What Does "Sought" Mean?

This Sunday, Rev. John Hagee tells the New York Times Magazine that John McCain "sought" his endorsement.

Sought -- as in -- made a courtesy call with lovey-dovey words in it? Wrote letters? "Please, please, pastor Hagee? I need you?" Or was the importuning left to some staffer?

I ask because the lesson of the Hagee affair to many inside and outside McCain's campaign was that McCain really wasn't seeking Hagee's endorsement at the time and had no business showing up with him and was sort of roped into it by a campaign structure that is too lean to allow for sufficient political vetting of spur-of-the-moment ideas suggested by campaign allies.

In other words: the problem was avoidable because there really wasn't a net benefit to Hagee's nod. (Please -- McCain won Texas because of Hagee?)

Comments

This is just pointless rationalization for McCain.

The evidence, from Hagee himself, is that John McCain asked for his endorsement.

The rest is a hypothetical argument that McCain himself didn't ask for the endorsement, that it was some staffer or ally.

Why? Because it would have been unwise for McCain to ask for it himself.

And all things that McCain does are wise.

Ergo McCain did not ask for the endorsement; so instead it must have been some staffer.

But again, that's not what Hagee himself said.

So either post up some actual evidence that McCain didn't ask for the endorsement, or quit cluttering up your blog with sentimental rationalizations.

Posted by lampwick | March 21, 2008 12:37 PM

McCain is such a confused old soul. He calls Robertson and Falwell 'agents of intolerance' then goes on his knees and pleases them. So it is not surprising that McCain sought endorsement of 'catholic hating' Hagee.

Double Talk Express.

Posted by DB | March 21, 2008 12:49 PM

uhhh, Marc, if McCain doesn't need Hagee's endorsement, why hasn't he openly and explicitly renounced said endorsement? okay, maybe he doesn't want to seem like a "flip-flopper." but then why hasn't he at least strongly condemned Hagee's most inflammatory statements?

answer: BECAUSE MCCAIN ABSOLUTELY NEEDS THE SUPPORT OF RELIGIOUS CONSERVATIVES LIKE HAGEE.

your logic is brutal. as lampwick says "pointless rationalization for McCain."

Posted by mercurino | March 21, 2008 12:52 PM

Presumably, "sought" means just what it says.

We noted early last year that McCain was meeting with Hagee and citing him as evidence that he was making in roads with the Right:

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/2007/02/mccain_courts_a.html

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/2007/06/mccains_continu.html

Posted by RightWingWatch.org | March 21, 2008 2:12 PM

mercurino what are you talking about? McCain has fully condemened Hagee's offensive remarks by saying the following:

"We've had a dignified campaign, and I repudiate any comments that are made, including Pastor Hagee's, if they are anti-Catholic or offensive to Catholics," McCain said.

"I sent two of my children to Catholic school. I categorically reject and repudiate any statement that was made that was anti-Catholic, both in intent and nature. I categorically reject it, and I repudiate it," McCain said.

"And we can't have that in this campaign," McCain said. "We're trying to unite the country. We're uniting the country, not dividing it."

Posted by Jesse | March 21, 2008 3:48 PM

thank you jesse. i'm embarrassed to say that McCain's repudiation of Hagee's bigotry must not have penetrated my echo chamber. i stand corrected.

i think, however, as others have more compellingly pointed out in this thread, the larger criticism of Marc's post still stands. Marc's suggestion that McCain wasn't "seeking" the Hagee endorsement, but rather was just going along with the suggestion of some tone-deaf staffer really isn't credible. the Hagee endorsement burnishes McCain's religious right cred. that's the "net benefit," over the long term, that Marc just can't seem to divine.

Posted by mercurino | March 21, 2008 6:56 PM

Jesse seems to have a selective memory. McCain may "repudiate" the comments, but he still accepts his endorsement. And if Hagee is correct, McCain actively sought his endorsement. No one forced McCain to seek his endorsement. No one forced McCain to appear on a stage in a photo op with the man. These events were not coincidental or even accidental, they were all planned. Makes it all the more interesting when you read some of the other McCain's other comments that Jesse does not selectively quote.

Well I think it's important to note that pastor John Hagee who has supported and endorsed my candidacy supports what I stand for and believe in. When he endorses me, it does not mean that I embrace everything that he stands for and believes. And I am very proud of the Pastor John Hagee's spiritual leadership to thousands of people and I am proud of his commitment to the independence and the freedom of the state of Israel. That does not mean that I support or endorse or agree with some of the things that Pastor John Hagee might have said or positions that he may have taken on other issues. I don't have to agree with everyone who endorses my candidacy. They are supporting my candidacy. I am not endorsing some of their positions.

Link

The standards on religion and hate seem a bit different depending on the candidate I guess. And just so you know that I don't throw those words around lightly, here are some of Hage's choice comments.

Hagee on Catholicism

Most readers will be shocked by the clear record of history linking Adolf Hitler and the Roman Catholic Church in a conspiracy to exterminate the Jews.

Hagee stating emphatically that Jesus is NOT the Messiah
Youtube Link

Do you think Christians would be interested to know that McCain actively sought the support of a man that believes that Jesus is not the Messiah? Which is worse, anti-American statements or actual blasphemy?

Posted by Bubba | March 22, 2008 3:14 PM