John McCain Caught Playing iPhone During Senate Syria Hearing

[RJ 17]

Yeah, I miss Reagan too.

I was talking about Canadian politics.

Politicians like Reagan and Thatcher were the beginning of a mainstream radicalization of right wing politics that has been largely responsible for our current situation of Us vs. Them in politics.

Really? That's why Reagan had the cooperation of both democrats and republicans and was one of the few presidents in "recent" history to actually listen to both sides of an argument and wasn't afraid to go with the option offered by his "opposition" if he thought it had merits? But yeah, you're right, Reagan was the anti-christ, sorry for bringing him up.

I should inform you though that I truly hate discussing politics on the internet, it's about as useless a lightbulb on the sun. You've taken your shot, I offered my response, if you wish to discuss politics beyond that I'm afraid you'll have to look elsewhere.

 

[Gorrath]

Just to clear things up a bit, if there is a Senate vote it is not going to be about declaring war or 'murdering countless people'. The operation being considered is a limited strike with no ground forces being deployed in order to punish the regime for its use of chemical weapons against civilians.

I'm curious as to what you think a strike will do if it's not kill people. I'm imagining the missiles and bombs approaching their target then, Loony Tunes style, a big paddle comes out and swats the bottoms of those durn guilty parties.

Any military action will result in deaths, and inevitably civilian deaths to boot. Telling yourself or others anything else is deluded at best.

The best case scenario that anyone can advocate through military action is that by the US stepping in and killing more people now they can avert a larger death toll in the long run.

I'm not saying U.S. strikes won't lead to deaths, what I was reacting to was your characterization of the hearing as being about a declaration of war that would lead to 'murdering countless people'. That characterization is sensationalized, as any U.S. strikes being currently debated do not involve a war declaration nor will they lead to 'murdering countless people'. What's more, I am not deluding myself into anything, I am simply stating that the way you framed the debate is far from what the debate is actually about.

The supposed merit of the strikes is that they are meant to serve as punitive against the regime for using banned chemical weapons against civilian populations, because if nothing is done by anyone it may embolden the regime to continue to use such weapons. Inaction may also lead to other regimes thinking that, since there will be no international reaction to the use of chemical weapons on civilians, that they too can do it with impunity.

I'm not weighing in on one side or the other myself, I am simply rejecting your notion that punitive strikes over the use of chemical weapons equates to a declaration of war and the murder of countless people.

 

[MCerberus]

Yeah, I miss Reagan too.

I was talking about Canadian politics.

Politicians like Reagan and Thatcher were the beginning of a mainstream radicalization of right wing politics that has been largely responsible for our current situation of Us vs. Them in politics.

Really? That's why Reagan had the cooperation of both democrats and republicans and was one of the few presidents in "recent" history to actually listen to both sides of an argument and wasn't afraid to go with the option offered by his "opposition" if he thought it had merits? But yeah, you're right, Reagan was the anti-christ, sorry for bringing him up.

I should inform you though that I truly hate discussing politics on the internet, it's about as useless a lightbulb on the sun. You've taken your shot, I offered my response, if you wish to discuss politics beyond that I'm afraid you'll have to look elsewhere.

In the sense that they'd be branded communist nutbags if you disagree with them then yes, they forced cooperation with their side. Reagan in particular showed a lot of the... effects... of being pretty much hand-chosen for success by J. Edgar Hoover.

But you're right, the Us vs Them thing really had more historic roots in Nixon's "southern strategy", "war on drugs", and the consecutive rise of Murdoch than on the two administrations mentioned.

 

[deathjavu]

Everyone in the thread complaining about intervention in Syria by comparing it to past actions is totally right- we should definitely compare Syria to the most recent military action the US was involved in before making our decision...

Iraq?. WRONG. The most recent action was taken in Libya!

An action so short, the American people somehow promptly forgot about it immediately after it happened! An action so effective, Libyans were waving American flags in the street! And when the American ambassador was killed, they were so mad they rioted and burned down the headquarters of the organization believed responsible (not that it was the right thing to do, but I mention it to point out that their positive feelings for America were that strong).

Anyway, there isn't a person in the first world who doesn't start playing iPhone/Android games during a three+ hour presentation that is/was incredibly repetitive (I should know, I watched more than half of it). What, you guys are mad that senators are no better than you? Why would they be?

Another article trying to grab the obvious knee-jerk response, "neutral" but still written in such a way as to suggest we should be mad.

Where were all these furious people when the head of the IP enforcement left to become a corporate lobbyist? Where was this righteous anger when Assad started this killing two and a half years ago? Where were you all when crop genes were patented and then these patents were enforced on unrestrained seed pollination across farms?

No, you people saved up your fury for someone who played iPhone during a long repetitive meeting, something several of you have effectively admitted to doing yourselves. Good job people, you're definitely changing the world. Your indignation totally isn't faker than a three dollar bill.

 

[Something Amyss]

I'm just impressed he finally knows what an iPhone is.

Politicians sleep during voting sessions in my corrupt country. This is nothing.

They do in 'Murrrrica, too.

 

[Hero of Lime]

From what I've been following, he probably already knows everything about the issue being a huge military guy. Can't blame him anyway, those briefings are pretty boring to watch, they can't be any more interesting in person.

I also just realized he and most other older politicians probably have gotten a smart phone before I do. I'm so behind!

 

[NeedsaBetterName22]

Ha, if you guys think this is bad, you should check out John Kerry when someone is directly talking to him. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?=fEcch-r28Bc] Man seems to think if he doesn't have eye contact with someone he can't hear them.

 

[WouldYouKindly]

We all know he's already made up his mind. Whatever is said, he knows how he's going to vote. That being said, who cares? If I were in his position I'd be doing the same thing, my mind already made up in the opposite way. Basically, if I don't have to option to not be there, I'll sleep or play on my phone, maybe get stuck in the tv tropes wormhole again.

 

[RJ 17]

Yeah, I miss Reagan too.

I was talking about Canadian politics.

Politicians like Reagan and Thatcher were the beginning of a mainstream radicalization of right wing politics that has been largely responsible for our current situation of Us vs. Them in politics.

Really? That's why Reagan had the cooperation of both democrats and republicans and was one of the few presidents in "recent" history to actually listen to both sides of an argument and wasn't afraid to go with the option offered by his "opposition" if he thought it had merits? But yeah, you're right, Reagan was the anti-christ, sorry for bringing him up.

I should inform you though that I truly hate discussing politics on the internet, it's about as useless a lightbulb on the sun. You've taken your shot, I offered my response, if you wish to discuss politics beyond that I'm afraid you'll have to look elsewhere.

In the sense that they'd be branded communist nutbags if you disagree with them then yes, they forced cooperation with their side. Reagan in particular showed a lot of the... effects... of being pretty much hand-chosen for success by J. Edgar Hoover.

But you're right, the Us vs Them thing really had more historic roots in Nixon's "southern strategy", "war on drugs", and the consecutive rise of Murdoch than on the two administrations mentioned.

You mean kinda like how anyone that disagrees with Obama is labeled a racist, thus forcing his opposition to "cooperate" with his administration lest they have that little sticker slapped onto them? Yes, clearly the left is entirely innocent when it comes to politics.

It's one big BS game that plays with the lives of the citizens in every country. No one side is better than the other, they're ALL full of shit. That's why, as I said in the post you quoted: I refuse to talk politics on the internet. So after responding to your little shot with one of my own, I'll tell you what I told Jumwa: "If you wish to discuss politics beyond (this), I'm afraid you'll have to look elsewhere."

 

[Mangod]

Normally, I'd lambast senator McCain on principle, but... I can actually sympathise with him (a bit) on this one. Sitting still for three hours is mindnumbing no matter what you're doing. I used to be a pretty dedicated WoW player, it was a game I enjoyed... but if I had to sit and play it for more than 90 minutes, I'd get so antsy I had to get up and take a walk around the house, grab a drink, read the newspaper, and water the flowers on the balcony before I could start playing again, because of monotony.

Yes, Mr. McCain probably shouldn't have been playing poker during a senate hearing... but the hearing should probably have had a fifteen minute break in the middle to let people stretch their legs and catch some fresh air too.

 

[EditGames]

People are comparing their 3 hour lectures which benefits themselves to this is kinda ridiculous. He is getting paid to listen and judge what to do and its an extremely serious matter where it isn't affecting his future , but other peoples. He should apologize instead of joking about it.
Yes , its boring , but its your job. Treat it as one.

 

[walrusaurus]

Anyone ever been in a VERY LONG ASS lecture or speech or seminar?

...

Admit it...most of us could not sit through three straight HOURS of something without letting our mind wander.

I had three hour once a week courses.
We NEEDED a 15 minute break in it because no one could pay attention through the entire damn thing.

Ya, I do it 4 days a week, along with a massive percentage of the rest of the country. I work 10 hour shifts, during which time you get three breaks, plus the nature of my work is such that i am often unable to go on break when scheduled. It is quite common that i'll go 4 or more hours w/o a break.

It's his job; and when your job means deciding whether we, as a nation, murder countless thousands of people, you f*ing sit there and you f*ing listen. I don't care how much you think you already know, these are human beings' lives your playing with, and he can't even be bothered to stop playing poker??

I always think that i have no more rage to spend on our useless politicians in this country, but somehow one of them always finds a way. This just makes me sick.

Disgusting.

And I am sure you are 100% focused every possible second of your shift every day from the second you clock on to the second you clock off right?

And there are some people that have this ability known as multitasking. It is an amazing feat let me tell you! Myself, and most of my friends, can be watching a TV show, or playing a videogame and carry on conversations at the same time! Or even listen to what someone is saying and be able to recall it just fine. Amazing I know.

And playing video poker takes considerably less attention than some of the games we play.

Though you shouldn't really expect anyone to take you seriously when you use lines like "murdering countless thousands of people" for some strikes that would kill maybe hundreds. This isnt about going to war, in case you missed the finer points of what is going on.

Ofc i'm not 100% focused 100% of the time. But there's a massive difference between that and playing games. If i pulled out my phone and started playing games during my shift i would be fired on the spot. Multitasking has nothing to do with it.

On the subject of how many people will be killed. You must not have been around when they were beating the drums on Iraq. "limited action" "we'll be in and out in 60 days" we heard the exact same bullshit back then, and that just turned out peachy didn't it. SO forgive me if I'm not willing to give our beloved poker-playing politicians the benefit of the doubt.

 

[McMullen]

Admit it...most of us could not sit through three straight HOURS of something without letting our mind wander.

Most of us don't get paid $174,000 through taxes to do exactly that either. This was his job, and we're paying him to do it. It's fair to expect some professionalism in return.

 

[Lightknight]

Good for him. I hope more Senators start doing the same thing. Most of the time nothing is really be said that matters anyways. It doesn't matter what people say, it matters what's in the text of the bills. People can say a bill is all about giving children a good home but if the bill is all about making orphans work for the government then why pay attention to the words being spoken when the effect of the law relies only on words.

 

[Something Amyss]

Ya, I do it 4 days a week, along with a massive percentage of the rest of the country. I work 10 hour shifts, during which time you get three breaks, plus the nature of my work is such that i am often unable to go on break when scheduled. It is quite common that i'll go 4 or more hours w/o a break.

It's his job; and when your job means deciding whether we, as a nation, murder countless thousands of people, you f*ing sit there and you f*ing listen. I don't care how much you think you already know, these are human beings' lives your playing with, and he can't even be bothered to stop playing poker??

I always think that i have no more rage to spend on our useless politicians in this country, but somehow one of them always finds a way. This just makes me sick.

Disgusting.

I never really thought asking someone to do their damn job would end up being so controversial. Of course, here we are.

Of course, I'm surrounded by people who can't even finish a sentence without checking Twitter, but I would hope someone important enough to be deciding if military intervention is necessary would have a little more focus.

Outrageous!

Proper behaviour in that situation is to take a nap. I thought the newbies would be briefed on correct procedures.

Well, you know kids these days with their vidya games....

And I am sure you are 100% focused every possible second of your shift every day from the second you clock on to the second you clock off right?

The natural conclusion then, is to do something that takes even more of your focus away.

And there are some people that have this ability known as multitasking. It is an amazing feat let me tell you! Myself, and most of my friends, can be watching a TV show, or playing a videogame and carry on conversations at the same time! Or even listen to what someone is saying and be able to recall it just fine. Amazing I know.

People who think they are good at multi-tasking have a tendency not to be and humans as a whole tend to over-assess themselves.

Nobody talks on the phone while driving and thinks "I'm really shit at this!"

Yet a ton of people do it and it's dangerous because they are, in fact, really shit at it.

And playing video poker takes considerably less attention than some of the games we play.

so....What? I mean, should we be thankful he wasn't playing an Ace Attorney game?

Though you shouldn't really expect anyone to take you seriously when you use lines like "murdering countless thousands of people" for some strikes that would kill maybe hundreds. This isnt about going to war, in case you missed the finer points of what is going on.

That's a largely semantic argument. "war" is used to describe any number of military actions and the odds of body counts even in an 90 day window (which Obama is likely to use all of, as he wants resolution with no end) are likely to be high with collateral damage pretty much a given. We can't even keep ourselves from killing civilians (and sometimes only civilians) with a single drone strike.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Anyone ever been in a VERY LONG ASS lecture or speech or seminar?

You could play a game of Monopoly in some of them and not miss anything!
Now granted this does look bad.

But at which point he is playing may lessen it.
I mean it could have just been two people arguing in circles.
Or something they went over already.

Admit it...most of us could not sit through three straight HOURS of something without letting our mind wander.

I had three hour once a week courses.
We NEEDED a 15 minute break in it because no one could pay attention through the entire damn thing.

Still it does look bad for an elected official in a war committee to be doing that.
At least he was not looking at porn.

this is all true, i've had 4-5 hour sessions (class combined with lab) and it was just disgusting how low productivity would get at some points, and as you mentioned during seminars and shit if someone is just going in circles/arguing, screw that noise, play a game to pass the time.

 

[Micalas]

I'm just glad he was caught playing a game as opposed to being caught sending out pictures of his crotch.

Because that would be a real war crime.

I'm pretty sure that if anyone in Congress near his age sent out a crotch pic, both Chambers would unanimously vote to strike the offender's house.

OT: McCain's very savy about military matters. You may not agree with his opinions on military matters, but the raw knowledge is there.

 

[Fox12]

Honestly, I don't understand why people think they hate each other, I'm surprised they haven't announced their engagement yet.

Probably because every Sunday after he lost the election he's gone on Meet The Press to complain about everything the President has done, is doing and will do in the future.

As Bill Maher put it: "New Rule: John McCain has to try spending a Sunday morning with his family. Look, Senator, I'm with you, anything to avoid church. But, come on, it's Sunday morning. There's got to be an easier way to tell Lindsey Graham you don't want to cuddle."

Mccain loves Obamas foreign policy, the only thing that he's criticized him about on Syria is that he hasn't bombed it fast enough. He's also just as quick to condemn dissidents in his own party as he is the president. While Rand Paul was delivering his filibuster about the dangers of domestic drone use, Mccain was at the White House discussing policy. The next day he vehemently defended Obama against Rand. They also agree on domestic spying programs. Many of their difference are frankly artificial, with the exception of Obamacare. A number of his major bills have been co-sponsored with Democrats. Mccain works quite a lot with Obama on major issues, and I'm honestly finding it difficult to see a difference any more.

I'm not a fan of either party, so whichever side he joins doesn't matter to me.

 

[craddoke]

Well, we already know that Mr. "Keating Five" likes to gamble (Google it). This isn't really too surprising.