Breaking News
Oprah Quitting TV Show In 2011

Swift Boater Bud Day “Confirms” McCain’s Story By Getting It Wrong

But hey, I totally trust the guy who helped to smear John Kerry’s military record when he’s backing up a sketchy McCain story.

Let us find out what fellow Swift Boat smear artist Jerome Corsi thinks, perhaps the conspiracy can grow.

Both comments and pings are currently closed.

24 Responses to “Swift Boater Bud Day “Confirms” McCain’s Story By Getting It Wrong”

  1. matt621 says:

    More Proof That One Should Never Listen To Andrew Sullivan.

    Unless he’s squatting out the Democratic Party line.

  2. JWG says:

    Wow! This thing is cracked wide open now! I can’t wait for the DNC ads pointing out this accusation! McCain is busted for sure!

    BTW, when are you going to get around to condemning Obama for meeting with swift boat financier T. Boone Pickens? Those swift boat guys are everywhere!

  3. Rheinhard says:

    Meanwhile, this guy must be lying about his service record or something because everybody knows that all Prisoners of War and veterans support McCain (who, did you know, was also a Prisoner of War?) and would totally back up his Sandy Cross that was like totally not swiped from Aleksander Solzhenitsyn and all…

    I can verify that John has an infamous reputation for being a hot head. He has a quick and explosive temper that many have experienced first hand. Folks, quite honestly that is not the finger I want next to that red button.

    It is also disappointing to see him take on and support Bush’s war in Iraq, even stating we might be there for another 100 years. For me John represents the entrenched and bankrupt policies of Washington-as-usual. The past 7 years have proven to be disastrous for our country. And I believe John’s views on war, foreign policy, economics, environment, health care, education, national infrastructure and other important areas are much the same as those of the Bush administration.

    I’m disappointed to see John represent himself politically in ways that are not accurate. He is not a moderate Republican. On some issues he is a maverick. But his voting record is far to the right. I fear for his nominations to our Supreme Court, and the consequent continuing loss of individual freedoms, especially regarding moral and religious issues. John is not a religious person, but he has taken every opportunity to ally himself with some really obnoxious and crazy fundamentalist ministers lately. I was also disappointed to see him cozy up to Bush because I know he hates that man. He disingenuously and famously put his arm around the guy, even after Bush had intensely disrespected him with lies and slander. So on these and many other instances, I don’t see that John is the “straight talk express” he markets himself to be.

    I eagerly await the Jays’ and mccanns’ explanations why Bud Day, Jerome Corsi, and Orson Swindle are noble ant totally believable superpatriot warrior poets, but Phillip Butler is secretly an pot-smoking Al Quaeda Communist mole.

  4. JWG says:

    everybody knows that all Prisoners of War and veterans support McCain

    Who ever argued this?

    Some will and some won’t — just like some swift vets supported Kerry and some didn’t. Let me know when Butler can provide any information contradicting McCain’s claims about a christian guard drawing a cross in the dirt.

  5. Jay says:

    Oh this is just effing grand:

    There’s been a ton of buzz on the web for the last day or so — beginning with this Daily Kos diary — suggesting that John McCain patterned his story about a Vietamese captor drawing a cross in the dirt before him on a similar episode from Russian novelist Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s time in the Soviet gulags.

    But it turns out that this episode probably never happened to Solzhenitsyn at all, and according to a Solzhenitsyn biographer it appears nowhere in his published writing. Columbia University professor Michael Scammell, the author of Solzhenitsyn: A Biography, says the episode “never happened,” and didn’t appear in Solzhenitsyn’s book, Gulag Archipelago, either.

    http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/08/solzhenitsyn_biographer_crossi.php

  6. JWG says:

    According to Sullivan:

    according to McCain, it was done with a sandal

    and now Oliver links to Sullivan and tries to claim that Bud Day gets the story wrong when he says the guard made a cross with his foot.

    Genius! Oliver is on the case and providing accurate analysis as usual!

    Here’s an idea: The film makers thought the imagery of “drawing” with a stick looked better visually than drawing with a shoe. Oh noes! They didn’t depict the event 100% accurately! McCain’s a dirty liar about his POW years!

    Comedy gold.

  7. SaveFarris says:

    I’ll bet the stick they used in the commercial wasn’t even indigenous to Vietnam! SOMEONE CALL A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR!!!!!

  8. JWG says:

    wasn’t even indigenous to Vietnam

    My God. There’s an angle I completely missed. McCain is going down in flames.

    OBAMA ‘08!!!!!!!

  9. Parthenon says:

    That it was not actually in the book proves very little.

    It appears to be somewhat widely believed that this happened to Solzhenistyn, such that it is reproduced in books and articles (the one originally quoted, from the Communion magazine) on the author.

    I’m not saying Sen. McCain lied – far from it – but the fact that it’s not actually in the book doesn’t dispute the fact that in certain circles it’s (or rather, it was) widely believed to have happened to Solzhenistyn. He could have read an article on the author just as easily and cribbed it from there. There’s probably nobody credible alive (in America, anyway, I doubt anybody’s placed a call to Vietnam) that can confirm this one way or the other.

  10. denis says:

    Solzhenitsyn Biographer: Cross-In-Dirt Gulag Story Never Happened

    …Anyway, this settles two aspects of this tale: This never happened to Solzhenitsyn, and there’s no way McCain could have picked it up from his works.

    Still, we have the all-important stick vs. sandal scandal still left unsolved.

    The plot thickens.

  11. Repack Rider says:

    McCain had a lot of time to put his “cross ” story into print, and he hasn’t been exactly hesitant in flogging the crap out of his POW years, since that seems to the only thing he has campaigned on during his entire political career. Why did it take over 25 years for it to get into print, and why does it so much resemble a story commonly if not accurately attributed to a writer for whom McCain has professed admiration?

    Ronald Reagan had a habit of reciting tales of heroism straight out of WW II propaganda films as though they had actually taken place, while he was watching. Was there ever a president that embarrassing? Until now, that is?

    But Ronald Reagan was old and suffered from Alzheimer’s, which destroyed his mental capacity sometime around 1983, so he can be excused for being a mere pawn of his corrupt lobbyist handlers, confused and helpless without notes to read from, shuffling by instinct between the white marks on the floor and smiling at his friend the camera, and reading the script prepared for him without understanding the meaning of the words.

    What’s McCain’s excuse?

  12. Matt says:

    Also keep in mind that Bud Day was John McCain’s divorce lawyer when McCain ended his first marriage.

  13. Well remember, we only call in a special prosecutor when the president has an affair with an intern.

  14. Duros Hussein 62 says:

    Dude! She wasn’t an intern! Do it right!

  15. JWG says:

    Ah, yes…the Clinton gambit! Oliver reminds us that it’s OK for a president to lie in court if he’s a democrat!

    Oliver on McCain: Oh, no! Was it a stick or a sandle?!!! Breaking news! Pants on Fire!

    Oliver on Clinton: So what if a democrat actually is a proven liar — I still love me some Slick Willy!!!

  16. Way to miss the point Bob.

    I don’t like people lying, one way or the other. Republicans want to eff the constitution over someone lying about an affair, I just think they should be ridiculed. I leave the impeachment to lies that caused people to die.

  17. JWG says:

    So you don’t think Nixon should’ve been threatened with impeachment? No one died in the Watergate scandal as far as I can remember. Maybe I’m wrong.

  18. Repack Rider says:

    No one died in the Watergate scandal as far as I can remember. Maybe I’m wrong.

    This just in. High crimes and misdemeanors do not always include killing.

    Clinton was impeached over a lie about a private matter of no consequence to the Republic and which did not deserve public attention, a lie that was not perjury, a lie that was removed from the public record when the case was settled out of court. His lie did not reach the level of a “high crime.”

    Shouldn’t the current fool be impeached if he lied about things that killed people?

    Clinton was required to testify under oath in a matter of no consequence to the Republic, although apparently White House staffers are not held to the same high legal standard as Democratic presidents. Should Bush be made to swear an oath and tell us about his actions in the White House?

  19. Jay Tea says:

    Clinton was impeached over a lie that subverted the course of a civil trial, a lie that threatened the right of an American citizen to seek redress for wrongs.

    And back to the topic at hand… we have McCain saying an incident occurred. We have a second party who says that yeah, he heard the same story way from McCain back when it would have been still fresh.

    On the other hand, we have a bunch of assholes who say “gee, McCain’s story sounds an awful lot like one from ‘The Gulag Archipelago.’ Er, um… we mean, it sounds like a story Solzhenitsyn told people, but didn’t put in his book. Er… make that, it sounds like a story someone said they heard from Solzhenitsyn, but he never actually told. Anyway, McCain MUST have made it up, ‘cuz… um… he’s like old and stuff, and… SWIFT BOAT!!!!!!”

    Yup. I definitely put a lot of stock in that second one.

    J.

  20. Quaker in a Basement says:

    a lie that threatened the right of an American citizen to seek redress for wrongs.

    Wow!

    And who was that American citizen? I believe you’re referring to Ms. Jones, who–in the tender care of conservative nutcases of varying stripes–sought “redress” for something that only turned into a “wrong” long after the fact, and only with the encouragement of Mr. Clinton’s political enemies.

    Yessiree. The fate of the Republic definitely hung in the balance on that one.

  21. aw says:

    Anyway, McCain MUST have made it up, ‘cuz… um… he’s like old and stuff,

    The story has been told by Billy Graham, who attributed it to Solzhenitsyn. It dates from the late 1970s. Obviously it can’t be disproved, and I’d give him the benefit of the doubt, but it’s weird. In any case, Bud Day is known to be both pro-Republican and very dishonest.

  22. Jay Tea says:

    Quaker, I’m not interested in re-hashing the whole Clinton impeachment mess, but Paula Jones sued Bill Clinton for sexual harassment, and the admissiveness of the Lewinsky affair was made legal by a law he himself signed.

    But hey, keep bringing up McCain’s five years as a prisoner of war. Keep that front and center in the minds of the American people as they head for the polls. That’s absolutely a winning move for you folks.

    J.

  23. Quaker in a Basement says:

    Quaker, I’m not interested in re-hashing the whole Clinton impeachment mess

    Mr. Tea, I know you’re not. You’re only interested in tossing out the usual hyperbole and hysteria when it serves your purposes to do so.

    It’s only when anyone correctly notices that you’re distributing taffy that you become “not interested.”