<p>ph - good points.
vp - thanks for the response.</p>
<p>I’m not too worried about McCain’s “temper” or his use of profanity. I like a guy who can present a strong image for America - and the prez can’t do anything too crazy without congressional approval. </p>
<p>Besides, the position of COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF isn’t a job for wussies.</p>
<p>Hunt, Bill may not have ever called Hillary the “C” word, but he’s certainly shown a breathtaking lack of respect for her with is history of womanizing throughout their married life. Which is worst? And I don’t think McCain’s ever been accused of rape, do you?</p>
<p>BTW, is there solid proof of McCain’s having called his wife such a horrible thing in public? Seems that if he did, it would have been all over the news…but then again, who knows?</p>
<p>I don’t think Bill is running for president, but for the sake of argument, I have plenty of trouble with his behavior too…but how that could excuse McCain’s behavior I don’t really understand.
bz, the president can do plenty of crazy things without Congressional approval.
I would just like to have a president who is not a jerk, and who has some common sense and common decency. Maybe I’m a pollyanna, but I was bothered by Nixon’s profanity, and really disgusted by Cheney’s language to a U.S. Senator. It astounds me that Republicans, who are always going on about values and courting the religious vote, can be blase about this.
As for McCain’s language toward his wife, I just read that his campaign denies it, but that the author of the book claims to have three separate sources (Arizona journalists) who were there.</p>
<p>Yeah, cheat on your wife with multiple partners, being accused of rape/assault by other women who are willing to associate their name with the charge and the reaction is, “well that’s a private matter”. </p>
<p>However, have an author with a leftist agenda use anonymous sources to accuse you of getting angry with your wife and suddenly that becomes cause for pause? But, let me guess, the people who are raising these issues are Obama supporters who want to eliminate the politics of personal destruction and elevate the discussion. Yeah, right.</p>
<p>So you think it’s OK for a guy who wants to be president to call a member of Congress “boy” and to get into a fistfight with him? I don’t think McCain has denied that one.</p>
<p>And when you get angry with your wife, what terms do you use for her? I can tell you that if I used the one McCain is accused of using, I wouldn’t have a wife for long. You think it’s OK, if it was at the end of a “long day?”</p>
<p>I hope that someone asks McCain, publicly, to respond to these claims. If those comments are true, then I can’t understand how anyone can excuse them. It matters not at all what Bill Clinton or Richard Nixon or anyone else has done. Just because someone else’s behavior may have been offensive to you, that does not make what McCain has said (if true) acceptable. Anyone who would speak to their wife like that, particularly in public, is not deserving of respect, let alone a vote for president.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s hard to elevate the discussion that always starts with discussing the character of a man who hasn’t been president for 8 years. You’ve got gutter politics AND irrelevance going for you in what you say.</p>
<p>Since you introduce character – since this post has introduced character – it is fair game to query whether someone who has been widely called nuts, has a hair trigger temper, and dropped the c-bomb on his own wife in public company should be president.</p>
<p>Why would you expect anybody to overlook these issues in a forum discussing McCain’s character?</p>
<p>For me, a very important issue is whether he is in thrall of the neoconservatives, the far right wing faction of Republican chickenhawks who brought us this disastrous Iraq War, saying it would be easy as pie, and now that it’s dragging out with nothing positive to show in terms of its stated objectives, have been trying to turn the focus on Iran. Talk about rewarding failure. </p>
<p>Here is the biggest concern: for a man who admits he doesn’t know economics and claims that foreign policy is his strength, the following reality scares me:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t doubt that McCain is less impressionable than our current president W, but this should be very worrisome to a country that needs leadership, judgement, and creativity to take the Iraq effort out of the impasse it is in.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/10/us/politics/10mccain.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/10/us/politics/10mccain.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp</a></p>
<p>Oh, and fundingfather, I know, I know: the NYT is a liberal rag that is just out to smear McCain. This is all lies, even though it directly quotes some prominent Republicans. Yeah, right.</p>
<p>So, then if these unproven allegations about what McCain said to his wife are true and if this should make him unqualified to be president that those who think this are in complete agreement with the impeachment of Bill Clinton (even if he hadn’t lied about his affairs). Or, are you suggesting that having a series of affairs is not as bad as calling your spouse a name? Or, are you being a just a bit hypocritical?</p>
<p>I don’t get this line of argument–even if Clinton supporters are hypocrites, what does that have to do with McCain’s fitness? Just because somebody else did something worse is not much of a defense. And fundingfather, aren’t you the guy who thinks Obama doesn’t have enough foreign policy experience–does it destroy your argument to point out that George W. Bush had even less?</p>
<p>Hunt pretty much said it all about the irrelevance on Bill Clinton in this picture. </p>
<p>There are a lot of people who know McCain’s a little bit nutty and a little bit headbutty.</p>
<p>I find it interesting that you didn’t comment at all about the fact that McCain is aligning with the failed faction of foreign policy wonks, the neocons. Warriors to a tee who have never worn uniform but are content to send others to harm’s way even if it’s for a fool’s errand.</p>
<p>“There are a lot of people who know McCain’s a little bit nutty and a little bit headbutty.”</p>
<p>And apparently he’s so fearsome that we only ever hear about these things from anonymous sources, political strategists dressed up as authors and political enemies who’ve had their hands ‘slapped’ for being earmark pigs.</p>
<p>Call me irrational but somehow I just don’t see McCain(who needs help to dress because his body was so broken) getting into a fight with a former linebacker. I also find the notion that Cindy McCain would be twirling her husband’s very, very sparce hair in front of reporters and that he would become so enraged by her noting what he more than likely already knows farfetched in the extreme. </p>
<p>McCain seems a man who values character more than most, and that I suppose does seem a little nutty and a bit headbutty in the world of politics. He’s fairly renowned for being headstrong in his convictions and beliefs, and as such I doubt any group will hold him in thrall. He’s not built that way.</p>
<p>Does he call people names? Yes. Does he also work across the aisle and prove he plays well with others and gets things done irregardless of party lines? Yes. Yes, he certainly does. I may not agree with him, but I’m not about to call him nutty because of unsubstantiated whispers.</p>
<p>I find the concept of John McCain as President to be nothing less than terrifying. </p>
<p>Never, ever, would I question the heroics of his conduct and the valor he displayed as a POW. But his service was as a fighter pilot and their actual service is a war of anonymity, destroying anything and everything in their path from miles in the sky. Their sense of warfare is not the same as those fighting on the ground and this is reflected in his willingness to seemingly stay in Iraq/Iran (he doesn’t seem to care which) forever.</p>
<p>Senator McCain and his family history reflects an attitude that war is an inevitable function of the human condition and he/they are seemingly lost in the absence of conflict. </p>
<p>McCain’s constant disregard for accurately identifying the different factions in the middle-east shows a lack of understanding that a President cannot have (as evidenced by the conduct of the present administration) and otherwise shows a disregard for the people and the humanity involved as he seemingly sees them as something less than human life and as collateral damage to his view of the necessity of warfare as the key element of foreign policy.</p>
<p>McCain’s fierce stubbornness is a huge plus and a huge minus. This is what made him survive in Vietnam when he was being tortured as a POW. Stubbornness is great when you are in the right, but disastrous when you are in the wrong. George Bush is a perfect example of what is wrong with a stubborn President. McCain would be even more stubborn and could be an even bigger disaster.</p>
<p>Great article, marite. Thanks for posting it. It’s what people do when no one is watching that is so telling, it seems.</p>
<p>Wow, the democrats on this board are really reaching on this one. If this is the best they can dig up on McCain he’s going to win in a landslide this November. It’s a testament to how strong he is as a candidate/person that we’re making a big deal about his temper/cursing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>McCain provides plenty of material. Since the OP brought up his character, there are other stories to tell. And by the way, there is no doubt that McCain has tons of character, much of it good. Some of it, though, is not at all appopriate for a president. I think what you’re seeing is an effort to put in proper perspective some of the mythology that is created about McCain, such as that he’s a straight talker.</p>
<p>Here’s an article from the right-wing newspaper the Washington Times:</p>
<p>McCain gets ousted from board for lack of straight talk</p>
<p>Sen. John McCain, a long-time board member of Project Vote Smart, was kicked off yesterday for failing to provide information about where he stands on key issues.</p>
<p>Project Vote Smart, which aims to try to get past the sound bites to find out where candidates stand on issues, administers the Political Courage Test to pin folks down on exactly where they stand.</p>
<p>McCain, who’s been a member of the organization’s board for years, had always been good about filling out the survey — until this year, when his presidential campaign has failed to respond to repeated overtures over nearly a year.</p>
<p>Richard Kimball, the president of PVS who considers himself a friend of McCain’s, and, incidentally, was the man who McCain defeated in his first run for the U.S. Senate in 1986, said the board voted weeks ago to give McCain one last chance to respond and, if he didn’t, he would automatically be kicked off.</p>
<p>That deadline passed yesterday, with no response from McCain.</p>
<p>Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama have also refused to submit their responses, but Kimball told us today it was a bit “embarrassing” for PVS that McCain, one of their own board members, refused.</p>
<p>As Mother Jones reports, board members have been ousted before for their lack of political courage, including Sen. Bill Bradley, who served on the board until refusing to submit to the test during his 2000 presidential bid.</p>
<p>The four-page test this year for presidential candidates asks about guns, health care, immigration, national security, education, abortion and many others. Here’s the question on “social issues”:</p>
<p>Don’t worry. There will be plenty of time to examine in detail the character of Hillary or Obama in the coming months.</p>
<p>I just read those inappropriate remarks he made (Huffington post link). What he told his wife was IMO between the two of them. If she doesn’t mind him calling her a c— in the presence of others then it is none of my business. I suppose they use profanities with each other in a humorous way. </p>
<p>But what he said about Chelsea Clinton and Janet Reno is far, far below the level of decency. It is not just an accidental cuss word. This is a conscious and public denigration- and the girl was just around 18 years old at the time (1998).</p>
<p>I think McCain’s performance on MTV showed real strength of character and mind. I’d urge anyone to try and hunt it down. Here’s a link to an assessment of his performance that I believe gives enough examples of the depth and breadth of his thinking and convictions:</p>
<p>[McCains</a> MTV Moment - The Caucus - Politics - New York Times Blog](<a href=“http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/04/mccains-mtv-moment/]McCains”>McCain's MTV Moment - The New York Times)</p>
<p>Frankly, I was suprised at the range of his beliefs, he’s not in lockstep with anyone or any party. I’d say if you want to believe sources that don’t want to be named than go for it…just realize that you’re on the same level as people who believe Obama’s a muslim, McCain has a black baby out of wedlock and Hillary’s a secret lesbian. Political operatives are skeevy no matter who’s feeding them.</p>
<p>Get over it people - I regret to inform you that McCain is HUMAN (as are ALL the candidates!). It’s where they stand on the issues & how prepared they are to face tha challenges of POTUS which are important right now, not the language they use or what they say to their spouses. </p>
<p>I was just going to post what vp said above - maybe this is just an example of the relationship b/w John & Cindy. Nobody mentioned (afaik) whether the comments were made in jest (not that I think it’s funny) or what her reaction was to the comment.</p>
<p>I agree w/ Lax - if this is the extent of the ammo against McCain, then he’s in good shape. Remember he took an oath to support & defend the Constitution at age 17 & has been reaffirming that oath regularly ever since. He was groomed at Annapolis to be a leader of integrity who never lies, cheats or steals - it’s in his DNA. All the stuff thrown out there by “journalists w/ agendas” (thanks Hekau!) doesn’t amount to much.</p>