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?
The point is his temper . I thought you could figure it out.
This article is about some military people and the famous McCain temper.
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.
I know. I’m saying the Dems should exploit that temper by finding out his triggers and jumping up and down on them.
“Ho! Ho! Ho Chi Minh! Ho Chi Minh is gonna win!”
I’d say you haven’t argued the point at all.
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.
No, it isn’t. I have complete faith in your powers of vocabulary.
Offered in evidence, his first campaign ad.
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?
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. 
If he calls her that in public, he hits her in private. Especially if it’s within the context cited.
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.
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.
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:
If you want to play this ping-pong gaime, we can go back and forth for months.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
That seems to be sort of accepted wisdom amongst military men who I’ve heard from on the topic.
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.
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.