... Because they are concerned about that "who's going to answer the phone at 3:00 AM" thing.
while the consensus is that the 3 a.m. ad helped Clinton, it has also drawn criticism as a tactic that ultimately benefits John McCain, particularly if he is to face Obama in the general election. In essence, Clinton has now turned the debate about commander-in-chief readiness into a contest of résumés. And the conventional wisdom is that John McCain -- ex-fighter pilot, former POW and war hero -- wins.
But that's not necessarily the case, say senior military officials and political analysts. In interviews with Salon this week, several experienced military officers said McCain draws mixed reviews among military leaders, and they expressed serious doubts about whether McCain has the right temperament to be the next president and commander in chief. Some expressed more confidence in Obama, citing his temperament as an asset.
It is not difficult in Washington to find high-level military officials who have had close encounters with John McCain's temper, and who find it worrisome. Politicians sometimes scream for effect, but the concern is that McCain has, at times, come across as out of control. It is difficult to find current or former officers willing to describe those encounters in detail on the record. That's because, by and large, those officers admire McCain. But that doesn't mean they want his finger on the proverbial button, and they are supporting Clinton or Obama instead.
There's a lot more in this piece at salon. Here.
- Log in to post comments
Yeah, not having the best ability to control your emotions shows a lack of power. Great leaders show the utmost restraint.
But on the other hand, the guy has been through a lot and it's understandable that he has some built up anger.
From my perspective on personality and non-verbal behavior alone (not the best position to take for a skeptic) McCain seems worn-out and frail. Clinton scares me a little and seems untrustworthy. I just keep comparing her to Bill and she always seems to come in second place. Obama seems the most electable if I were basing on these qualities alone. He has this ability to inspire and bring people together that the other candidates don't have.
I think the US has three potential Presidents of high calibre, each with their own strengths and weaknesses.
I am not a US citizen, but I somehow instinctively like Barack Obama, because of his unique life experiences and his freshness. He also seems to have the temperament to be a good President.
Most of the focus on the "3am call" is pure fantasy .. great Presidents like Washington, Lincoln, FDR, or even Reagan (about whom I have doubts) did not became great by an instant response to a sudden crisis. Rather, they became great by careers of conviction and political action that they turned to good account in the Presidency. They delegated, were shrewdly selective about the issues they chose to focus on, and were daringly innovative BUT with precise timing and judgment on what would be accepted by the American people.
I think all the candidates have the temperaments to do this, but I think Obama most of all. It is also probably true that if he is not nominated or elected this time around, he will still be "President in waiting" for the next four years.
My hunch is that these "high-ranking military officers" cited are all Clinton cronies like Wesley Clark.
My husband is a former Army officer and we have lots of friends who are still in. They are all big McCain fans and cannot stand either Obama or Hillary.