« COLEMAN POKES FUN AT FRANKEN’S WORKERS’ COMP PROBLEMS | Home | REPORTER COMPLIMENTS COLEMAN FOR ANSWERING QUESTION AFTER CAMPAIGN EVENT; POSTS PICTURE OF FRANKEN STAFF USHERING FRANKEN “OUT OF THE CAPITOL” »
MINNESOTA MONITOR ISSUES APOLOGY FOR ATTACK ON MCCAIN; NOW ANOTHER LIBERAL BLOG BLAMES MCCAIN’S TEETH ON “POOR PRISON NUTRITION”
By Michael B. Brodkorb | March 26, 2008
First, I was happy to read that Minnesota Monitor finally issued a formal apology about their shocking attack on Senator McCain's teeth. Minnesota Monitor did the right thing, as McCain's teeth were broken at the gum while being tortured as a P.O.W.
But now another liberal blogger, Charlie Quimby, is questioning whether McCain had his teeth broken while a P.O.W.:
"Much of McCain's dental problems were more likely the product of poor prison nutrition…" Source: Across the Great Divide, March 26, 2008
Click here for the complete post.
Mr. Quimby also claims the facts surrounding McCain's torture are being invented:
"There's no need to invent details of McCain's suffering or the persistent consequences. But that's what 'many of his teeth broken at the gum' appears to be." Source: Across the Great Divide, March 26, 2008
Click here for the complete post.
Poor prison nutrition? Are you kidding me? I'll point Mr. Quimby to excerpts of Senator McCain's book that details the horrors of his torture as a P.O.W.:
"They cracked several of my ribs and broke a couple of teeth. Weakened by beatings and dysentery, with my right leg again almost useless, I found it impossible to stand." Source: Herald Sun, March 2, 2008
Click here for the complete story.
I find Mr. Quimby's post as equally disturbing as the original attack on McCain from Minnesota Monitor. The folks at Minnesota Monitor can claim "we didn't know" that McCain's teeth were broken at the gum while being tortured as a P.O.W. But Mr. Quimby's post takes a more perverse track by blaming McCain's teeth on "poor prison nutrition" and by questioning whether people, presumably McCain, are inventing "details of McCain's suffering."
If you believe Mr. Quimby's ridiculous theory, the invention of any facts must have been done by McCain, since I and other bloggers are citing McCain's own account of his torture. Mr. Quimby's charge of fact invention is shockingly preposterous.
Tags: Uncategorized
Topics: Uncategorized | 34 Comments »
34 Responses to “MINNESOTA MONITOR ISSUES APOLOGY FOR ATTACK ON MCCAIN; NOW ANOTHER LIBERAL BLOG BLAMES MCCAIN’S TEETH ON “POOR PRISON NUTRITION””
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:28 PM
Say, Michael?
Suffereing through ol’ Smokescreen’s 30 minutes of sounding like a democrat sure has you in a foul mood…..
March 26th, 2008 at 6:32 PM
TPT: It was nice talking with you again today. I’m not in a foul mood, but rather sickened by Mr. Quimby’s post.
March 26th, 2008 at 8:02 PM
Mention a slimy POS and 2punk is the first to float to the surface.
March 26th, 2008 at 8:20 PM
Leave it to TPT (for Too Pathetic Twice-over) to forget what subject we’re on.
I can only imagine this scene from school about 1,000 years ago:
Teacher: Tommy, what’s 2 plus 2?
Tommy: 6 Republican con artists! (It’s a public school, after all.)
Teacher: Tommy, can you name the primary colors?
Tommy: Smokescreen is one!
March 26th, 2008 at 8:45 PM
2punk wasn’t able to go to school SJ. He was with John Kerry, deep in the jungles of Vietnam goin’ hand to hand with the VC.
He won the Congressional Medal of Honor, and he’d show it to ya, but his dog ate it.
March 26th, 2008 at 9:39 PM
I’ve already responded to your ridiculous comment over at my blog, where readers will discover:
a) In my original post, I linked to the McCain statement you only now cite, and unlike you, Michael, I used it to provide more context for my readers. Thanks for pointing out to me what I already pointed out to you. It shows how carefully you check things.
b) I did not say McCain’s dental woes were entirely due to nutrition or that he invented anything. In fact, I used that as an explanation for how “a couple” could become “many.” Since you and your tabloid source did not quote McCain himself, I had to come up with some explanation for your statement.
c) In no way did I condone the original post or make light of Sen. McCain’s service.
Please get well soon.
March 26th, 2008 at 9:47 PM
“since I and other bloggers are citing McCain’s own account of his torture. Mr. Quimby’s charge of fact invention is shockingly preposterous.”
Readers should click on Michael’s link to “McCain’s own account,” which he didn’t bother to include in his original post. You’ll see it substantiates my post which did link to it. The “invention” was not McCain’s, but Michael conflating two after-the-fact, secondhand summaries.
He’s counting on you stopping at “shockingly preposterous.”
March 26th, 2008 at 11:21 PM
Mr. Quimby: Do the right thing and apologize/correct your post.
March 26th, 2008 at 11:36 PM
Mr. Brodkorb,
I’m going to do something even better. I’m going to ask people to read what I wrote instead of what you said I wrote.
March 26th, 2008 at 11:54 PM
I quoted your perverse post accurately and provided links. Do the right thing and apologize/correct your post. I’ll remind you that you blamed McCain’s teeth on “poor prison nutrition” and questioned whether people, presumably McCain, were inventing “details of McCain’s suffering.”
March 27th, 2008 at 12:07 AM
Quimby and his ilk are just another part of the partisan disease…
March 27th, 2008 at 12:49 AM
Poor prison nutrition. This implies that John McCain has a criminal background. McCain was “prisoner of war” in the “Hanoi Hilton”.
March 27th, 2008 at 5:07 AM
MDE faithful have gone after public schools, veterans, John Kerry [killing an NVA or VC in the Mekong Delta (not deep in the jungles of Vietnam)],but God forbid that buzzword should mention anything about gaps in former POW’s teeth.
Them’s fightin’ words. The WWII uncles at the Hopkins VFW are comin’ after you.
Never mind that there is a war going on in Iraq and over 4,000 American soldiers [all volunteers as Dick Cheney has recently referred to them] are dead, while much of America has moved on.
March 27th, 2008 at 6:08 AM
Love it – vicious torture by like-minded communists is now defined as “poor nutrition” by liberals nut jobs. This, ladies and gents, is what you’d get by putting these guys totally in charge of government.
March 27th, 2008 at 7:34 AM
Ya know, Michael – it’s a good thing for you you’re a GOPer, because your shoddy journalism wouldn’t make it in the reality based world.
Why do I say this? Facts, Michael – facts. Here’s what set you off, this time:
“Much of McCain’s dental problems were more likely the product of poor prison nutrition…” Source: Across the Great Divide, March 26, 2008
Here’s what Newsweek said (and which I posted on an earlier thread):
***
During the 2000 election, Republican smear artists (emphasis added)trying to stop the presidential campaign of John McCain spread rumors that the former POW was “nuts” because he had been “in the cage too long”—in the Hanoi Hilton for five and a half years. The campaign decided to make public Captain (now Senator) McCain’s medical records, which showed that he had an enlarged prostate and trouble lifting his arms (repeatedly broken in captivity), but had been judged perfectly sane by a series of Navy psychiatrists who had tested him for years after his release from prison.
The details of those medical evaluations make you wonder why McCain is not stark raving mad today. Tortured repeatedly to extract a confession, McCain “tried to hang himself X2 to avoid giving in,” reads the report of a psychiatrist at Jacksonville Naval Hospital in Florida who had interviewed McCain in 1973. “Broke three teeth as a result of rocks in diet,” records another. (emphasis added) Last week, as I read to McCain from these long-ago documents, he chimed in, “And also a fist in the face a couple of times.”
***
Rest of story, here: http://www.newsweek.com/id/107581
“poor nutrition” versus “rocks in the diet”.
That’s where we’re at.
So, Michael – your complaint against Mr. Quimby only has validity, depending upon what your definition of “poor nutrition” is.
March 27th, 2008 at 7:35 AM
Chet – do try to keep up, won’t you?
March 27th, 2008 at 7:36 AM
Charlie,
I’ve read yours and Michael’s accounts, as well as Mac’s book, and – it should surprise nobody – copiously about the experiences of POWs in Vietnam.
And, with all due respect, your response to this flap sounds more like pointillistic hair-splitting than anything else.
Mac says he had his teeth knocked out. So let’s hypohetically take your point – that malnutrition, rather than the business end of a club, were the cultprit.
Is that much of an improvement?
Mac lost ‘em in captivity. And while I duly note your condemnation of Priesmeyer’s post, the point atop my point is “is there REALLY a ‘buzz’ on the web about this? Why? And do we chalk it up to ignorance or mental illness?”
Molly P and the Minnesoros Monitor, for all the fun they’ve given us this last few days, are just the tip of the iceberg. A squalid, rotten iceberg.
March 27th, 2008 at 7:45 AM
Mitch, why is it GOPers refuse to condemn the smearing of McCain in the 2000 race, especially what happened during the South Carolina primary, but get their panties in a wad when a liberal says something stupid?
Could it be that they really don’t give a rat’s ass about McCain, but instead are only interested in taking partisan shots?
This episode, which escalated from condemning – correctly – MinnMon, has turned again into partisan sniping, with the worst invective coming from them that gave GW Bush a pass.
March 27th, 2008 at 7:49 AM
Keeping up with OneNutTommy is hardly a challenge. Commies like you are so easy.
March 27th, 2008 at 8:17 AM
Tommy, GOPers DO CONDEMN any “smearing” of John McCain in 2000. Do you really think we don’t, just because you say so?
March 27th, 2008 at 8:36 AM
You Dem’s sure dig the gutter for crap.
March 27th, 2008 at 9:11 AM
Speaking of duplicity, I’m astonished how accepting Democrats are of their candidate’s close personal and political association with a racist, hate-mongering, bigot.
Though… racism, hate-mongering and bigotry are core Democrat principles.
March 27th, 2008 at 9:29 AM
Bogie,
Mitch, why is it GOPers refuse to condemn the smearing of McCain in the 2000 race
I did.
get their panties in a wad when a liberal says something stupid?
The correct term is “respond”. If we got our *underwear* in a wad every time a liberal said something stupid, our legs would be chafed down to the femur.
Could it be that they really don’t give a rat’s ass about McCain, but instead are only interested in taking partisan shots?
Sure, it could be exactly that!
It’s exceptionally unlikely, but “could” is a very inclusive term. Barack Obama could put a unicorn in every garage! I could spend a torrid weekend with Scarlett Johannson! I could not give a “rat’s ass” about Mac!
(But as a matter of fact, while I disgree with much of Mac’s politics, I am supporting him for president, as he will quite simply be the best of the three options facing us at the moment. Hope that answers your “question”).
And you say “taking partisan shots” like it’s both a bad thing, and not your entire oeuvre as a commenter…
This episode, which escalated from condemning – correctly – MinnMon, has turned again into partisan sniping, with the worst invective coming from them that gave GW Bush a pass.
And there’s that whole “Correlation equals causation” thing, to make the trifecta of logical fallacies!
March 27th, 2008 at 11:09 AM
(But as a matter of fact, while I disgree with much of Mac’s politics, I am supporting him for president, as he will quite simply be the best of the three options facing us at the moment. Hope that answers your “questionâ€).
Well, at the beginning of the GOPer presidential season, I was mighty encouraged – because it sure looked like no matter who the republiCons nominated, we were gonna get a democrat! Now, with McCain the Chosen One, it’s a gimme!!!
The best thing about that crowd “The Party Of Family Values” ran for prez?
The only guy that was only married once, was the Mormon!!!
Yep, Mitch – McCain, Obama, or Shrillerie – don’t matter which, there’ll be a democrat in the Oval Office next January!!!
And after yesterday’s speech, it looks like ol’ Smokescreen’s a democrat once again, too!!!
March 27th, 2008 at 11:22 AM
The best thing about that crowd “The Party Of Family Values†ran for prez?
The only guy that was only married once, was the Mormon!!!
OK, Tommy – I’m onto you.
You’re really Tracy Eberly, doing a parody of a Tic commenter. Even the “less gifted” Democrats have given up on that slur.
Ironically invoking “family values” is sooo 1990.
You are so busted.
March 27th, 2008 at 1:24 PM
In your dreams, Mitch.
That “Party of Family Values” (well, actually, lack thereof) still rings a bell in moderate circles.
And they still respond to the story of Newt Gingrich rollin’ off a bimbo, to go persecute The Slickster for rollin’ a bimbo.
It’s the ol’ hypocrisy deal, and nobody does that hypocrisy deal better than the GreedOverPrinciples party.
March 27th, 2008 at 1:47 PM
Mitch,
“Pointillistic hair-splitting” is one way to put it, but I prefer “pointing out how Michael’s post builds an exaggeration” from one fact — which I quoted from the start. He persisted in paraphrase because McCain’s actual words didn’t quite fit his blasted mouth meme.
My point, among several, was that malnutrition, the difficulty of maintaining hygeine in a long captivity AND than the business end of a club, were all culprits. Broken teeth evoke the most sympathy and outrage, obviously, and that’s why Michael chose to make McCain’s “couple” into “many” and turn “Michael’s inventing” into “McCain’s inventing.”
March 27th, 2008 at 3:39 PM
What is not explained Charlie is your obvious reach to question McCain’s treatment as a prinior of war. Something a keyboard worrior like yourself does not understand. I guess it really matters how he lost his teeth, at least to wimpy liberal whiners such as yourself. Well maybe puddles too.
I know, let’s bring up Hitlery’s stinky va-jay-jay, that seems like the kind of stories Charlie would be into.
March 27th, 2008 at 3:42 PM
little stones – BRILLIANT!!!
March 28th, 2008 at 12:51 AM
Was Norm Coleman LESS ANGRY than Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer that 4,000 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq?
March 28th, 2008 at 12:56 AM
If so, does that make Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer and ANGRY Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer?
March 28th, 2008 at 11:37 AM
Jack is just crazy. not really angry.
Jack is such a joke, I hope that is hwo you are voting for there el pres.
Liberals are not upset with the American death toll what so ever! It is just merely a way to try and use for political gain. Do you really think this country is going to ever forget how liberals treated vets returning home from Vietnam? Not in our lifetime, which is why the democRats have no real support from the military at voting time.
Charlie, puddles, el pres….. all flaiming liberals who could care less about the service men and women, they just like the idea of a political score.
Rather disgusting crowd if you ask me.
March 28th, 2008 at 6:12 PM
Charles Quimby simply needs to be put into a cage and put in the same position as John McCain. Only this time, it should be in somewhere like Burma.
Let’s see how he likes it, THEN let him blog about it.
March 29th, 2008 at 2:50 AM
Do you really think that the Vietnam Vets individually and collectively, are really going to let people forget how some of the CONSERVATIVES treated them upon their return from Vietnam?
The Vietnam Vets didn’t fight in the BIG War [WWII]. That attitude is not too distant from the attitude displayed on this MDE Board with the Hopkins VFW, Post 425.
It was as ridiculous back then, as it is ridiculous now. But it happened then, and it is happening on this board, now.
If you talk to some of the older Vietname Vets who came back sooner, you will find out about the overt HOSTILITY that they encountered in some of the American Legion Clubs and in some of the Veterans of Foreign Wars Posts.