Comments on: McCain unmasked?

By: Eric Forhan

Eric Forhan — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 04:28:20 +0000

The defense argument seems weak, as I’m sure that were it true Senator McCain would already have his defense lined out.

When did the GOP become the anti-Vietnam Vets party?

By: Rhymes With Right

Rhymes With Right — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 04:17:51 +0000

But the problem is that the author here just threw it out in a rather uncritical fashion — no attempt was made to either substantiate or refute it. As such, especially with the disclaimer about Soviet disinformation added, it amounts to nothing more than “I don’t know if it is true or not, but I heard a rumour that…”

And unfortunately, this very rumour is of such a scurrilous nature that its repetition damage’s the subject’s reputation — and its manner of presentation strikes me as evidence of malice aforethought.

By the way, PTG, the only censorship I suggest here is self-censorship. You know, the kind of thing that adults do when they maturely consider whether to pass on lies and determine that doing so is fundamentally immoral. Sadly, the author of this particular post — and the source from which he pulls the information — demonstrates a severe deficit in the moral compass department in posting this garbage.

By: ptg

ptg — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 03:34:17 +0000

Who reads this blog? ACLU lawyers? What a bunch of wannabe censors. Are you afraid of ideas? Afraid of the facts?

I was not aware that anyone had made such claims about John McCain. I learned something new from this post: the fact that his war record was being smeared. Would you prefer that I and other folks remain ignorant of this unpleasant fact?

Perhaps you think regular folks can’t sort out and evaluate facts like this. That would amount to elitism worthy of the left.

BTW: McCain could sue Mr. Wheeler and the author of this blog post for libel; anyone with $100 can sue anyone else for any cause of action they can imagine. This won’t happen because McCain is a public figure. The plaintiff would have to prove actual malice to prevail. It is OK to tell lies about public figures unless its done with malice. Read the tabloids.

By: Rhymes With Right

Rhymes With Right — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 01:16:18 +0000

Your repetition of this garbage is that much worse because you acknowledge the suspect nature of the source. It amounts to willfully passing on incredibly damaging gossip because it is too juicy to pass up, without any regard for its truth, just because you dislike the target.

By: JonJayRay

JonJayRay — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 13:04:25 +0000

My comment that this could be Soviet disinformation must have been very difficult to read

By: Roy Mustang

Roy Mustang — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 05:05:24 +0000

“If this is true” from “highly respected Jack Wheeler”

Wow. MDS knows no limits.

Shameful. Truly shameful.

By: Eric Forhan

Eric Forhan — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 04:26:26 +0000

If it is true that the report that you often beat your wife, then …

Respectfully, this is below STACLU. Or at least, I hope it is. “If this is true” is a weak argument, and one for the DailyKos types.

By: Jay

Jay — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 01:30:01 +0000

Yes,as owner of this blog, I think those saying that this is over the top are reacting over the top. First of all, you don’t put a group blog suspect because there are so many differing opinions. Second, as ptg pointed out, he never embraced the information. He simply put it out there prefaced with an “if”. It definitely isn’t libel when it was prefaced as not being embraced as truth.

By: ptg

ptg — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 01:15:20 +0000

I don’t know why everyone is beating up on JR over this post. When I read it, I immediately noted that it starts out with “if” and goes on to suggest it might be commie disinformation. It didn’t occur to me that this story was presented as fact or otherwise promoted. Someone else wrote the quoted account, scurrilous as it may be. What is to be gained by pretending such things don’t exist?

By: Meaux

Meaux — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 22:20:23 +0000

RE your “unmasked” posting..

I am surely no fan of McCain. I do however find your posting very much over the top. I do not think it is responsible to post something of this nature without supporting documentation. As it stands, it is just a nasty slur and I find your blog now suspect by virtue. Very poor, my opinion.