McCain’s temper is an asset
Is John McCain too hot-headed to be president?
That’s suggested in a political ad produced by the liberal group Brave New PAC. It features Philip Butler, a highly decorated Navy officer who had already been imprisoned 2 1/2 years before McCain was brought to Hanoi in October 1967.
In the ad, Butler says: “I think I can say with authority that the prisoner-of-war experience is not a good prerequisite for president of the United States. … He was well known as a very volatile guy, and he would blow up and go off like a Roman candle. John McCain is not somebody that I would like to see with his finger near the red button.”
One quibble with the ad is that it suggests McCain was “volatile” while in Vietnam. But in the longer interview on the group’s Web site, it sounds more as if Butler is talking about their time at the U.S. Naval Academy, when the two midshipmen lived across the hall from each other. That’s probably two very different John McCains.
Nevertheless, at points along the campaign trail, even Republicans have talked about temperament. It’s partly why Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., initially endorsed Mitt Romney over McCain.
“The thought of his being president sends a cold chill down my spine,” Cochran told the Boston Globe in January. “He is erratic. He is hotheaded. He loses his temper, and he worries me.” Cochran has since endorsed the McCain-Palin ticket.
McCain brought up his reputation in the book “Worth the Fighting For”: “I have regretted losing my temper on many occasions. But there are things worth getting angry about in politics. … When public servants lose their capacity for outrage over practices injurious to the national interest, they have outlived their usefulness to the country.”
There’s something to be said for a bit of temper. I wish someone in the administration had been fired up enough to generate a sense of urgency among war planners while the situation in Iraq was deteriorating in 2005-06.
McCain for years had called for a new strategy and more troops. If only someone in the chain of command had pushed as hard, and gotten angry – furious, even, given the costs – when efforts fell short.
So, yes, a temper has its place, but it certainly can’t be the defining characteristic of a presidential candidate. And it’s not for McCain, as other former POWs will attest.
Retired Air Force Col. Tom Moe of Ohio recalls looking through a peephole in his cell door when McCain was returned from interrogation – a time when volatile behavior would be understandable. Instead, McCain waited for the guard to momentarily look away. He would turn toward Moe’s cell, smile, and give a thumbs-up.
“I remember that image of him looking over when he couldn’t stand up straight, when he was broken and battered,” Moe said in an interview last week. “What a tremendous image of his strength and courage.”
As for temper, POWs learned quickly to control themselves, Moe said.
“If you lost your temper in Hanoi, you could easily be beaten to death,” Moe said. “If ever there was a time to cool it, it was there.”
Leo Thorsness, a Medal of Honor recipient, wrote last week in the New York Times about other lessons learned in Hanoi: “The years in a brutal prison were equivalent to earning a Ph.D. in psychology. We saw that peace without freedom is empty. We gained a deep appreciation for justice and courage. We learned that survival depends on teamwork. We were colorblind – whites, blacks, Asians, we were all the same. We learned the value of always doing what is right regardless of consequence. …
“A president who has been tested in this way can be counted on to make wise decisions.”
I understand that temperament is a valid concern when looking at candidates. Has the person been tested? Overcome obstacles? Fought for beliefs? Put others first?
What I don’t understand is why McCain’s political opponents would highlight one of his greatest strengths.