McCain Removed Troop Support Site From Campaign Website
Well the folks over at Versionista.com sent me this email today, I thought I might add some pictures to explain what they found. Senator McCain, the supposed supporter of the troops removed a troop support site from his campaign website. Before and After:
The site in question:
Anyone care to explain this?… BB-Idaho correctly sourced this site in the comments so please do take a look.
August 09 2008 12:06 am | American Politics
August 9th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Interesting: at http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=America_Supports_You we learn that the ‘charity’ is sponsored by DOD, but that a PR firm with close links to the Bush admin runs it. It appears they specialize in cheerleading, rather than actual aid. One can only wonder if the McCain campaign is pre-empting any suggestion that he is unduly infuence by that camp; or some argument or misunderstanding with them occurred.
August 9th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
I think you are spot on with that statement BB, a pre-emption, thanks for the link, that explains a lot and it will be my official explanation for the change.
August 9th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
I think BB may be right. Besides, McCain is attempting to disassociate himself from President Bush in order to pick up more independents. This could be tricky though because it will upset some conservatives.
August 10th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
You make a good point Gayle, I think you have mentioned this to me before that trying to dissassociate himself from President Bush, Senator McCain might be making a lot of people angry. Maybe this factors into his calculation though? I think Senator Obama is in the same situation in not strongly advocating certain liberal views with regards to drilling etc… We will only be able to determine whose strategy is better after the election.
August 10th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
1. it is not a charity org. as you allege, Crian. it never was set up to be. it is a DoD site meant to generate support for the troops.
2. considering where it was at on McCain’s site it could have been deleted for any number of reasons, none of them impugning his support of the troops which you very clearly imply.
3. where is the fairness in your implication?
August 10th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
Hey Griper, using the word charity was a mistake on my part. Couldn’t think of the right word at the time but it has been changed as you can see.
It could have been removed for a number of reasons and my implication may not be fair, it was simply meant to promote discussion on the topic.
BB clarified the issue and I have made the change.
August 10th, 2008 at 6:20 pm
ok, discussion then. but since there are no facts to base it on then it could be that his campaign thought it best not being seen as being associated with a possible scandle that could develop with the inquiry about improper use of funds.
or, since it was under the title of “featured sites”, they could have just deleted it because they no longer wished to feature that site.
in other words, any discussion about this at the moment would be discussions of speculations with any number of speculations being as valid as any other.
August 11th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
Very true again Griper :), given that there are numerous other issues to discuss. Speculation on all the possible possibilities could take a very long time. Thank you yet again.