So, last Monday, I wrote about how John McCain's spokesperson tried to use McCain time in Vietnam as a counterpoint for people pointing out that he had access to the secret forum questions before hand. Now, just four days later, Obama attacks McCain for having seven different houses. To counter that, McCain spokesman Brian Rogers use the same POW argument:

[Rogers] also added: "This is a guy who lived in one house for five and a half years -- in prison," referring to the prisoner of war camp that McCain was in during the Vietnam War.

Rogers called the house story "by far the most personal attack" of the campaign, and said "it comes from a candidate who said he was against this kind of thing."

Umm...what?

Anywho, I like Trapper John's response over at Daily Kos:

Lord. McCain is Giuliani-like at this point in his single-minded determination to cling to the one positive association that his campaign retains in the public mind. You have to wonder how'd he'd react to other, hypothetical scandals:

McCain Accused Of Taking Bribes From Abramoff: "This is a guy who didn't touch hard currency for five and a half years -- in prison," spokesman Brian Rogers told the Washington Post.

2003 McCain Arrest for DWI Uncovered: "This is a guy who didn't have a sip of booze for five and a half years -- in prison," spokesman Brian Rogers told the Washington Post.

McCain Caught Cheating With 22 Year-Old ASU Intern: "This is a guy who didn't get laid at all for five and a half years -- in prison," spokesman Brian Rogers told the Washington Post.

So, a few days ago, Obama and McCain participated in a forum with Evangelical preacher Rick Warren, to test them on issues that the Evangelical voting bloc will focus on. Sen. Obama went first, while Sen. McCain was supposedly kept in a "Cone of Silence" to keep him from having time to prepare for an almost identical round of questions. Now it comes to light that McCain had not been in the building at the time, and therefore could theoretically overheard the questions on the radio. Of course, the McCain campaign denies this, and frankly I don't really care either way, but one comment by a McCain spokeswoman caught my attention:

Nicolle Wallace, a spokeswoman for Mr. McCain, said on Sunday night that Mr. McCain had not heard the broadcast of the event while in his motorcade and heard none of the questions.

“The insinuation from the Obama campaign that John McCain, a former prisoner of war, cheated is outrageous,” Ms. Wallace said.

Now, I certainly don't envy McCain for the crap he had to endure in Vietnam, and I respect his decision to refuse an early release. But I not quite seeing how being tortured in Vietnam would make anyone more or less honest. Sure it might make some people reevaluate their lives for the better, but it'll make just as many people turn inward and become angered and resentful, as apparently occured with Sen. McCain in the years following his return.

I am concerned about the increasing willingness to treat criticism of the military as unacceptable. About a month ago, Gen. Wesley Clark drew the ire of the McCain campaign when he discussed McCain's foreign policy experience^[PDF] on CBS's Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer: (emphasis mine)

Gen. CLARK: ...[H]e hasn't held executive responsibility. That large squadron in the Navy that he commanded wasn't a wartime squadron. He hasn't been there and ordered the bombs to fall. He hasn't seen what it's like when diplomats come in and say, 'I don't know whether we're going to be able to get this point through or not. Do you want to take the risk? What about your reputation? How do we handle it publicly?'

[...]

SCHIEFFER: I have to say, Barack Obama has not had any of those experiences either, nor has he ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down. I mean...

Gen. CLARK: Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president.

SCHIEFFER: Really?

The response from the McCain campaign?

In a statement released by the McCain campaign Sunday afternoon, retired Admiral Leighton "Snuffy" Smith criticized Clark's comment.

"If Barack Obama wants to question John McCain's service to his country, he should have the guts to do it himself and not hide behind his campaign surrogates," Smith said.

"If he expects the American people to believe his pledges about a new kind of politics, Barack Obama has a responsibility to condemn these attacks."

What attacks? All Clark did was to point out that suffering from a war does not make you an expert in the field of foreign policy, yet as has happened with Ms. Wallace, this got blown way out of proportion, and McCain surrogates both put up an "argument" with served as more of a distraction that a real counterpoint.

Personally I hope Obama doesn't handle any controversy by apologizing like he did with the Clark affair, where he denounced the former generals comments. He really need to start standing up to absurd controversies like this if he wants to earn any respect at all. One can only hope.