# Trite SDMB arguments and John McCain. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 7, 2008, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374 "2008-04-07T19:57:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/41 "2008-04-08T18:22:31Z")
[QUOTE=gonzomax] [http://rawstory.com/news/2008/McCain\_temper\_boiled\_over\_in\_92\_0407.html](http://rawstory.com/news/2008/McCain_temper_boiled_over_in_92_0407.html) Heres another one when he called his wife a cunt. He is so presidential His temper has been covered a long time. [/QUOTE] From your link: > [@](#): > > Three reporters from Arizona, on the condition of anonymity, also let me in on another incident involving McCain’s intemperateness. In his 1992 Senate bid, McCain was joined on the campaign trail by his wife, Cindy, as well as campaign aide Doug Cole and consultant Wes Gullett. At one point, Cindy playfully twirled McCain’s hair and said, “You’re getting a little thin up there.” McCain’s face reddened, and he responded, “At least I don’t plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you cunt.” McCain’s excuse was that it had been a long day I normally wouldn’t take much notice of what gets said in anger between a husband and wife. We’ve all been there (I called my wife a C-word once…once), but this is just so random and so public. She must have really touched a nerve with that remark about his hair. The Democrats should totally exploit that. Keep poking him with that stick. ETA also, “trollop?” Who says “trollop” anymore. What is he, Mongomery Burns? ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/42 "2008-04-08T18:48:34Z")
> **[The tracks of her tears](https://www.salon.com/2008/01/13/commander_in_chief/)** > > New Hampshire Dems judged Clinton best qualified to be commander in chief. Working class voters backed her. So why does everyone want to talk about her tears? Plus: The Clintons and race. The point is his temper . I thought you could figure it out. This article is about some military people and the famous McCain temper. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/43 "2008-04-08T18:51:26Z")
I think that **Mr. Moto** must be pleased for once to have a candidate who is not actually a chickenhawk and who does have family in harm’s way. That’s great! The problem is that one cannot proclaim this without tacitly acknowledging that these are rare traits among conservatives. What is one to do? I know - blame liberals by dressing this proclamation up in a cheap suit of condemnation. Too bad it was a huge stretch that left pretty much everyone scratching their heads. As for the side discussion, I have no idea why someone would shy away from calling McCain “right wing” or a “warmonger.” Wasn’t Bush a right-winger? If he wasn’t, I don’t know who is? McCain describes a course that is precisely the same as Bush, so how is he somehow not aptly labeled the same as Bush? And come on, nobody mongs war more than McCain. I would think it’s a strength of his, relative to the interests of his base, of course. His base being primarily mongers of war themselves. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/44 "2008-04-08T18:58:15Z")
[QUOTE=gonzomax] > **[The tracks of her tears - Salon.com](https://www.salon.com/2008/01/13/commander_in_chief/)** > > New Hampshire Dems judged Clinton best qualified to be commander in chief. Working class voters backed her. So why does everyone want to talk about her tears? Plus: The Clintons and race. The point is his temper . I thought you could figure it out. This article is about some military people and the famous McCain temper. [/QUOTE] I know. I’m saying the Dems should exploit that temper by finding out his triggers and jumping up and down on them. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/45 "2008-04-08T19:04:34Z")
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic] I know. I’m saying the Dems should exploit that temper by finding out his triggers and jumping up and down on them. [/QUOTE] “Ho! Ho! Ho Chi Minh! Ho Chi Minh is gonna win!” ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/46 "2008-04-08T19:11:23Z")
> [@](#): > > I won’t particularly argue that point. I’d say you haven’t argued the point at all. > [@](#): > > But I will point out that while partisans of various stripes were yelling “draft-dodger” or “chickenhawk” those men won their respective elections - indicating that easy as these attacks might be to make, the American public as a whole does not care. Don’t act like everyone was equally guilty here. It was conservatives who started the accusations of draft dodging. They used it in 1992 against Clinton and again in 1996. Then when George Bush ran in 2000, they suddenly had a change of heart and announced that accusations of draft dodging were unprincipled. Instead they attacked the war record of Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004. Not surprisingly, apparently the rules have changed again and in 2008 we’re now being told that it’s unprincipled to question anyone who served in battle. I’m going to invoke my psychic powers and predict that in 2012, we’ll once again see conservatives declaring that their principles are firmly against whatever issues their candidate is vulnerable on. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/47 "2008-04-08T19:37:12Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] “Incessantly” is a pretty vague term… [/quote] No, it isn’t. I have complete faith in your powers of vocabulary. > [@](#): > > …I’m not sure that he talks about his military career more than he talks about his Congressional experience. But if you’ve got proof, I’m open to hearing it…I’m sure he considers that an important aspect of the job, but I can’t say that I’ve even seen him say or imply that it’s the most important thing. Offered in evidence, his first campaign ad. > **[Gateway Pundit: John McCain-- First Campaign Ad --- "624787"](http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/03/john-mccain-first-campaign-ad-624787.html)** Now, just speaking as a DFH, if I were to suggest McCain’s most laudable accomplishment, it might very well center on his alliance with Kerry towards normalizing relations with Viet Nam. This is the humanity and generosity I would hope for in a leader. Perhaps at some future date. Perhaps I will be Queen of Rumania. Perhaps. But this ad, to my limited and tentative understanding as I await your correction, seems rather to stress the opposite pole, it seems to underscore his travails as a POW. It is playing to an emotional response, is it not? And is not that emotional response keyed to McCain’s military experience? What other valuable geo-political expertise is granted by such experience as his? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/48 "2008-04-08T19:51:14Z")
[QUOTE=elucidator] Perhaps at some future date. Perhaps I will be Queen of Rumania. Perhaps. [/QUOTE] Hey, _my_ life is _already_ a glorious cycle of song. Of course, the song cycle includes hits like “Life Is a Lemon and I Want My Money Back,” “I’m Just a Bug on the Windshield of Life,” and the entire catalog of The Shins. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/49 "2008-04-08T20:59:49Z")
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic] From your link: I normally wouldn’t take much notice of what gets said in anger between a husband and wife. We’ve all been there (I called my wife a C-word once…once), but this is just so random and so public. She must have really touched a nerve with that remark about his hair. The Democrats should totally exploit that. Keep poking him with that stick. ETA also, “trollop?” Who says “trollop” anymore. What is he, Mongomery Burns? [/QUOTE] If he calls her that in public, he hits her in private. Especially if it’s within the context cited. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/50 "2008-04-08T21:21:22Z")
McCain would be at best 4 more years of the same reckless foreign policy. He could be a lot worse. He too has Iran in his sights. To put it politely ,he is a war mongering ,hot headed prick. He lies. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/51 "2008-04-08T21:28:13Z")
[QUOTE=mswas] If he calls her that in public, he hits her in private. Especially if it’s within the context cited. [/QUOTE] No doubt. I think it might actually say something that he wasn’t able to control an outburts like that in public. I haven’t really bought in to the uncontrollable temper meme against McCain, but that thing with his wife is definitely something that you would expect him to be able to keep a lid on in public. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/52 "2008-04-08T21:50:08Z")
[QUOTE=elucidator] No, it isn’t. I have complete faith in your powers of vocabulary. Offered in evidence, his first campaign ad. [/QUOTE] Well, frankly the assertion you made is unprovable, so offering me one video, even if it’s his first generally election campaign ad, isn’t going to do it. Remember, the issue at hand is whether or not McCain has a “military mindset”. How his public relations handlers present him in commercials tells us what he wants us to think about him, not necessarily what his “mindset” is. You’re certainly welcome to your opinion about what his mindset is, but just recognize it as that. I’ll also remind you that his first big speech as the presumptive Republican nominee was lauded in the press for his emphasis on diplomacy over military action: > [@](#): > > [McCain’s diplomacy](http://in.news.yahoo.com/indianexpress/20080329/r_t_ie_op_clm/top-mccain-s-diplomacy-7f368a9.html) > > As the Democratic candidates, Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, tear each other apart in a war of attrition, the presumptive Republican nominee Senator John McCain, is trying to look presidential and focus on substance. > > \ > > A careful analysis of the speech, however, shows McCain not just rebutting his critics among Democrats but also deliberately differentiating himself from Bush. > > \ > > McCain also emphasised his commitment to multilateralism, to separate himself from the widely perceived unilateralism of the Bush Administration. “Our great power”, McCain said, does not mean “we have all the wisdom and knowledge necessary to succeed. We need to listen to the views and respect the collective will of our democratic allies.” > > \ > > McCain also conceded that America’s policies have alienated much of the opinion in the Islamic world. Saying that military power alone cannot win the war against terror, McCain called for “major changes in how our government faces the challenge of radical Islamic extremism” and stressed the importance of winning the hearts and minds of the moderate Muslims around the world. If you want to play this ping-pong gaime, we can go back and forth for months. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/53 "2008-04-08T21:52:34Z")
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic] No doubt. I think it might actually say something that he wasn’t able to control an outburts like that in public. I haven’t really bought in to the uncontrollable temper meme against McCain, but that thing with his wife is definitely something that you would expect him to be able to keep a lid on in public. [/QUOTE] I actually don’t feel as strongly about the word “cunt” as most people, although I’ve never called my wife that (in seriousness, anyway). Although I don’t like McCain whatsoever, I’m very hesitant to agree that his calling her that means that he also necessarily beats her. It could be that he just called her that once, and it happened in public, or that he calls her that all the time. It’s still a far cry from physical abuse. Besides which, if he alienates her, she might turn the money spigot off. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/54 "2008-04-08T21:56:30Z")
[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian] I actually don’t feel as strongly about the word “cunt” as most people, although I’ve never called my wife that (in seriousness, anyway). Although I don’t like McCain whatsoever, I’m very hesitant to agree that his calling her that means that he also necessarily beats her. It could be that he just called her that once, and it happened in public, or that he calls her that all the time. It’s still a far cry from physical abuse. Besides which, if he alienates her, she might turn the money spigot off. [/QUOTE] Actually, I misread **mswas’** post as saying that if he calls her that in public, he _calls_ her that in private. Somehow I missed that he said _hit_. I DON’T necessarily draw THAT conclusion. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/55 "2008-04-08T21:57:41Z")
[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian] I actually don’t feel as strongly about the word “cunt” as most people, although I’ve never called my wife that (in seriousness, anyway). Although I don’t like McCain whatsoever, I’m very hesitant to agree that his calling her that means that he also necessarily beats her. It could be that he just called her that once, and it happened in public, or that he calls her that all the time. It’s still a far cry from physical abuse. Besides which, if he alienates her, she might turn the money spigot off. [/QUOTE] She tousled his hair and he called her a trollop and a cunt? That’s a pretty standard MO for someone that hits their wife. If he can’t handle his wife playfully telling him that his is losing his hair, what else can’t he abide? ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/56 "2008-04-08T21:59:18Z")
[QUOTE=RickJay] Whether it’s valid or not depends on what it is you’re trying to establish. As a general “I think Candidate X sux” argument, no, it’s not valid. It also doesn’t prove the war in question that Candidate X supports is wrong. It could serve as a data point, though, for assessing the overall character of a person, and that person’s wisdom with regards to the issue. A small point, but there it is all the same. As a case in point, I am not sure I buy into the concept in the specific case of George W. Bush. I do, however, think that there is something to be said for Paul Wolfowitz’s perspective being sadly lacking in firsthand experience; Wolfowitz is notable for being extraordinarily bright, but suffering from an idealistically based refusal to consider any real world experience that would get in the way of his idea. According to virtually every account of the man I have ever read, he is notoriously resistant to the acknowledgement of facts that contradict his worldview. It is worth noting that if was Wolfowitz who refused to believe John Shinseki’s estimates of how many troops would be needed in Iraq, and who refused to prioritize an occupation plan; of course, Shinseki, the man with experience, was proven completely right. One wonders if Wolfowitz’s decision to avoid service and instead spend his entire life in positions of academia and policymaking detracts from his wisdom and understanding of how the real world works; he, more so than anyone else in the Bush administration, seems to be particularly guilty of not understanding the Law of Unintended Consequences, and his CV reads as a litany of high-concept ideological positions supported by very little consideration of how they might affect ordinary human beings - or, maybe more important, how ordinary human beings will react to the implementation of his positions. So, would four years in the Army have done him some good? Perhaps it would have. I think, frankly, that the man’s lack of military experience (or experience in anything other than academia or government) is a fairly significant weakness - again, \*\*in the specific case \*\* of Paul Wolfowitz. [/QUOTE] In my view, the way that Shinseki was treated by Rummy and Wolfowitz was (and remains) an outrage. The guy was supremely qualified for his CJCS position, and when he expressed a contrary view on troop levels needed to do a certain mission, he was overruled, sacked and replaced with a “yes-man”. The Iraq war could have played out a lot differently if the political hacks that birthed this flawed plan had listened to, you know, the guys that have “been there, done that”. My Dad is a retired major general who did 36 years in the Corps Of Engineers, we often have had this very discussion. He concurs with your position re: Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, etc, et al. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/57 "2008-04-08T22:00:22Z")
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic] Actually, I misread **mswas’** post as saying that if he calls her that in public, he _calls_ her that in private. Somehow I missed that he said _hit_. I DON’T necessarily draw THAT conclusion. [/QUOTE] For some women being called a ‘cunt’ in front of reporters would be a fate worse than being slapped. It’s all about context. If he called her a cunt after she said something truly vile and mean, and it wasn’t in front of reporters, that would be something, but the disproportionate reaction to what she said is the tell. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/58 "2008-04-08T22:02:00Z")
[QUOTE=FoieGrasIsEvil] In my view, the way that Shinseki was treated by Rummy and Wolfowitz was (and remains) an outrage. The guy was supremely qualified for his CJCS position, and when he expressed a contrary view on troop levels needed to do a certain mission, he was overruled, sacked and replaced with a “yes-man”. The Iraq war could have played out a lot differently if the political hacks that birthed this flawed plan had listened to, you know, the guys that have “been there, done that”. My Dad is a retired major general who did 36 years in the Corps Of Engineers, we often have had this very discussion. He concurs with your position re: Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, etc, et al. [/QUOTE] That seems to be sort of accepted wisdom amongst military men who I’ve heard from on the topic. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/59 "2008-04-08T22:22:12Z")
[QUOTE=mswas] For some women being called a ‘cunt’ in front of reporters would be a fate worse than being slapped. It’s all about context. If he called her a cunt after she said something truly vile and mean, and it wasn’t in front of reporters, that would be something, but the disproportionate reaction to what she said is the tell. [/QUOTE] I agree with that, and I don’t think it suggests anything _good_ about how he treats her in private (after all, this is a guy who admits to having numerous affairs during his first marriage because his first wife lost her looks after a car accident), but it doesn’t nevessarily mean he’s _physically_ abusive. He could just be verbally and/or mentally abusive. In any case, I agree that his public behavior in that instance suggests even worse behavior in private. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2008, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374/60 "2008-04-08T22:29:40Z")
[QUOTE=FoieGrasIsEvil] In my view, the way that Shinseki was treated by Rummy and Wolfowitz was (and remains) an outrage. The guy was supremely qualified for his CJCS position, and when he expressed a contrary view on troop levels needed to do a certain mission, he was overruled, sacked and replaced with a “yes-man”. The Iraq war could have played out a lot differently if the political hacks that birthed this flawed plan had listened to, you know, the guys that have “been there, done that”. My Dad is a retired major general who did 36 years in the Corps Of Engineers, we often have had this very discussion. He concurs with your position re: Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, etc, et al. [/QUOTE] My father, who recently retired from a career in the State Department said that the same kind of attitude obtained in the DoS. Guys who had been in State forever and knew what they were talking about routinely had their opinions ignored in favor of the neocon agenda. Powell made _some_ efforts to talk sense into the administration (though not nearly enough and he folded too easily. The scuttlebutt in State was that he never really forgave them for hanging him out to dry with that UN presentation), but then Rice was given the job, thus ensuring that the White House would not be subjected to any opinion but its own. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trite-sdmb-arguments-and-john-mccain/444374.md?page=4)