Dear President Obama;

As I have mentioned in a previous letter, you are the first political candidate I  campaigned and caucused for as a precinct captain, and donated money to.  As an independent, I was voting for Senator Barack Obama the man, not Senator Barack Obama the Democrat from Illinois.  You appeared to be a person who decides things on the evidence as opposed to ideology. You promised change, yet in too many cases it has been more of the same.

If health care reform does not overcome the insurance lobby and provide real reform, then I  have no  expectations that financial, energy, climate, or educational policies enacted that have positive impact on the majority of citizens. For those policies, too, I can only assume the lobbyists are the deciding factor.  You took action with the auto industry, for good or ill;  they must have a weak lobby. 

Most discouraging is the economy and jobs, for truly,  "it's the economy, stupid".  While missing the ditch, the mock economic recovery has not touched the broken Reagan/Bush/Clinton economic policies, and now the Geithner/Bernanke/Summers car is headed for the cliff with those policies while Wall Street rakes in billions and millions of citizens are added to unemployment. There is change we desperately need.

Will 2009 be the year where we look back and realize opportunity lost, and with it, hope for anything but a plutocracy and its codependent president and congress? And for what? Pointless adherence to an ideology of pragmatism and bi-partisanship, or is the real truth the stealth influence of our government's 400,000 lobbyist-owners? The slow transfer of wealth to the top 0.1% continues until there are even few conservative Republicans above the poverty line and we face a future similar to Iran's today, where the silent majority, not just the fringe left or right, awaken to protest a repressive and unresponsive United States  government and the plutocrats that own it. 

A mandate is a terrible thing to waste.  Accelerating towards the cliff is just stupid.   If the next three years continue as the first, then I know what I will not be doing in 2012.

Respectfully, but less hopeful.

Wanderwolf

#10. The elected head of your party national committee is a ... ummmmm .... uh ... well,  words fail us.  It's really an extremist talk show host who constantly screams he is not an extremist.

 

#9. There is incredible anticipation when the House and Senate Minority Leaders show up to speak, that is, at least whenever Dick Cheney is hunting in the area.

#8. You only speak in four commandments of two word each: "Cut taxes", "Free trade", "Less government",  and "Anti-abortion" (and sometimes you cannot count too well).

#7. You are the black swans of thought and speech, randomly selecting one of the four commandments for any occasion.

#6. Your beliefs are founded on rock solid convictions, except on Tuesday where the reverse is true, but firm again on Wednesday, not so much on Thursday, but very firm on Friday.  You also sponsor legislation that disputes the liberal notion that the sun rises in the east.

#5. The daughter of your 2008 presidential candidate calls your leaders a bunch of clueless, lame old men, and there is no effective rebuttal.

#4. Your party turned the 2008 presidential candidate into a clueless, lame old man with a mannequin in $180,000 worth of clothes.

#3. The mannequin attempts to string a "new" commandment together, but cannot come up with anything coherent, much less utter the existing four commandments in the proper word order.

#2. Your leading contender for the 2012 presidential race is the 2008 mannequin ... if someone will only bring it to your party event. 

And the number one reason you know you are a failing political party....

#1. You finally cleanse the party of the liberal sympathizers and can have uninterrupted conversations between the three of you.

Dear President Obama:

First of all, I am a big supporter.  In 50 years on Earth, you are the first political candidate I campaigned for and contributed money to. During the campaign, you surprised me several times, But after the first couple of times, I learned to ignore the chatter in the blogs and cable news and the fear and loathing in Washington; you soon had them waxing eloquently about your latest triumph.  I have not always agreed with you, but I did not expect to nor require that, and my support did not waver. And besides, your political calculus was far ahead of mine and all the pundits. I learned to trust that calculus along with confidence in your judgement of the facts of a particular issue facing our nation. But on one subject, I must admit lingering discomfort; the reticence to investigate and prosecute crimes, if any, committed by the previous administration.

Recently, for the first time, I have been in Washington for an extended period of time.  I have wandered the National Mall, stood at Lincoln's feet and read the inscriptions, Lincoln's own words,  in stone, much as I imagine you have.  Past the Vietnam and World War II memorials to our soldiers, past the Washington Memorial and the adult kickball teams, to the steps of the Capital. Many days I have walked past the White House with the smell of cherry blossoms in the air, stirring memories from childhood, spring and future promise, a sense I get from looking at the White House now.

And along the street named after our Constitution the words "The United States of America" are everywhere.  But if those are to be more than words printed on metal and carved in stone, our words, our laws must have meaning and equal enforcement for all. No partisan persecution, just the same crime and punishment any citizen faces. Whether FISA or torture or Wall Street, or corporate lobbyists, we cannot look away any longer. For if we look away, we lose our laws and we lose our country. You said words are important. words do have meaning. Words are all we have. Our laws are words - our constitution is words;.  They have to be true words.

Surprise me again, Mr. President. Keep the promise in the air.

Respectfully,

WW

I am reading Angler about Dick Cheney's time in the W's White House. His endorsement strikes me as a stab in the back by Cheney in revenge for McCain's recent negative comments about the Bush Administration. Or else is Cheney so delusional to think his endorsement helps McCain?

Watching these "town halls", I have to wonder. If John McCain says "drink the magic coolaid", will they?

While President George W. Bush is already regarded by a majority of historians as the worst president in our history[2], is it possible the Senator John McCain could be a worse president than Bush?  If the 70% - 80% of the Democrats, Republicans, and Independents think the Iraq war was a mistake and the country is going in the wrong direction, could they vote for McCain if they knew he was worse than Bush?

The Iraq war is the true Bush legacy, but even before Bush was for the Iraq war, John McCain became involved with neocons who were proponents of the Iraq war in the 90s.  In the fall of 1997 on Fox News, McCain complained that George H.W. Bush hadn't overthrown Saddam Hussein during the first Gulf War, embracing a key neocon idea.  McCain first explained his thinking in a March 15, 1999 speech at Kansas State University - "call it rogue-state rollback if you will" of "supporting indigenous and outside forces that desire to overthrow the odious regimes that rule these states."[15]  McCain and associate Senator Joe Lieberman were honorary co-chairs of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq that included neocons like Robert Kagan, William Kristol, Randy Scheunemann, James Woosley, John Bolton, and others.  In 1998, McCain and Lieberman sponsored the senate version of the Iraq Liberation Act[1] drafted by Randy Scheunemann later signed by President Clinton.  Neocons initially supported McCain in the 2000 presidential election prior to his defeat by Bush in the primary.

McCain continued his advocacy for the neocon's war in Iraq with the Bush administration.  When asked if he had any major disagreements with Kristol and Kagan or their magazine,  McCain's response was "I am sure there have been issues that we have disagreed on," he said, "but I think, generally speaking, I agree with and respect them enormously."[8]  The March 2002 Economist discusses John McCain as the source of George Bush's foreign policy.  The article is titled "George Bush: McCainiac - How the President has Almost Become the Man he Trounced in the Primaries" and goes on to  say "It is almost as if the Arizona senator had won the election" and "Despite his defeat, he laid much of the groundwork for Mr Bush's post-September presidency."[22]  A year later, just before the invasion of Iraq, when asked if Iraqis would treat Americans as liberators, McCain continued the pre-war spin, "Absolutely, absolutely." McCain insisted "Saddam Hussein is on a crash course to construct a nuclear weapon" and that "the interaction we know to have occurred between members of Al Qaeda and Saddam's regime may increasingly take the form of active cooperation to target the United States." McCain believed "regime change in Iraq" could result in "demand for self-determination" throughout the Middle East.[8]  

Four years into the Iraq war and McCain was undaunted, becoming a principal supporter of the surge. An American Enterprise Institute (AEI) event in January 2007 brought together Fred Kagan, retired General Jack Keane and Senators John McCain and Joe Lieberman. The focus was on how to escalate the war in Iraq. "The surge must be substantial and it must be sustained," McCain told a packed room. That meant keeping an additional 20,000 to 35,000 troops in Iraq for 18 to 24 months.[16]  At the AEI, McCain and Lieberman worked closely with Robert and Fred Kagan, who authored the report leading to the surge. They then worked with Cheney to convince President Bush to go with the escalation.  But it was not just Iraq.  Randy Scheunemann expressed the need to stay in Iraq for a long time, not just to stabilize Iraq, but because the U.S. may have to deal with many threats from the region. And of course you have to include Iran as among the possible threats that we’d have to deal with, according to McCain.[11]

McCain continued his support for aggressive international expansionism.  In a May 2007 speech to the Hoover Institution, McCain explained the war on terror is part of a "worldwide political, economic, and philosophical struggle between the future and the past, between progress and reaction, and between liberty and despotism." According to McCain, the despotism problem requires us to "put pressure on dictators in Iran, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Burma, and other pariah states" but also to worry that Russia and China have joined to block pressure on these dictators.  "Iran is able to aggressively pursue nuclear weapons and hegemony in the Persian Gulf," McCain said, "in part, because it has been shielded by the world's powerful autocracies."  To combat a conspiracy of dictatorships, McCain proposed creating a "worldwide League of Democracies," whose role would be to create an alternative mechanism to the United Nations that could facilitate coercive action "with or without Moscow's and Beijing's approval."  McCain added "there's only one thing worse than the United States exercising the military option; that is a nuclear-armed Iran."[15]  A YouTube video catches McCain saying at a campaign stop in Florida "There are going to be other wars.  I am sorry to tell you this.  There are going to be other wars.  We will never surrender but there will be other wars."[24]  In a another recent campaign speech, McCain said that by 2013 "the size of the Army and Marine Corps has been significantly increased and are now better equipped." [23]  "He's the true neocon," said Ivo Daalder of the Brookings Institution.  "He does believe, in a way that George W. Bush never really did, in the use of power, military power above all, to change the world in America's image. If you thought George Bush was bad when it comes to the use of military force, wait till you see John McCain."[17]  McCain's only political philosophy that comes out in his five books is to restore executive power at the expense of Congress, especially when it comes to foreign policy and war.[19]

McCain's 2008 presidential campaign has him rejoined with the neocons, with Scheunemann, Kagan, Kristol, Bolton, and Lieberman as his top foreign policy advisors.[13]  Some have McCain picking John Bolton as Secretary of State; McCain was a leading Republican supporter of Bolton's nomination as United Nations ambassador.[7]  Even the Saudis are rooting for McCain because he promises to keep U.S. troops in Iraq and to deter Iran.  "The royal family and other elites would like to see McCain," said Mai Yamani, a scholar with the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut. "He would keep the troops in Iraq, and that is their main worry, that the U.S. may withdraw or minimize its presence," said Yamani. U.S. forces are needed to counter the spread of Iranian influence from Iraq, which many Saudis believe "now is ruled by Iran."[28]  Lawrence Kaplan, former neocon, said in a May 2008 interview "The near-term argument here is that if John McCain wins the presidential election, neoconservatism will have been vindicated. Because by voting him into office, people will have tacitly given their endorsement to that sort of foreign policy. His advisers are the very people we are arguing about."[25]

How does McCain's economic plan compare to Bush? In a study of McCain’s economic plan, he proposes a corporate tax cut, repeal of the AMT, and an extension of the Bush tax cuts that would result in debt of $12.7 trillion,  the highest since America's 1951 World War II debt.  McCain's debt is $3.5 trillion greater than Bush's $9.2 trillion.  McCain's budget reduces government revenues to 16.3% of GDP, the lowest levels since 1962 where spending averaged 18.3% of GDP the past 25 years.  This study assumes McCain's most optimistic spending savings: $18 billion cut of earmarks and a $15 billion freeze in wasteful spending. Impacts from McCain's optional simple alternative tax are unknown.[26] Given McCain's previously stated intention to grow the military, additional budget cuts must come from domestic spending.

A vote for McCain is a vote for wars and an overreaching foreign policy and a fiscally irresponsible imperial presidency more extreme than George W. Bush.  Yet McCain is a man with an explosive temper that Republican and Democratic senators and senior military leaders do not trust as commander in chief.  The consequences of a McCain presidency are too dire to not vote for the Democratic candidate, or abstain from voting, for reasons of race, gender, or campaign bitterness.  The lives of our sons and daughters and the future for our grandchildren depend on it.  After ten years of transformation, the John McCain of 2008 is no maverick; he is indeed, worse than Bush.

Sources:

[1]http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c105:H.R.4655.ENR:Iraq Liberation ActOctober, 1998

[2]http://harpers.org/archive/2008/04/hbc-90002804Worst. President. Ever.Scott HortonApril 5, 2008 

[3]http://www.antiwar.com/orig/lind1.htmlHow Neoconservatives Conquered Washington – and Launched a War
Michael Lind
April 10, 2003

[4]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-heilbrunn/john-mccain-neocon_b_82530.htmlJohn McCain, NeoconJacob HeilbrunnJanuary 21, 2008

[5]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-heilbrunn/mccain-camp-is-neocon-red_b_99046.htmlMcCain Camp Is Neocon Redux: It's OfficialJacob HeilbrunnApril 28, 2008 

[6]http://www.antiwar.com/orig/giraldi.php?articleid=12345John McCain and the Neocon ResurgencePhilip GiraldiFebruary 12, 2008

[7]http://news.aol.com/newsbloggers/2008/02/09/john-mccain-might-pick-top-neocon-as-secretary-of-state/John McCain Might Pick Top Neocon as Secretary of StateCenk UygurFebruary 9, 2008 

[8]http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=18768&prog=zgp&proj=zusrNeo-McCainJohn JudisThe New RepublicOctober 16, 2006

[9]http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/3890.htmlJohn McCain

[10]http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=53694&sectionid=3510203McCain presidency, 'neocon redux' April 29, 2008

[11]http://www.democracynow.org/2008/3/26/a_century_in_iraq_replacing_unA Century in Iraq, Replacing UN with “League of Democracies,” Rogue State Rollback? A Look at John McCain’s Foreign Policy VisionAmy Goodman with Robert DreyfussMarch 26, 2008

[12]http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/28/politics/28bolton.htmlMcCain Urging Accord on Bolton and Secret DocumentsDouglas Jehl and Carl HulseMay 28, 2005

[13]http://thinkprogress.org/wonkroom/2008/03/17/mccain-advisers/John McCain's War CabinetM. DussMarch 7, 2008

[14]http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/10/us/politics/10mccain.html2 Camps Trying to Influence McCain on Foreign PolicyElisabeth Bumiller and Larry RohterApril 10, 2008

[15]http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_militaristThe MilitaristMatthew YglesiasApril 28, 2008

[16]http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/08/opinion/main2336887.shtmlHow To Further The Neocon Mess In Iraq Nation: Those Who Sold War On False Pretenses Want EscalationAri BermanJanuary 8, 2007

[17]http://www.prospect.org//cs/articles;jsessionid=aMB8pp4oa-a8De9IKI?article=more_bellicose_than_bushMore Bellicose Than Bush? Paul WaldmanMarch 11, 2008 

[18]http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/fareed_zakaria/2008/04/mccains_radical_foreign_policy.htmlMcCain's Radical Foreign PolicyFareed ZakariaApril 28, 2008

[19]http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/03072008/transcript2.htmlBill Moyers JournalMarch 7, 2008

[20]http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_196286.htmlSo, what is a 'neocon'?Bill SteigerwaldMay 29, 2004

[21]http://www.aei.org/publications/filter.all,pubID.25086/pub_detail.aspOperation Comeback Joshua MuravchikNovember 1, 2006

[22]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-bergmann/economist-in-2002-john-mc_b_101891.htmlJohn McCain "Laid the Groundwork" for George Bush's Post 9-11 Foreign PolicyMax BergmannMay 15, 2008

[23]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/john-mccain-trades-straig_b_101961.htmlJohn McCain Trades Straight Talk for Unadulterated FantasyArianna HuffingtonMay 15, 2008

[24]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-caYFdnUCYPolk City, FL CampaignJohn McCain  January 2008

[25]http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,551828,00.htmlI Don't See Anything Good That Has Come from this WarYassin MusharbashMay 6, 2008

[26]http://thinkprogress.org/wonkroom/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/budget.pdfMcCain’s Deficit ProblemMay 2008

[27]http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/10/lieberman-bennett-kristol-iran/Lieberman, Bennett, And Kristol See Petraeus Hearing As ‘An Argument’ For ‘Going Into Iran’»MattApr 10, 2008

[28]http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aTPOwyOePvy8&refer=politicsMcCain Iraq, Iran Policies Make Him Favored Candidate to Saudis Hans Nichols and Janine ZachariaMay 16, 2008

[29]http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2008/05/26/080526taco_talk_toobinIn McCain's CourtJeffrey ToobinMay 26, 2008

We started off at 9:30 at Obama HQ in Dallas and then split up into groups of 30 - 40 people that were sent to various parts of the city. Turnout must have been strong since it ended up only being a half day effort; I had been told to allow all day.  We then broke in teams of three and worked our route going door to door.  Majority of people were happy to talk to us and were Obama supporters.  We had a friendly conversation with a Republican who liked Obama, too. We also ran into a Clinton supporter who was friendly. One woman we caught in the driveway and started yelling at us before we could get past "Hi, we are volunteers...".  She did not want to talk about voting. We assumed she was for Clinton and "bitter".

Obama's trust in people is well placed, and how he is running is campaign reflects that trust. Our instructions were all about being respectful and friendly - nothing negative.  As a counterpoint, one of my  co-canvasser started with Clinton but has been very disappointed by both Hillary and Bill and the descent in their campaign.

What I saw and heard today leaves me very optimistic about November.  In our group of 30 - 40 that met in the parking lot before breaking into teams, there were black, white, hispanic, old, young, and middle age.  All people that want their country back.  All the pundit and Clinton campaign rhetoric about electability is just that. Like the story on Huffington Post, I think the only people who have to worry are the RNC and McCain.  I do trust that people will see that McCain 2008 is not McCain pre-2000 and may in fact be worse than Bush, once the general election ramps up and the MSM wakes up, as it is starting to do.

The ideology of free trade implemented by NAFTA, CAFTA, and other free trade agreements are foundations for President Bush, Senator John McCain, and Senator and President Clinton.  Although not member to a formal free trade agreement, in 2000 and 2001,  trade with China accelerated when it was granted most favored nation status by the Bush Administration and admitted to the WTO.  The November 2007 Report To Congress by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission () highlights disturbing results of the US's trading relationship with China.
Since 2000, US exports to China grew from $16 to $55 billion by 2006 while China's exports to US grew from $100 to $287 billion in the same period.  This trade surplus has allowed China to invest and expand at a rapid rate, both militarily and industrially.  China's estimated defense budget has grown three fold since 1990 from an estimated $12 billion to an estimated $38 billion in 2004.  In the same period, the US defense budget grew just over 10% from $431 to $478 billion in 2005.  China's defense expenditures are now 6th behind the UK, France, Germany, and Japan.  China's expenditures on R&D has grown four fold from $50B in 1998 to over $200B in 2005 and now has state of the art research capabilities in several technologies.  Susan Hockfield, President of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, in a February 2008 speech expresses concern: 

"Yet China is pouring billions of dollars into building and staffing a swath of new universities, with the express goal of getting five of them into that top 20 ranking within 15 years.  Whether you believe they can achieve that vision in this time frame or not, it is a glimpse into a serious new competitive landscape."

The 2007 Report to Congress goes on to examine specific impacts on North Carolina, which has felt competition from China directly in the textiles and furniture industries.  From 1996 to 2006, manufacturing jobs in North Carolina dropped from 809,400 to 553,300.  In 2006 alone, of 120,000 jobs nation-wide that were eligible for federal programs because of import competition, 40,000 were in North Carolina.  The impact on workers in North Carolina has been significant.  42% of laid off North Carolina workers 55 and older found a job within a year earning 61% of their former manufacturing wages.  Another 33% of laid off workers were making less than 50% of their pervious wages.  One North Carolina study found 15% of 4,800 laid off workers from one company found jobs that had no benefits.  Between 2001 to 2006, North Carolina average annual wage fell, dropping it from 31st to 36th place in state rankings, at $32,234, 11% lower than the US average of $36,276.
China's admission to the WTO in 2001 had a direct impact on North Carolina textile industries since China would have remained under the Mutli-Fibre Arrangement of 1974 that limited China's export of textile to the US.  In the first quarter after China joined the WTO in 2001, textile and apparel exports grew 65% overall and as high as 1,500% for some categories, costing 44,000 US jobs and 11,000 North Carolina jobs.  China's industrial policy also provides 73 subsidies to its textile producers, enabling them to compete effectively with North Carolina textile firms. 

"Beijing goes to great lengths to hide the fact that many Chinese firms thought to be private are, in fact, SOEs [State Owned Enterprises].  Many companies in China whose stocks are traded on China’s exchanges are in reality SOEs in which the government keeps as much as a 75 percent stake",

says Mr. Frederick Jiang, manager of the Ivy Pacific Opportunities Fund.

In 1999, China's bedroom furniture exports to the US were only $200 million.  Between 2000 and 2005, 73 North Carolina furniture plants closed after China's 2001 WTO admission lowered tariffs on furniture, costing North Carolina 18,801 jobs.  By mid-2002, furniture exports to the US increased to $1.6B and China's share of the US bedroom furniture market grew from 15% to 53%.
To counter China's tactics, the US Department of Commerce levied anti-dumping duties in 2004 and temporary textile import quotas in 2005.  Federal assistance programs for dislocated workers and North Carolina's investment in Research Triangle Park offset the impacts of China's trade policy and prevented total devastation of North Carolina's economy.
University of California professor Peter Navarro examined major drivers of Chinese competitiveness.  He ranked the three most important drivers: currency manipulation of the renminbi; export subsidies though free energy, water, capital to underperforming industries; and counterfeiting and piracy. Other factors include: China's weak enforcement of IPR;  lack of enforcement by the Bush administration of trade laws and refusal to bring complaints;  and China's three decades of record economic growth has not translated into better lives for citizens so they save for basic survival needs, not the purchase of imported goods.
David Sirota recently discussed the Clinton administration's approval of the sale of Magnaquench in 1995 to two Chinese state-owned companies headed by husbands and  daughters of then-Chinese leader Deng Xiaopin.  This sale was approved by the Clinton administration despite objections since the magnets made by Magnaquench were used in our military's smart bombs. In Indiana, this led to the loss of 200 jobs when a Magnaquench plant closed. 
With China, the Clinton-Bush-McCain blind adherence to free trade has enabled a new military and industrial R&D power to appear on the horizon. Jobs were lost nationally with significant impacts in North Carolina and Indiana; the furniture and textile industries in North Carolina were decimated by Chinese-US trade policy.  China's strategy of importing jobs and exporting goods is far superior to the US strategy of exporting jobs and importing goods; China is experiencing record current account surpluses and foreign currency reservers and growing political, economic, and military power while the US experiences record deficits, debts, recession, and declining national security.  The US needs an intelligent approach to trade policy that benefits the nation as a whole, not a failed ideological belief in free trade that benefits the few.

(12) 1982.  In McCain's first race for Congress, rival state Sen. Jim Mack of Tempe, contacted McCain's ex-wife in hopes of collecting dirt.  McCain privately promised to "personally beat the (expletive) out of" Mack if he ever pulled such a stunt again, a threat McCain admitted to in his 2002 book.

(12) 1982.  Donna Carlson, another of McCain's 1982 Republican opponents, believes McCain holds a grudge - "forever and ever, I guess."  "I had a lot of friends in Congress at the time that I ran, and some of them supported me, endorsed me or helped raise money," said Carlson. "And he never let them forget that. He always brought it up like it was something evil they had done."

(1) 1986.  McCain confronted Robert Wexler, the head of Arizona's Young Republicans then in his 20's and exploded, according to witnesses including Jon Hinz, then executive director of the Arizona Republican Party.  McCain jabbed an index finger in Wexler's chest.  "I told you we needed a stage," he screamed according to Hinz. "You incompetent little (expletive).  When I tell you to do something, you do it."  Hinz placed his 6-foot-6 frame between the McCain and Wexler.  "John, this is not the time or place for this," Hinz said.  McCain fumed he hadn't been seen clearly by television viewers because Wexler did not account for McCain's short stature in the stage.  McCain did not talk to Hinz again for several years.

(1) Late 1980s.  McCain requested the firing of an aide to Sen. Dennis DeConcini, D-Arizona, according to two top figures in DeConcini's office.  The aide, Judy Leiby, was attending a Phoenix meeting between McCain and veterans when she rebutted a McCain assertion that DeConcini, a Democrat, favored a bill that included a cut of some veterans benefits.  "That is incorrect," Leiby said, detailing the specifics of DeConcini's position.  Afterward, McCain called DeConcini and asked he dismiss Leiby. DeConcini defended Leiby, praising her fairness and expertise.  McCain repeated his demand that Leiby be fired and DeConcini "politely told McCain to go to hell," according to a source close to the conversation, adding: "Not once in [DeConcini's 18-year Senate tenure] did another senator ask for an aide to be dismissed. Not once did anyone speak about an aide like that."

(14) 1989.  Accessible to reporters as a presidential candidate, McCain conducted an interview with the Arizona Republic.  Showing his temper, McCain insulted, cursed and hung up on reporters questioning him about involvement in the Keating Five scandal.

(1) 1989.  The nomination of John Tower for defense secretary was already in trouble when Sen. Richard C. Shelby, D-Alabama, helped doom it by voting against Tower.  A furious McCain, believing Shelby had reneged on a commitment of support, accosted him and got within an inch of his nose and screamed at him.

(11) 1991.  Before Anita Hill appeared at the Senate hearings on the nomination of Clarence Thomas to the U.S. Supreme Court, McCain and then Arizona Sen. Dennis DeConcini said they supported Thomas.  E. J. Montini wrote, since only Hill or Thomas could be telling the truth,  McCain and DeConcini were labeling Hill a liar without hearing her testimony.  DeConcini took the comments in stride but McCain told Montini "You are the liar," and promised "to pursue this as far as I can since I have the weight of evidence and a clear case on my side that you have assassinated my character."  McCain did not speak or correspond with Montini for the next 12 years.

(7).  1992. Three reporters from Arizona described an incident involving McCain's temper.  Wife Cindy McCain 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 (expletive)."  McCain's excuse was it had been a long day.

(10) 1992.  A fight in Arizona went on for years about Mount Graham, on which the federal government wanted to put a telescope.  Two respected physicians, Robin Silver and Bob Witzeman, went to meet McCain and discuss Mount Graham.  When they mentioned "Mount Graham," McCain erupted.  "He jumped up and down, screaming obscenities at us for at least 10 minutes," Silver said. "He shook his fists as if he was going to slug us."  Witzeman was stunned at McCain's violent, irrational temper. "To my mind, McCain's the most likely senator to start a nuclear war."

(9) 1992.  Dolores Apodaca Alfond expressed concern a Senate panel looking into missing Vietnam soldiers, like her brother, might shut down before it exhausted all avenues.  "I do not denigrate your efforts," McCain thundered at her. "And I am sick and tired of you denigrating mine and many other people who have views different from you."  McCain later backpedaled and admitted he may have "appeared upset."

(1) 1992.  At a meeting with Arizona officials over a federal land issue, a furious McCain questioned Phoenix mayor Paul Johnson's honesty.  "Start a tape recorder -- it's best when you get a liar on tape," McCain said to others in the meeting, according to an account of their "nose-to-nose, testosterone-filled" argument Johnson provided to reporters.  

(1) 1992.  At a committee investigating Vietnam War prisoners and those missing in action, Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, was mocked by McCain to his face and McCain used a profanity to describe him.  Grassley told McCain, "I don't have to take this. I think you should apologize." There was shouting and shoving between them, but no punches. Nebraska Democrat Bob Kerrey helped break up the altercation, according to a spectator.  Grassley said recently it was a long time before he and McCain spoke again.

(1) 1994.  McCain tried to stop a primary challenge to governor J. Fife Symington III by telephoning his opponent, Barbara Barrett, and warning of unspecified consequences should she stay in the race.  Barrett stayed in.  At the state Republican convention, McCain confronted Sandra Dowling and, according to witnesses, angrily accused her of helping persuade Barrett to enter the race.  "You better get [Barrett] out or I'll destroy you," a witness claims McCain shouted.  Dowling responded that if McCain couldn't respect her right to support whomever she chose, that he "should get the hell out of the Senate."  McCain and Dowling shouted an obscenity at each other

(4) 1998.  The Phoenix New Times in Arizona and the National Journal ran an Associated Press story reporting McCain's joke that Chelsea Clinton was ugly and Janet Reno and Hillary Clinton were lesbians.  "Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?" McCain said at a GOP fund-raiser in Washington. "Because Janet Reno is her father."

(15) 1999.  NASA administrator Daniel Goldin was called in by McCain in 1999 after a $125-million probe crashed on Mars.   "McCain went ballistic the moment Goldin walked into McCain's office," said a participant in the meeting who requested anonymity. "He was shouting and using profanity, saying he was sick of NASA's screw-ups.  It went on for a few minutes and then he kicked Goldin out of the office."  Goldin was walking down the hallway but was summoned back to the McCain's office by an aide.  "When he came back in, McCain started yelling at Goldin all over again. And then McCain kicked Goldin out a second time, before he ever said a word," the source said.

(6) 1999.  Former Gov. Jane Hull pretended to hold a telephone receiver away from her ear to demonstrate a typical outburst from McCain in an interview with The New York Times.

(2) 1999.  The Arizona Republic had not made an endorsement in the 2000 presidential race.  In an editorial:  "If McCain is truly a serious contender for the presidency, it is time the rest of the nation learned about the John McCain we know in Arizona. There is also reason to seriously question whether he has the temperament, and the political approach and skills, we want in the next president of the United States."

(6) 2000.  "Only an a------ would put together a budget like this," he told the former Budget Committee chairman, Sen. Pete Domenici.  "I decided I didn't want this guy anywhere near a trigger," Domenici told Newsweek in 2000.

(4) 2002.  In his 2002 book, "Worth the Fighting For: A Memoir," McCain said, "I have a temper, to state the obvious, which I have tried to control with varying degrees of success because it does not always serve my interest or the public's."

(13) 2003.  At a base closure meeting, McCain got into a disagreement with freshman Rep. Trent Franks, R-Arizona.  McCain repeatedly berating Franks, calling the congressman "boy" several times, standing up and pointing at him, and emphasizing that Franks should know his place.

(1) 2006. Reports surfaced of Rep. Rick Renzi, an Arizona Republican, taking offense when McCain called him "boy" once too often during a meeting. McCain aides confirm the report while playing down its importance.

(3) 2006.  A NewsMax.com article quoted former Sen. Bob Smith, R-New Hampshire: "I have witnessed incidents where he has used profanity at colleagues and exploded at colleagues . . . He would disagree about something and then explode. It was incidents of irrational behavior. We've all had incidents where we have gotten angry, but I've never seen anyone act like that."

(3) 2006.  "People who disagree with him get the (expletive)" said former Rep. John LeBoutillier, R-New York, who had an encounter with McCain while on a POW task force.  "I think he is mentally unstable and not fit to be president," LeBoutillier said.

(3) 2006.  "He had very few friends in the Senate," said former Sen. Smith, who dealt with McCain almost daily. "He has a lot of support around the country, but I don't think he has a lot of support from people who know him well."

(3) 2006.  Democrat Paul Johnson, the former mayor of Phoenix, saw McCain's temper up close. "His volatility borders in the area of being unstable," Johnson has said. ""Before I let this guy put his finger on the button, I would have to give considerable pause."

(13). 2006. "But for someone to say that McCain became just angry and yelled or raised my voice or -- it's just not true. It's simply not true," McCain said. "And so, those rumors continue to circulate about - quote - temper. They're going to have to find some concrete examples of it, and they aren't there."  Two days earlier McCain acknowledged that, "I have had a bad temper in my life."  "In my early days in office, I displayed that temper, always to my detriment.  Every time I ever lost my temper, I regretted it since then."

(1) 2007.  During a heated closed-door discussion with Senate colleagues about immigration, McCain shouted a profanity at John Cornyn, R-Texas.

(16) 2007.  Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, had an exchange with McCain over his Baghdad market photo-op. 

(5) 2008.  Sen. Thad Cochran, R- Mississippi, has known Senator John McCain for more than three decades, endorsed Mitt Romney for president.  Cochran's choice was partly driven by his fear of how McCain might behave in the Oval Office.  "The thought of his being president sends a cold chill down my spine," Cochran said about McCain. "He is erratic. He is hotheaded. He loses his temper and he worries me."

(1) 2008.  McCain had a testy exchange in March with New York Times reporter Elisabeth Bumiller over whether he had had a conversation in 2004 with Democratic Sen. John F. Kerry about being his running mate.

(9) 2008.  "I like McCain. I respect McCain. But I am a little worried by his knee-jerk response factor," said retired Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, who was in charge of training the Iraqi military from 2003 to 2004. "I think it is a little scary. I think this guy's first reactions are not necessarily the best reactions. I believe that he acts on impulse."

(9) 2008.  "I studied leadership for a long time during 32 years in the military," said retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Scott Gration, a one-time Republican. "It is all about character.  Who can motivate willing followers?  Who has the vision?  Who can inspire people?" Gration asked. "I have tremendous respect for John McCain, but I would not follow him."

(9) 2008.  "One of the things the senior military would like to see when they go visit the president is a kind of consistency, a kind of reliability," explained retired Gen. Merrill McPeak, former Republican and former chief of staff of the Air Force.

(9) 2008.  Stephen Wayne, a political science professor at Georgetown studying the personalities of presidential candidates, agrees McCain's temperament is a concern. "The anger is there," Wayne said. If McCain is the one to answer the phone at 3 a.m., he said, "you worry about an initial emotive, less rational response."

(9) 2008.  Retired Rear Adm. John Hutson, a lifetime Republican, put it this way about facing a national security crisis: "When everybody else goes nuts, the president of the United States needs to get cooler and cooler."

(12) 2008.  DeConcini, whose relation with McCain frayed during the Keating Five period, acknowledges he is not McCain's most objective observer.  DeConcini would not support McCain for president "under any circumstances" based on temperament concerns.  "McCain's problem was that, if he didn't get his way, he'd go through the roof," DeConcini said. "I witnessed it. It's something that McCain has got to live with and tries to deal with."

(16) 2008.  Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, twice triggered the McCain temper, in spats over ethics reform in 2006.



(1) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/19/AR2008041902224.html?nav=hcmoduleMcCain: A Question of TemperamentMichael LeahyWashington Post Staff Writer April 20, 2008

(2) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/19991031/aponline183823_000.htmScott Thomsen
Associated Press
October 31, 1999

(3) http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/8/30/123006.shtmlJohn McCain's Temper Preceded VietnamRonald Kesslernewsmax.comAugust 30, 2006

(4) http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/1/10/182118.shtmlVanity Fair Tiptoes Around McCain's Explosive TemperRonald Kesslernewsmax.comJanuary 11, 2007

(5) http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/01/27/famed_mccain_temper_is_tamed/Famed McCain Temper is TamedMichael KranishThe Boston GlobeJanuary 27, 2008

(6) http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=4301022Will McCain's Temper Be a Liability?Libby QuaidAssociated PressFebruary 16, 2008

(7) The Real McCainCliff SchecterMay 2008

(8) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/03/AR2008020303242_pf.htmlGOP Senators Reassess Views About McCainPaul Kanewashingtonpost.com February 4, 2008

(9) http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/03/06/commander_in_chief/It's 3 a.m. Who Do You Want Answering the Phone?Mark BenjaminMarch 6, 2008

(10) http://www.creators.com/opinion/alexander-cockburn/the-mushrooming-clouds-that-hang-over-mccain.htmlThe Mushrooming Clouds that Hang over McCainAlexander Cockburncreators.com2008

(11) http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0323montini0323.htmlNothing here for McCain to become angry over . . . I hopeE. J. MontiniThe Arizona RepublicMarch 23, 2006

(12) http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/0407mccain-grudges0407.htmlMcCain Foes, Allies Address his TemperDan Nowicki
The Arizona Republic
April 7, 2008

(13) http://www.azcentral.com/news/specials/mccain/articles/0803mccain-temper-ON.htmlQuestions About McCain's Temper: Fair?Billy House
The Arizona Republic Washington Bureau
August 3, 2006

(14) http://www.azcentral.com/news/specials/mccain/articles/0323keating-ON.htmlMcCain: I Learned From Keating Five CaseAssociated Press
March 23, 2008

(15) http://www.azcentral.com/news/specials/mccain/articles/0522McCain22-ON.htmlMcCain Peppers Dispute with Salty WordsRalph Vartabedian and Michael Finnegan
Los Angeles Times
May 22, 2007

(16) http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/opinion/03rich.html?scp=8&sq=John+McCain+Temper&st=nytAsk Not What J.F.K. Can Do for ObamaFrank RichNew York TimesFebruary 3, 2008

After watching Olbermann and Abrams on MSNBC skewer the media on this bitter issue the last two days, I must confess, I am also bitter (or angry, frustrated, disappointed, not content, discontented - substitute your choice).<br><br>I am bitter every time Bush or McBush mention terrorism and Iraq in the same sentence.<br>I am bitter every time problems with free trade are mentioned and the only possible alternative is protectionism.<br>I am bitter that the most favored nation status was granted China in 2001 and we get poisoned food and toys for our children while China expands their military budget to match that of Great Britian and runs up nearly a trillion dollar trade deficit with the US.<br>I am bitter when our Constitution is violated by the Bush administration and nothing happens to the violator.<br>I am bitter when laws are violated by the Bush administration and nothing happens to the violator.<br>I am bitter that the 109 Congress passes the Military Commissions Act that prevents the Bush administration for being charged with war crimes just before the 110 Congress showed up.<br> 
I am bitter when the White House is turned into party and corporate headquarters and the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many.<br>I am bitter that one of the largest US institutional bond funds had the intelligence to move their fund to 88% cash and avoid the pending credit crisis while our Federal government was deaf, dumb, and blind, and now citizens and their communities pay the price of others greed and incompetence.<br>
I am bitter when corporations are given preferential treatment and rights over citizens.<br>I am bitter when CEOs run companies into the ground and still get millions of dollars in bonuses.<br>I am bitter when our country looses its international standing and respect.<br>I am bitter every time a child is left behind by No Child Left Behind.<br>I am bitter every time seniors are stuck paying higher prescription prices by the Prescription Drug Benefit Plan.<br>I am bitter that scientific evidence and research is suppressed or ignored on subjects like climate change.<br>I am bitter every time the Clinton campaign diverts attention from the issues that make me bitter, and a majority of the MSM tags along.<br>

I was riding in a taxi about four weeks ago and the driver, whom I know since I travel frequently and arrange for him to take me to airport, brought up how tired he was and didn't know if he could continue.  He works hard, is single, and lives modestly and is enterprising in his cab business and tries to provide real service to customers, like myself, to build his business. Even with his efforts, with gas prices increasing, he was working a lot of long hours trying to make ends meet.
He then expressed how upset he was with how Bush is running the country. And this was visible, palpable anger towards Bush and the Republicans and the impact it was having on him.  We had not talked politics much up to that point beside my mentioning briefly that I supported Obama during a previous trip to the airport. At that time, he was undecided and maybe leaning to Clinton, but now he launched into how he was looking at Obama and how Obama pulled himself up and that had impressed him.
You do not have to travel to western Pennsylvania to find bitterness and anger towards our government.  Barack Obama understands where a large number of people are in this country; these same people do not need to be told who is an "elite" and who is not, by the candidates, or the MSM.
Clinton and McCain disgrace themselves with their hypocrisy and political rhetoric about Obama being an elite. The MSM disgrace themselves through their lack of reporting the story,  instead just regurgitating the rhetoric from the campaigns.  Although, Dan Abrams on MSNBC tonight, to his credit, at least challenged that this "bitter issue" warrants the storm of media attention it was getting.