvious.

On the other hand, plagiarism is considered an evil among academics, writers and journalists because claiming another’s words as one’s own falsely increases one’s work product and reputation. That’s all good and well as a rule of government for those who are judged solely or primarily by their ability to generate material reflecting original thought. It makes no sense as a rule of government for those whose value depends not on the originality of thought, but, rather, on the forcefulness of their advocacy of issues for the public good. A rule should not apply in situations where the reasons for the rules existence are inapplicable.

In this regard, I would put politics and legal work on the same plane. Both are involved in advocacy, rather than grubbing for original work product. Thus, whether the speaker is McCain or Obama, one should not care about the precise origin of their ideas – or the fact they don’t stop every moment to give credit for someone else’s turn of phrase – when they are engaged in political advocacy. The failure to give such credit is not the same as claiming the wording or the idea for one’s self. We should be more concerned about the truth of the ideas themselves, and whether those ideas truly embody the beliefs of the speaker.

There's a difference between SOUNDING similar and a WORD FOR WORD copy.

"The senator used that language in 1995 and possibly earlier, so the idea that it was somehow plagiarized… is completely incorrect.’’
-
All you gotta do then is show us tapes of his earlier speeches. That's all. Cant do it? Then eat it!

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN you are not reading The New York Aluminum Tube Times. So McCain is going to actually get scrutiny from this paper!

Yeah, what's your problem? McCain wasn't giving a speech called words matter. He has some thing to run on other than words like a record. You Obama-bots should look into getting a candidate who has one of those of your own.

Read the post, McCain gave a speech with those same words in 1995, which was BEFORE 1996. If anything, Ziemer was copying McCain. If there was any copying at all.

Swing and a miss, strike two! Let's see, NY Times didn't hurt McCain. This "scandal" won't hurt McCain and will only make you lefty loons look bad.

Logic Prisoner, if you think McCain was getting a free pass before then you ain't seen nothin' yet pal. You might as well call him Teflon John after this because after his campaign has turned the tables on both the New York Times and the lefties behind this who didn't think to look back at McCain's speeches before 1996 he'll be unstoppable.

This is like a Dan Rather giftwrapped election present.

Here's a newsflash to the left, ANYONE who has actually been through war will agree with McCain and Admiral Ziemer and use similar words to describe it.
Posted by: Jeff | March 27, 2008 4:56 PM

I'm sure you gave John Kerry the same benefit of doubt.

That's why Republicans are true hypocrites.

What more can one expect from a former Naval Academy student who graduated 4th from the BOTTOM!

* * * * *

Posted by: Mary Schoenhoff | March 27, 2008 9:03 PM

Yes, Mary, and it’s really a snap to get into the Naval Academy in the first place. I’m sure you and I could both do it standing on our heads.

It's also nice to see the Chicago LIBune take more of its marching orders from a left wing think tank.
The Chicago LIBune, what a freakin joke!!!

Posted by: John D | March 27, 2008 5:55 PM

Take ten soldiers who've actually been in a war and ask them their opinion of it and I have no doubt there words will sound exactly like McCain's and Ziemer's. Keep trying radical left, you've got nothin' here. You forgot to consider that maybe their words sound similar because they're true.

Posted by: Jeff | March 27, 2008 6:14 PM
---------------------

Jeffy, we sure as h** aren't going to take the word of CHICKENHAWK REPUBLICAN like you....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFGit_tZDqs

Sign up or shut up, Jeffy....and the same thing goes for you Lil Johnny D'ucksnort!

Jeff, did you read, I mean eat, your own words shown above? Didn't they teach you about objectivity at Medill School? Did they teach you anything there?

Yes, Mary, and it’s really a snap to get into the Naval Academy in the first place. I’m sure you and I could both do it standing on our heads.

Posted by: John W. | March 27, 2008 9:20 PM

You're right Johnnyboy, it's not easy to get into the navel academy when you're dumber than a bag of rocks like McCain is, he only got in because of his father's influence, his father was a admiral.

Just like W who got into Yale as a legacy, McCain is a dope who has fallen Upwords his whole life.

Take ten soldiers who've actually been in a war and ask them their opinion of it and I have no doubt there words will sound exactly like McCain's and Ziemer's. Keep trying radical left, you've got nothin' here. You forgot to consider that maybe their words sound similar because they're true.

Posted by: Jeff | March 27, 2008 6:14 PM

No. I've been in a war (Vietnam) and I'd put it less eloquently, and a lot less politely. I'd expound, but the Trib wouldn't post it.

I support McCain. He is the only candidate with any backbone. I don't know how they can keep their bodies straight without one.

Let's get real. Obama and Hillary are cut and run liberals. The only plan they have for American is to run from Iraq, raise taxes, spend trillions on govt giveaways, and push gay marriage on all of us.

Not to worry though. Obama will get the nomination, White people will not allow him to get elected.

Mc Cain Wins. God Bless America.

Not to worry though. Obama will get the nomination, White people will not allow him to get elected.
Posted by: Jerry | March 27, 2008 9:49 PM

Another "great" American heard from. This IS the republican party. With losers like this...no wonder America is losing what it once was.

Not to worry though. Obama will get the nomination, White people will not allow him to get elected.
Mc Cain Wins. God Bless America.

Posted by: Jerry | March 27, 2008 9:49 PM

Jeri,

It's nice to see that the KKK membership has taken off their hoods and endorsed old man warmonger John McCain/Bush especially since it appears that McCain/Bush can't even talk about his signature campaign issue (warmongering) without copying someone elses words.

Plagiarism?? Was it Franklin or Jefferson who said there is no such thing as a good war nor is there a bad peace. whiteagle38

Bill r. I feel for your friend's family but it doesn't change a thing. McCain was right to say how awful war is. Your story does nothing but back that up. The fact still remains that the hardcore lefties on this board, and I give you credit Bill for staying out of it, tried to invent a scandal out of nothing from this. If they'd've done their homework they'd've known McCain's speech predates Ziemer's. Nothing here to see.

Loon, notify me when you sign up. I'll just wait here and listen to the crickets chirp.

McSkyraider is the only candidate who has the experience to be elected President. Obama, the 'community organizer' is an empty suit with no message and Clinton is a total ninny, her alledged experience as First Lady is a joke.

John McCain's historical supposed "American Hero"-exploited quick-time entree into national politics, IS,
in and of itself, a grand
diversion. Now, he is being
conjoled, steered and carefully managed toward
presidential illusions!?!
Repuglicrites truly are
shameless.

One thought that I will add is that Obama should be far ahead in any polls with Mc Cain because there will be a tendency for certain voters to claim they intend to vote for Obama and not do such. Why? Because most pollsters are working class people, and the perception of those polled is that they are giving the pollsters what they want to hear. Example? Yes, the 2004 Presidential election where Kerry did much better in the exit polling than the real polling.

One thought that I will add is that Obama should be far ahead in any polls with Mc Cain because there will be a tendency for certain voters to claim they intend to vote for Obama and not do such. Why? Because most pollsters are working class people, and the perception of those polled is that they are giving the pollsters what they want to hear. Example? Yes, the 2004 Presidential election where Kerry did much better in the exit polling than the real polling.

One thought that I will add is that Obama should be far ahead in any polls with Mc Cain because there will be a tendency for certain voters to claim they intend to vote for Obama and not do such. Why? Because most pollsters are working class people, and the perception of those polled is that they are giving the pollsters what they want to hear. Example? Yes, the 2004 Presidential election where Kerry did much better in the exit polling than the real polling.

Since he has more direct contact with reporters, he gets more chances to clarify on his quotes. With his closeness to reporters he was able to clarify stuff like his 100 years statement (even with the clarification the Democrats are desperate enough to blow this way out of proportion.)

It's not McCain's fault that he gets "let off the hook." Blame Obama and Hillary for having such an exhilirating competition (one I haven't seen in years) and stealing all the public attention.

I'm going back to observing the Democratic contest now, go Obama!

"a million tragedies ensue" is not a "normal" phrase.

Yes, if you ask soldiers about war, most will say: it stinks, it sucks, terrible, awful.

There are a few out there like "Psycho (Francis)" from Stripes: "All I know is I finally get to kill somebody." But they are a small minority.

But in the normal course of a conversation, you would not here the particular phrase above. It would be highly unlikely, which makes it believeable that parts of the speech may have been plagerized.

Skeptical brings up a good point. Look at how the McCain has handled potential scandals and one word comes to mind: openness. Look at the Obama campaign and the answer would be tight-lipped or controlling.

When the shoddily-reported NY Times story came out McCain did a press conference that day and answered every question the the travelling press corps had.

When the Wright story broke what did Obama do? Obfuscated and refused to answer questions ("c'mon guys I just answered eight questions") and told the press to wait two days for his speech.

When he finally gave the speech it contradicted earlier statements that he'd never heard Wright say the things in the video.

The question of who's more open and accessible is an open and shut case. McCain's campaign people got the facts about the 1995 speech into Silva's hands only a few hours after this post went live. Watching these campaigns in action is like pros vs. joes of the political world.

Gotta love the fact that the anit-McCain tingent here just completely ignores the fact that McCain used the speech before Ziemer. So basically McCain proves that he used the speech frist yet they still rail against him for copycatting. Could it be that no matter what the facts they just want to attack McCain even if their is not justification? You can attack McCain for certain things but this is clearly not one of them to anyone who has an independant mind.

The question of who's more open and accessible is an open and shut case. McCain's campaign people got the facts about the 1995 speech into Silva's hands only a few hours after this post went live. Watching these campaigns in action is like pros vs. joes of the political world.

Posted by: Jeff | March 28, 2008 8:25 AM

Yep, you did a great job there Jeff. Do you get health insurance working for McCain? How about 401K?

Rather than attacking McCain for copying, I'd rather attack him for lying in his speech.

The man hates war? Oh, Please. He glories in it. It's his first choice solution for all of our international problems. It is his identity. It is his life. There will be none sure thing about a John McCain presidency: More wars, and no search for peace.

Gotta love the fact that the anit-McCain tingent here just completely ignores the fact that McCain used the speech before Ziemer. So basically McCain proves that he used the speech frist yet they still rail against him for copycatting.
Posted by: Vinny
-
Just a second here, Vinny. McCain CLAIMS he used the speech before Zeimer but he has not come forward with any proof. Until then, the evidence is clear. He's a McCopycat.

By the way, what's a tingent?

Hey Bruce...

Here you go.

http://mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.Speeches&ContentRecord_id=2ec2aff0-d85d-4841-89fb-e412e78c31a4&Region_id=&Issue_id

Let the hemming and hawing commence.

Oh and Lois.... Give it a rest. If you have managed to convince yourself that McCain's only solution for any problem is war then are are indeed a sad person.