|
Post by Julia, wrought iron-y on Oct 2, 2008 13:11:52 GMT -5
Some of the article did seem spun negatively. But I find it interesting to see a different interpretation of the events in McCain's life. This part in particular seemed very pertinent: Even those in the military who celebrate McCain's patriotism and sacrifice question why his POW experience has been elevated as his top qualification to be commander in chief. "It took guts to go through that and to come out reasonably intact and able to pick up the pieces of your life and move on," says Wilkerson, Colin Powell's former chief of staff, who has known McCain since the 1980s. "It is unquestionably a demonstration of the character of the man. But I don't think that it is a special qualification for being president of the United States. In some respects, I'm not sure that's the kind of character I want sitting in the Oval Office. I'm not sure that much time in a prisoner-of-war status doesn't do something to you. Doesn't do something to you psychologically, doesn't do something to you that might make you a little more volatile, a little less apt to listen to reason, a little more inclined to be volcanic in your temperament."Reminds me of this article I saw in the times a while ago about why McCain is so supportive of the Iraq War while other Vietnam vets in the Senate are so opposed. The McCain Doctrines.The author wants to tell me McCain is "a little more volatile, a little less apt to listen to reason, a little more inclined to be volcanic in temperament" then he should point to concrete examples in McCain's behavior, and he'll be on his way to convincing me. I wish he would not amateur analyze his subject. Mostly, I wish he was not trying to turn this plainly, obviously positive indicator about MCain's character - that he has overcome such awful adversity so well - into a negative. "I'm not sure" some of Obama's experiences (with his dad's uninvolvement and Mom's relatively early death and growing up as "black" in a "white" household) haven't had some negative effects on him and his overall emotional stability either. But I admire Obama for overcoming such negatives and doing so well in his life - and I admire McCain for the same. Fair or not, to me, stuff like this turns me off completely to the author and anything he's got to say. To me, it's "spin" of the worst sort (personal, unverifiable, nasty). The bolded part is still part of the quote- it's testimonial evidence, so to speak. Most of the Rolling Stone article is, in fact, quotes from people who've known McCain, or of McCain himself. Some of it is reportage of his behavior (circumstantial evidence, as you've requested): his service record before and after the Hanoi Hilton, and reports of his behavior to his first wife have been reported widely elsewhere, and only the small detail of him being turned down for a Sea Command and the viginette of how him dumping Carole effected his relationship with the Reagans was new to me. Julia, however, the fact that the Navy didn't promote him past Captain has always been a warning flag to me.
|
|
|
Post by Julia, wrought iron-y on Oct 2, 2008 13:14:25 GMT -5
Well, you know, it was only discussed in boutique publications like The Washington Postand Time magazine. Julia, But Palin reads all the newspapers and magazines - she said so. Couric: What, specifically?
Palin: Um, all of them, any of them that have been in front of me all these years.
Couric: Can you name a few?
Palin: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news, too. Alaska isn't a foreign country, where it's kind of suggested, "Wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C., may be thinking when you live up there in Alaska?" Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America.
She must have read at least one press release about Gwen Ifill's book, no? Hell if I can tell. Given that shecouldn't remember two months back when she made a press release decrying the Exon decision, I don't know what to think. Julia, except that having a baby wrecks your brain for more than a couple months, in my experience
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Oct 2, 2008 13:39:35 GMT -5
The author wants to tell me McCain is "a little more volatile, a little less apt to listen to reason, a little more inclined to be volcanic in temperament" then he should point to concrete examples in McCain's behavior, and he'll be on his way to convincing me. I wish he would not amateur analyze his subject. Mostly, I wish he was not trying to turn this plainly, obviously positive indicator about MCain's character - that he has overcome such awful adversity so well - into a negative. "I'm not sure" some of Obama's experiences (with his dad's uninvolvement and Mom's relatively early death and growing up as "black" in a "white" household) haven't had some negative effects on him and his overall emotional stability either. But I admire Obama for overcoming such negatives and doing so well in his life - and I admire McCain for the same. Fair or not, to me, stuff like this turns me off completely to the author and anything he's got to say. To me, it's "spin" of the worst sort (personal, unverifiable, nasty). The bolded part is still part of the quote- it's testimonial evidence, so to speak. Most of the Rolling Stone article is, in fact, quotes from people who've known McCain, or of McCain himself. Some of it is reportage of his behavior (circumstantial evidence, as you've requested): his service record before and after the Hanoi Hilton, and reports of his behavior to his first wife have been reported widely elsewhere, and only the small detail of him being turned down for a Sea Command and the viginette of how him dumping Carole effected his relationship with the Reagans was new to me. Julia, however, the fact that the Navy didn't promote him past Captain has always been a warning flag to me. My point wasn't that McCain doesn't have documented temperment issues (I know he does) it's that there is no way anyone can know if his time as a POW is at the crux of it. We have no idea if that experience helped or hurt his temperment issues; if those issues might not be worse if not for his time in the POW camp, etc. Different people react very differently to stressors like this. So again, I can only say that I find this sort of psychoanalysis to be psychobabble; it seems meant to diminish a very real accomplishment of McCain's that points to strength (not weakness) of character. I can believe McCain has temperment issues; trying to tell me it's because of his time in POW camp, that I should look on him with extra-suspicion of some kind because of that - I find that very objectionable. And I don't buy it.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Oct 2, 2008 13:55:17 GMT -5
The bolded part is still part of the quote- it's testimonial evidence, so to speak. Most of the Rolling Stone article is, in fact, quotes from people who've known McCain, or of McCain himself. Some of it is reportage of his behavior (circumstantial evidence, as you've requested): his service record before and after the Hanoi Hilton, and reports of his behavior to his first wife have been reported widely elsewhere, and only the small detail of him being turned down for a Sea Command and the viginette of how him dumping Carole effected his relationship with the Reagans was new to me. Julia, however, the fact that the Navy didn't promote him past Captain has always been a warning flag to me. My point wasn't that McCain doesn't have documented temperment issues (I know he does) it's that there is no way anyone can know if his time as a POW is at the crux of it. We have no idea if that experience helped or hurt his temperment issues; if those issues might not be worse if not for his time in the POW camp, etc. Different people react very differently to stressors like this. So again, I can only say that I find this sort of psychoanalysis to be psychobabble; it seems meant to diminish a very real accomplishment of McCain's that points to strength (not weakness) of character. I can believe McCain has temperment issues; trying to tell me it's because of his time in POW camp, that I should look on him with extra-suspicion of some kind because of that - I find that very objectionable. And I don't buy it.I see your point here, and I think the point that the person the author quoted was trying to make is similar - but on the other end of the spectrum. He and others "question why his POW experience has been elevated as his top qualification to be commander in chief". A lot of people defend choosing McCain by saying that he survived a POW camp, and that should be reason enough to vote for him. The way I read the quote was that the guy, who knows McCain, was trying to tell us that he may be a bit unstable, without actually, you know, coming right out and saying it.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Oct 2, 2008 14:12:18 GMT -5
My point wasn't that McCain doesn't have documented temperment issues (I know he does) it's that there is no way anyone can know if his time as a POW is at the crux of it. We have no idea if that experience helped or hurt his temperment issues; if those issues might not be worse if not for his time in the POW camp, etc. Different people react very differently to stressors like this. So again, I can only say that I find this sort of psychoanalysis to be psychobabble; it seems meant to diminish a very real accomplishment of McCain's that points to strength (not weakness) of character. I can believe McCain has temperment issues; trying to tell me it's because of his time in POW camp, that I should look on him with extra-suspicion of some kind because of that - I find that very objectionable. And I don't buy it.I see your point here, and I think the point that the person the author quoted was trying to make is similar - but on the other end of the spectrum. He and others "question why his POW experience has been elevated as his top qualification to be commander in chief". A lot of people defend choosing McCain by saying that he survived a POW camp, and that should be reason enough to vote for him. The way I read the quote was that the guy, who knows McCain, was trying to tell us that he may be a bit unstable, without actually, you know, coming right out and saying it. What can I say? Suggesting that McCain's time in the POW camp is a reason for us to be suspicious of his emotional stability is just not OK, to me, no matter what the motive of the person saying it (or the person deciding it's worth quoting). I don't think its legit, and more than that, I think it's just plain wrong to do. I definitely agree that "look, he survived a POW camp" is no reason to believe McCain is FIT to be President. I don't agree it's OK to try to counteract this by suggesting that "look, he survived a POW camp" is a reason to believe that he might be UNFIT to be President. I'm not sure I really buy that "he survived a POW camp" is being touted by the GOP as the main reason to vote for him anyhow, and I can hardly believe very many people who plan to vote for him would list that as the number one reason. I can see where it is being played up as a positive . . . I mean - it is a positive, no? It's not a simple thing to overcome that sort of major adversity in life. I, personally, do respect Mr McCain for it. I don't know what it did to him, though I can see it didn't break him. But the biggest reason to vote for him? I haven't watched every news clip or heard every speech or seen every ad, and I don't plan to vote for him. So I'm only guessing, but it doesn't seem that way to me. Seems like "I've got the most experience, I'm a maverick, I'll bring change, and 'looky here conservatives, I've picked Sarah Palin' " is the main mantra, and what people are voting for.
|
|
|
Post by Julia, wrought iron-y on Oct 2, 2008 14:26:04 GMT -5
The bolded part is still part of the quote- it's testimonial evidence, so to speak. Most of the Rolling Stone article is, in fact, quotes from people who've known McCain, or of McCain himself. Some of it is reportage of his behavior (circumstantial evidence, as you've requested): his service record before and after the Hanoi Hilton, and reports of his behavior to his first wife have been reported widely elsewhere, and only the small detail of him being turned down for a Sea Command and the viginette of how him dumping Carole effected his relationship with the Reagans was new to me. Julia, however, the fact that the Navy didn't promote him past Captain has always been a warning flag to me. My point wasn't that McCain doesn't have documented temperment issues (I know he does) it's that there is no way anyone can know if his time as a POW is at the crux of it. We have no idea if that experience helped or hurt his temperment issues; if those issues might not be worse if not for his time in the POW camp, etc. Different people react very differently to stressors like this. So again, I can only say that I find this sort of psychoanalysis to be psychobabble; it seems meant to diminish a very real accomplishment of McCain's that points to strength (not weakness) of character. I can believe McCain has temperment issues; trying to tell me it's because of his time in POW camp, that I should look on him with extra-suspicion of some kind because of that - I find that very objectionable. And I don't buy it. Most of the loudest voices online who have been pointing at his POW experience as a cause are people who were in the Hanoi Hilton with him- at least one of them came out and became a psychologist specializing in PTSD.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Oct 2, 2008 16:16:41 GMT -5
My point wasn't that McCain doesn't have documented temperment issues (I know he does) it's that there is no way anyone can know if his time as a POW is at the crux of it. We have no idea if that experience helped or hurt his temperment issues; if those issues might not be worse if not for his time in the POW camp, etc. Different people react very differently to stressors like this. So again, I can only say that I find this sort of psychoanalysis to be psychobabble; it seems meant to diminish a very real accomplishment of McCain's that points to strength (not weakness) of character. I can believe McCain has temperment issues; trying to tell me it's because of his time in POW camp, that I should look on him with extra-suspicion of some kind because of that - I find that very objectionable. And I don't buy it. Most of the loudest voices online who have been pointing at his POW experience as a cause are people who were in the Hanoi Hilton with him- at least one of them came out and became a psychologist specializing in PTSD. I don't think this is presented fairly in this article. As to the point about others also saying that McCain's time in the POW camp has caused temperment issues, I find it objectionable to make this kind of very public claim about anyone without both the proper expertise and a complete and current examination of the subject. From what you say, it sounds like most people making this claim have accumulated neither the expertise nor the examination, and that one (or two?) have the expertise only. I can see private speculation, but public speculation in a widely read mag . . . to me, it's wrong, and it's all about spin.
|
|
|
Post by Julia, wrought iron-y on Oct 2, 2008 20:16:18 GMT -5
Wait. Did she say she doesn't have to answer the questions she's asked?
|
|
|
Post by Julia, wrought iron-y on Oct 2, 2008 20:18:17 GMT -5
Most of the loudest voices online who have been pointing at his POW experience as a cause are people who were in the Hanoi Hilton with him- at least one of them came out and became a psychologist specializing in PTSD. I don't think this is presented fairly in this article. As to the point about others also saying that McCain's time in the POW camp has caused temperment issues, I find it objectionable to make this kind of very public claim about anyone without both the proper expertise and a complete and current examination of the subject. From what you say, it sounds like most people making this claim have accumulated neither the expertise nor the examination, and that one (or two?) have the expertise only. I can see private speculation, but public speculation in a widely read mag . . . to me, it's wrong, and it's all about spin. No, that's not what I said, nor does it have any relation to what I've observed online over the past two weeks. But this is not a productive conversation, sorry.
|
|
|
Post by Rachael on Oct 2, 2008 20:52:47 GMT -5
Wait. Did she say she doesn't have to answer the questions she's asked? She did indeed. She thinks it makes her look like a maverick. She then goes on to, wait for it, not answer the questions she's asked. Repeatedly. Doesn't sound like a bibbling idiot for a change, though.
|
|
|
Post by Rachael on Oct 2, 2008 21:02:38 GMT -5
Now, the gay marriage questions are "gimmes" for both candidates. No danger of turning off any block of people who were already planning to vote for either candidate.
That said...how frickin' condescending can she be to talk about how "tolerant" she is? Argh.
And how dare she refer to our "support for women's rights"? ARGH.
And STOP SAYING "NUKULAR"!
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on Oct 2, 2008 21:58:44 GMT -5
Most of the loudest voices online who have been pointing at his POW experience as a cause are people who were in the Hanoi Hilton with him- at least one of them came out and became a psychologist specializing in PTSD. I don't think this is presented fairly in this article. As to the point about others also saying that McCain's time in the POW camp has caused temperment issues, I find it objectionable to make this kind of very public claim about anyone without both the proper expertise and a complete and current examination of the subject. From what you say, it sounds like most people making this claim have accumulated neither the expertise nor the examination, and that one (or two?) have the expertise only. I can see private speculation, but public speculation in a widely read mag . . . to me, it's wrong, and it's all about spin. I agree that the article had a very negative spin to it. Doesn't mean that the facts presented are necessarily wrong or that the opinions presented should be discounted. (That would require some fact checking and an assessment of the people offering their opinions about McCain's character. Some of the incidents described I've definitely heard before, so I don't think the article is entirely off base.) The reason that that quote stuck out for me was because it jived with my impressions of McCain's attitudes, particularly about foreign policy. It struck me that his experience as a POW may have had a role in shaping those attitudes. So, to me, Wilkerson's comment suggests a cause for certain already made observations, rather than speculation about what kind of person McCain may be or what he may do. A man is influenced by the sum of his life experiences. Which is not to say that said life experiences should disqualify from any endeavor he wishes to pursue; I would be against such discriminatory action. But I do believe that it's important to carefully consider both the positive and negative influence these life experiences have on the person in question and to be cautious if warranted. Which is what I think Wilkerson was trying to say about McCain having been a POW.
|
|
|
Post by Rachael on Oct 2, 2008 22:15:18 GMT -5
And the first post-debate polls are in - he kicked her ass all over St. Louis, despite her doing better than 84% of people expected.
Biden 52, Palin 39....
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Oct 2, 2008 22:26:24 GMT -5
Good God, I was flicking between Fox and MSNBC for the reaction to the debate, and you would think they were watching a completely different debate!
I do think though, that most people can separate the wheat from the chaffe.
|
|
|
Post by Julia, wrought iron-y on Oct 2, 2008 23:02:00 GMT -5
Now, the gay marriage questions are "gimmes" for both candidates. No danger of turning off any block of people who were already planning to vote for either candidate. That said...how frickin' condescending can she be to talk about how "tolerant" she is? Argh. And how dare she refer to our "support for women's rights"? ARGH. And STOP SAYING "NUKULAR"! And the winking... and "doggone" ferchissake. Julia, there's Folksie, and then there's doing a bad Minnie Pearl imitation.
|
|