I think that is ridiculous. Does he wander around the Senate when he doesn’t have the floor? What about at home? Surely this “disability” would be something well known, like his temperament issues or his inability to raise his arms over his head. In a debate, the opponents are supposed to be respectful and civil. That includes body language and paying attention to one another. Obama was respectful and attentive while McCain said his bit. It is not too much to expect the same from McCain. McCain’s campaign had no say in the choice of chairs? I don’t believe it. I don’t mind that he wasn’t sitting during Obama’s “turn”, but he could have stood and given Obama the courtesy of his full attention.
The type of chair was specified in the pre-debate agreement. If he had trouble sitting on higher chairs, you’d think that his campaign would specifiy a different type.
Y’know, he’s 72 years old, a time of life at which even the best of us are physically hampered. He was, in younger days, tortured, which I would fully expect to show physical effects at age 72, just like the ankle I injured at the age of 20 is bugging the hell out of me at age 51.
I watched the debate; I saw him try to sit on the stool at the beginning. It was apparent that he was not physically comfortable, that it bothered him. I doubt that he sits on stools at home or in the Senate.
I’m not saying that arguing the mental acumen of a 72-year-old is not a fair argument in the election; I’m simply saying that denigrating McCain due to his physical issues is a cheap shot.
After all, it’s not like he will be leading us into battle; that hasn’t happened since the Middle Ages.
The fact that his campaign people are incompetent is not relevant.
Give him a break. He spent 5 1/2 years not be able to wander around freely.
For the most part, people aren’t making fun of him for it, they’re genuinely trying to figure out why he was doing it. Is walking around like that really more comfortable than standing still for him?
I’d not be surprised if it is. It keeps the muscles stretched, keeps one from tightening up.
As strange as it may seem,that is possible. My leg was crushed in an accident a few years ago and I have trouble sitting for long periods. Walking around for a couple of minutes every hour or so helps. I’m also more comfortable moving around rather than standing still. That said, I don’t remember ever hearing anything about McCain having any kind of leg injury, it’s always his lack of arm and shoulder mobility.
In this kind of situation, I would put courtesy over discomfort and remain seated.
There are many, many fit and active 70+ people in this country, my parents included. If McCain truly could not use the chairs, there was no reason he could not stand to give his senate colleague a respectful hearing.
See above. And for his staff to be that incompetent is saying something. He needs to pick better people (or they need to watch out for their “guy”).
What issues? No one is making fun of his war injuries. This man has become decrepit in front of our eyes over the summer–where is the John McCain who strode across stages and rooms with confidence? Almost overnight he’s become doddering and unsure. That is pitiable but it is also fair game for concern re his ability to lead, as you say yourself. But I am not concentrating on that. I am focused on the fact that the man says he can and will reach across the aisle and do bipartisanship stuff, and yet he cannot (will not) show proper respect to a fellow senator. If he couldn’t sit, he could stand attentively. He chose to do neither, causing a distraction on national TV and food for comedy as well, which adds to my concern re his obliviousness and out of touch-ness (if that’s a word).
Who cares about leading into battle? Where did that come from? 
The whole point of this thread seems to be that McCain is not physically fit to be president because he could not sit (or stand) still.
You know who could stand still? FDR. These days he’d probably be denounced because he didn’t wander the stage!
For Pete’s sake, can’t we attack McCain for something meaningful?
I think there are plenty of other threads with meaningful attacks on McCain. It’s hardly like this is the only anti-McCain thread around here.
What thread are you reading? This one consists of people wondering why he did that, not concluding anything significant about his ability to be President.
I don’t think anybody’s really attacking him at all.
Frank surely we all wish that the consequences of his torture weren’t a continuing problem. And I wish that I could agree that “the fact that his campaign people are incompetent is not relevant.” But it is relevant. He selected them and they spoke for him and agreed to certain restrictions. If he had to break those restrictions because he was in pain, then he should have apologized at his first opportunity for having to stray from his zone during the questioning of the other candidate. It certainly was a distraction.
Someone should have been thinking of McCain’s comfort before the debate.
There were others there who were also uncomfortable. Before the questioners were shuttled to Belmont University, they were told that they would be seated at 4:00 PM and would have to remain in their seats until security allowed them to leave after the debates. No bathroom breaks. I think that is inhumane.
Posts # 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 15, for starters.
It doesn’t do us any good to turn into Rush Limbaugh.
Add 10, 16, 17.
You seem to have jumped to the certain conclusion it was because his disabilities made him uncomfortable. This is nothing more substantial than a wild-assed guess, without anything to support it other than your personal opinion of his appearance. Well, here’s my wild-assed guess; he did it on purpose, a calculated move to distract from Obama’s message. On that basis, it is fair game for criticism, and any attack based on it is justified.
I have no more support for my WAG than you do, so I guess that makes us even.
I really don’t get it, Frank. The ones that you listed don’t support your original contention that the thread is about his physical inability to be President (unless a reference to a “rocking chair” is a disqualifier. The last one refers to Post #2 which does take digs at his physical aging. The others either see both sides or talk about mental incapacities.
Yes, he was being attacked sometimes, but in the posts that you listed, not egregiously so. Not even a quarter of the posts were attacking him in a thread where you might expect more. It is only 23 days until a Presidential election.
As I mentioned, in the first paragraph of my post #23, I’ve got experience of past injuries leading to current minor disabilities which make me uncomfortable. My past injuries pale to McCains’. As I said earlier, I think this thread is a cheap shot, and I have seen no response that alters that opinion.
I shudder to imagine the responses were I a Republican.
When I was a tiny kid and was in a school play, I used to wander around to draw attention to myself. I thus demand that everyone take my experiences as proof of why McCain was walking around.
Seriously, cite – other than your own injuries, for which I’m sorry – that McCain’s wandering was definitely due to physical disabilities? Exactly what infirmities in the back or lower body does McCain have? And why are they suddenly manifesting themself now, when only two weeks ago in the previous debate, he showed no such inability to stand still for the same amount of time?
I’d wager that most people who are making light of McCain’s wandering are doing so because they posit that he was being an attention whore, not an infirm old man. Mocking a petulant jerk (and there’s more to back up that assertion than there is McCain’s alleged leg-based feebleness) is not a cheap shot.
Well, in what way does it matter? His wandering appeared to make no substantive difference to the audience as to the winner of the debate. Nobody at the debate seemed to care.
Why is his wandering suddenly an issue, and his gravely mistaken stances on current events are not?