I’m not happy to hear that he’s died, but I’m getting a bit grossed-out by the way everyone is expected to fawn over what a great man he was.
A “war hero” is not someone who helps unload high explosive from an airplane, onto a city, from a safe altitude.
He was hardly a “maverick” except insofar as he voiced opposition to certain things (including torture) but only in a way that was calculated not to do anything, at all. His defining political moment, when he was a true maverick, was by bringing Sarah Palin in as his running mate, when he discovered that Bozo The Clown was not available. By doing that he helped the Republican establishment realize that they could, literally, run a cardboard cut-out for office; that discovery turned out to be consequential.
McCain was credited as being a strong moral voice on torture, but he actually did absolutely nothing to stand against the US government’s programs of “extreme rendition” or prisoner abuse at Gitmo. As the Senate Chairman of the Armed Services Committee, he helped promote American militarism, including the now-standard lip-service to Israel, sanctions on Iran, and arms sales to Saudi Arabia. As far as his stance on torture, it appears to be that surviving it, then going on to become a paid-in-full member of the oligarchy, was enough for him. I don’t consider it tremendously heroic to be in the position of understanding how pointless torture is, and only occasionally piping up with “… so maybe we should stop. No? OK, your budget for next year is approved.” We should not credit him for wasting opportunity.
Spare me the ritualized mourning over another dead oligarch. We need better people in Washington.
I hear he was a nice guy when he wasn’t dropping high explosives on people.
I do not understand all the praise that is being lavished on McCain. Is it not enough for our rulers to have power, do they insist that we must love them, as well? For all their pretense of leading resistance, America’s media is quick to kiss the hand that slaps it.
Is it not enough for our rulers to have power, do they insist that we must love them, as well?
I haven’t seen this listed explicitly in any of the main definitions of fascism, but it certainly seems to show up in every case of actually-lived full-on totalitarianism. Personally, I propose we call it the “smile while you heil!” rule.
But we all know much of it is pro-forma and insincere. That should help a bit.
John Morales@#2:
But we all know much of it is pro-forma and insincere. That should help a bit.
Unfortunately, they are beyond the reach of sarcasm, now.
When some military generals suggested that it was time to end DADT, he roared at them and said that this was a question for the senators to decide.
When some senators suggested that it was time to end DADT, he roared at them and said that this was a question for the generals to decide.
If we must praise him for his principles and integrity, then let us remember how he stuck to his principles and employed whatever arguments he needed at the moment.
The Keating Five. Martin Luther King Jr. Day. The repeal of Glass-Stegall. “Bomb-bomb-bomb Iran”. Topics like these are all fair game, and they should be talked about. Now IS the time, before people forget.
I can’t recall if Nixon was the first when he died in 1994, but he’s the first I can remember people repeatedly using vacuous and pandering phrases like “elder statesman” to commend to condemnable. Repeat the lie often enough and nobody will bother looking for the truth (“you can’t prosecute dead people, so why bother reading?”).