McCain temper scorches NY Times reporter

America, do you really want this crazy old man to have his fingers on the Nuclear buttons?

McCain's Temper May Become an Issue
By Scott Thomsen
Associated Press Writer

PHOENIX –– While rising in the GOP presidential polls, Sen. John McCain is facing questions about what some Arizona political leaders view as his quick temper – and whether it might hinder him as president.

In a front page article and separate editorial Sunday, The Arizona Republic said it wanted the nation to know about the "volcanic" temper McCain has unleashed on several top state officials.

Those who have been on the receiving end of a McCain uproar include Republican Gov. Jane Hull, former Republican Gov. Rose Mofford and former Democratic Mayor Paul Johnson of Phoenix.

Mrs. Hull, a supporter of GOP presidential front-runner George W. Bush, has acknowledged that her relationship with McCain has been cool and told an interviewer recently McCain "has to keep control" of his temper.

A Hull spokesman, Francie Noyes, said Sunday the governor had no further comment on the matter of McCain's temperament and that "she wants to move on to other things."

But the Arizona Republic, which endorsed McCain for each of his five congressional races but has not yet made an endorsement in the presidential race, was direct.

It declared 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."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/19991031/aponline183823_000.htm

EB. Okay. Can I ask you about your (pause) Why you’re so angry?

McCain: Pardon me?

EB: Nevermind, nevermind.

McCain: "I mean it’s well known. Everybody knows. It’s been well chronicled a thousand times. John Kerry asked if I would consider being his running mate."

McCain must be learning from his good friend Hillary Clinton. She's known to have an inability to hold herself back as well.

McCain and Clinton = more of the same. These are two very outdated products. Some one toss them away and provide us with something fresh. Like a bright young Senator from Illinois who has the intellect and strength of character necessary to do the rebuilding this nation so desperately needs.

McCain and Hillary are spoiled, rotten old Washington insiders. They don't care about the problems facing this country. They only care about themselves and their corrupt cronies.

America is this the future you want?

No Country For Old Men...
or monsters like Hillary Clinton.

Obama 2008. Fresh ideas that will change America for the better.

How dare the press ask John McCain a question! The Generalissimo is to be bowed to and obeyed, not questioned. I hope the reporter was at least standing at attention.

Awesome. Give her both barrels, John.

Plus, c'mon it's Bumiller! Can she get back to fawning over President Bush? http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/28/politics/28letter.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

From the yellow journalism Times, no less!

My favorite description of Bumiller's "journalism" comes from wonkette.com:

"Reading Elisabeth Bumiller's gossippy, color over the facts White House reporting typically feels like eating Ca'n Crunch for dinner."

http://wonkette.com/politics/elisabeth-bumiller/elisabeth-bumillers-white-house-swan-song-178355.php

I wonder how her Condi book is?

Nice try, Frank James, but regular folks feel no sympathy for a poor widdle New York Times reporter hounding a public official about a private conversation. And really, where's the payoff? Given the headline ("scorches"), I was half expecting Senator McCain to throw a punch. Too bad he didn't. Would have been a nice chuckle and a good "attaboy" moment for America.

Isn't it funny that Jeff would howl over and over that Obama needs to answer questions about Rezko...and then commends McBush about "giving her both barrels". Of course he will say Obama hasn't answered enough questions as if there were ever enough questions asked by the rabid and then he will say McBush answered all the questions.

I wonder how her Condi book is?

Posted by: Jeff | March 7, 2008 3:43 PM

Give it a rest Mr college Republican, your McCain hero worship is making everyone sick right before the weekend.

The question that needs to be addressed is why did he lie to Sheryl Stolberg when he said he never had a conversation with Kerry about VP? Or is he lying now? We know he was lying one of the times. Do we need 4 more years of being lied to?

If it's McCain v. Clinton we can call the campaign, "Crazy Bitch" (Tina Fey's word, not mine).

If McCain can't handle getting questioned by a reporter without a childish temper tantrum, how is he going to handle getting questioned by Vladimir Putin? Global thermonuclear war?

John E, glad to see you've added Albert Palmer to your list of aliases. Haven't been in college for many years. Thanks for making me feel young. I'll support who I want and you support who you want.

Bill Hussein, McCain answered her question and he's answered this one many times before. He had a conversation with him, no offer was made or rejected and that was pretty much it.

You don't have to be a McCain supporter to know that Bumiller is the worst type of political reporter.

...to add to what I wrote, I'll say that the transcript looks far worse than the actual tape. Just watched the actual tape. Senator McCain spoke in measured and reasonable tones. Was every bit a conversation and not at all a "scorching". Either the press is clearly showing its anti-GOP bias in reporting this conversation as a scorching, or the press is little more than a bunch of hypersensitive thin-skinned crybabies who simply can't take any criticism whatsoever of their methods. It's clear to me why so many Americans have so little trust in the news media.

Listen, this is the most rubbish article I have ever read from this site, and here is why. Is McCain not human? Does the media really have a right to interfere with his personal conversations? The very idea of media trying to pry into his personal things is just wrong, as it is in any case. He had every right to be upset about this. At least he isn't hiding his emotions, which in my opinion exemplifies what any politician should stand for. If this government is really supposed to derive there just powers from the governed, Then it is up to us to elect people who best show who we are. He has done nothing against that whatsoever.

John McCain- The Anti-Jefferson!

"The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the
very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to
me to decide whether we should have a government without
newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not
hesitate a moment to prefer the latter." --Thomas Jefferson to
Edward Carrington, 1787.

"By a declaration of rights, I mean one which shall stipulate freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of commerce against monopolies, trial by juries in all cases, no suspensions of the habeas corpus, no standing armies. These are fetters against doing evil which no honest government should decline."

"JUDITH MILLER SPEAKS"

What goes around comes around!

It's 3am and the phone in the Whitehouse rang, and John didn't answer it, Cindi did! Vicki who!Who did you say this was? Vicki Who!

John. Oh John, You remember now! Honey, it's John Kerry not someone named Vicki!

Come on, I don't know why she's I mean he's calling! Hey! I got to go! Talk to you in the Rose Garden. Thanks.

Big headline.

Tiny story.

Nice try, Frank James, but regular folks feel no sympathy for a poor widdle New York Times reporter hounding a public official about a private conversation. And really, where's the payoff? Given the headline ("scorches"), I was half expecting Senator McCain to throw a punch. Too bad he didn't. Would have been a nice chuckle and a good "attaboy" moment for America.

Posted by: Tim1979 | March 7, 2008 3:55 PM

The issue is not the NYT. The issue whether someone with such a short fuse ought to be the President. The dude's got to handle pressure a little better than all that.

Oh my! Temper, temper, temper! That was such a simple, non-invasive question. I really wonder how he would handle a crisis.

"MCCAIN SPEAKS"

DON'T ASK THE "SHOOT STRAIGHT EXPRESS" QUESTIONS OF THE PAST.

THAT WAS THEN, THIS IS NOW.

DON'T ASK THE "SHOOT STRAIGHT EXPRESS" QUESTIONS ABOUT LOBBYING,LOBBYIST, MALE OR FEMALE.

DON'T YOU DARE, ASK ME ANYTHING, I DON'T LIKE WHEN PEOPLE ASK ME QUESTIONS OF MY PAST. I DON'T LIKE GIVING A CONFESSION EVERYTIME I COME HOME FROM THE STORE, I MEAN THE CAMPAIGN.

DO YOU ASK THE PREACHER MAN WHY HE NEEDS A NEW CAR?
DO YOU ASK THE PRESIDENT WHY HE DIDN'T JUST TELL THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THAT HE NEEDED TO LISTEN TO CALLS PRIOR TO 2000 ELECTION TO ENSURE A WIN AND HIS CALL FROM JEB TO DADDY LIVE ON FOX NEWS WASN'T RECORDED OR WIRETAPPED.

STOP ASKING QUESTIONS, DON'T YOU SEE MY NAME IS A SIX LETTER WORD. DON'T YOU SEE I WILL GIVE YOU A "SKYWATCH" TATOO ON THE BACK OF YO NECK. SO BACK OFF!

Kerry asks McCain to be running mate;

This is one of my '8 worst' Kerry mistakes in the 04 campaign.

Angry old men, even so called heroes, have no place commanding this country's military might.

Kerry campaign mistakes:

1. Swiftboat non response:
Kerry sould have IMMEDIATELY responded with a challenge of some sort. Perhaps a public face to face with one of these moral cowards. Hell, challenge one of them to a fist fight. Anything but silence for weeks! By the time he responded a critical few percentage points regarded Kerry as the coward and Bush as the war hero.

2. Beer with Bush or Kerry:
This 'poll' result was repeated over and over as proof that Bush was likable and Kerry unlikable. Never once did anyone point out that Bush can't have a beer and in fact, can't hold his likker. Kerry was the only candidate you could have had a beer with. Kerry should have challenged Bush to beer drinking contest.

3. Kerry,Flip Flopper:
Anyone could see 'talking point' written all over this one, yet like the Swiftboating, no response at all. Nobody on his staff could come up with the idea of having a 'Bush Flip Flop' of the week event?

4. McCaulif fired off all ammo on Bush's military record in like February! Even Kerry seemed to realize the stupidity of this move and tried to stay silent on it. Every one had to know an attack was coming on Kerry's military record, didn't they? But when the inevitable attack came, McCaulif, or whatever his name is, had already fired off all the ammo. It was all old news, used way too early to be effective. Stupid.

5. "I'm looking forward to the debate."
As soon as I heard Kerry utter these words, I knew he had learned nothing from the Richards, Gore, or McCain debacles. Now he's one of the 'debacles'.

6. Last two weeks didn't even sound like he wanted it:
He was droopy and tired looking. Sounded apathetic and stunned. Even his already weak 'air punch' had devolved to the point he could barely make a fist. Hey, if you're going to punch the air, I say go with the full metal black power salute.

7. When he was softballed a question on the Iraq war resolution, 'knowing what you know today would you still vote for the resolution', he said yes! You could even see on his face barely concealed disbelief at his very own words. The flip flop label that he had not effectively countered, had frozen him.

8. There was some Democratic Party operative on all the talk shows prior to the first debate between Kerry and Bush, bragging about what a great debater Kerry was, and how he was going kick Bush's ass in the debates!!?? Do I even have to explain that one!

9. Asking McCain to be his running mate. It was lose, lose, lose. Of course McCain would say no, and it would make voters think there was no good Democratic choice, and it was hopelessly naive of JK to think a reach out would work.

Take heed, Hills or Bama.

I don't blame ya John!

Even the rock star, I feel your pain, I did not have sex with that women, B.J. Clinton had it out with a few liberal reporters last month.

Thanks Mr. McCain for not bringing out a boney finger to point in her face...

Ms. Bumiller would have lasted about 35 seconds at The Hanoi Hilton, but Mr. McCain lasted 6 years and turned down a release without his fellow Prisoners Of War.

John Kerry wanted to ride on McCains war record into The White house, because Kerry's war record was all fabricated.... and it was proven!

Paulo

Look at the video, there's no "temper" on display at all. If that's really what you think the issue is. McCain never raises his voice once. Nice try, Swampune.

I wonder how her Condi book is?

Posted by: Jeff | March 7, 2008 3:43 PM

Give it a rest Mr college Republican, your McCain hero worship is making everyone sick right before the weekend.

Posted by: Albert Palmer | March 7, 2008 4:31 PM

Ain't it the truth Albert!

Top that with the comment about Condi rice who by the way Jeff is gay!!!

That's right Jeff a gay republican, imagine that. What a giant leap forward it would be for the republican party if they knowingly ran not only a woman for VP, but a lesbian. That would be real progress they could hang their hat on.

The only problem is that Condi was not exactly forthcoming in those pesky little congressional hearings. I'm not a fan of hers from a job perfomance stand point, but Jeff if your Condi comment was meant from the standpoint of change. Well that is change that would be welcome from the party of denial.

Let's see if my comment gets through the LGBT censors.

http://www.lgbtcenters.org/

Hey Bill/Jeff,

When are you going to step out from behind your keyboard and actually sign up to serve in John McHotheads 100 years of war on Iraq that you keep pushing on everyone?
http://www.bushflash.com/14.html

It's all just words Jeff if you can't back them up with action I mean it's you and your clown Wingnut friends on here who are always calling Obama an empty suit.
It's time to look in the mirror little Wingnuts:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nqtL-P8kzo

John Kerry wanted to ride on McCains war record into The White house, because Kerry's war record was all fabricated.... and it was proven!
Paulo

Posted by: Paulo | March 7, 2008 6:25 PM

Eat Cheese, Paulo!

You're drooling from the mouth again.

OBAMA 08!!!!

McCain, this supposed foreign policy expert is indeed Senator Hothead.

Just what we need for world diplomacy. (not!)

Elisabeth Bumiller was right to ask "Why are you so angry?"

The American people and foreign leaders will not want to ask this about their leader.

Presumptive nominee, maybe, pompous ***, yes.

Great, now the Swamp is allowing the child on this blog to post that the Secretary of State of the United States is a homosexual with absolutely no proof. It's shameful what any idiot with a keyboard can say about public officials. I understand the Supreme Court rulings on the subject, but just, wow, John E. or "an inconvenient truth" I didn't think you could sink any lower. Every time you top yourself for new sleaze level.

p.s. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

How come nobody ever asks: "how are ya gonna pay for that War, John?"

"temper scorches NY Times reporter" - What a ridiculous heading!!

I watched the video and he's hardly showing a temper and he hardly "scorches" the reporter.

Who wrote this - someone from the MTV's Real World show??

I'd be pissed too if some reporter was asking a stupid question!

If McCain didn't have an "R" before his name you'd think he was a Democrat. It's hard to conceive any true conservative supporting him of further yet, actually voting for him. If this is the best the Republicans can do, they an their ilk are pathetic. Well, at least McCain heroically served his country in a time of combat, unlike the chickenhawk cowards Bush and Cheney. Do not worry folks, you will see more and more of this man's temper as the race progresses.

But according to Shrillary -- he's "passed the Commander-And-Chief threshold." What a crock!

McClinton and McCain --what a pair they make!

I am not a John McCain fan. However, I think his conduct in giving any one of those dribbling idiots at the NYT the heave is perfectly understandable. That’s especially true in light of the way they tried (and failed) to slime him. It's called self-defense.

Considering the nature of her questions when he clouded up and rained on Little Miss Muffet this time, I think he had every reason to believe the NYT was just digging for dirt again. What she got was what one can expect for working for a dirty yellow rag.

He should have sued them in the first place.

"Considering the nature of her questions when he clouded up and rained on Little Miss Muffet this time,"

"Little Miss Muffet"?

What century are you living in? Why refer to a woman's in such a dismissive, condecending and explicitly sexist way?

Does she threaten you Little Johnny Boy?

Mommy Issues?

Grow up and learn to accept that women are equals.

McNut was correct.We all know that "McNut" approached Kerry about leaving the Wing Nut party and "Begged" his old friend Kerry for the VP spot.He was turned down.

Lois, while I agree that little Miss Muffett might be a little out of bounds it's perfectly understandable the way that McCain entirely respectfully responded to Bumiller.

I score the whole thing McCain 5, Bumiller 0. He never once raises his voice to her and gives her several opportunities to ask another question and then BUMILLER went negative by saying "why are you so angry." As many posters have reported, everyone here can tell he wasn't angry except for the leftist who wrote this headline.

McCain explained very calmly and very clearly why he didn't want to keep the private conversation between himself and Senator Kerry private. Bumiller pushed ahead anyway.

McCain is doing exactly what he should be doing when confronted with a "gotcha" question about an old story on which there are no new facts and the reporter is just trying to pick a fight. Bumiller even admits it by immediately retracting her question. It speaks volumes that no one else from the press section on McCain's plane came to her defense.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2D_mhqDRBY&

"Never mind."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2D_mhqDRBY&

Considering the nature of her questions when he clouded up and rained on Little Miss Muffet this time, I think he had every reason to believe the NYT was just digging for dirt again. What she got was what one can expect for working for a dirty yellow rag.
He should have sued them in the first place.

Posted by: John W. | March 7, 2008 9:25 PM

Yeah, it has to be the media's fault, they're just digging for dirt, Saint John McSame as Bush would NEVER lie or do something underhanded..

John McCain has 59 lobbyists raising money for his campaign, and yet he said "I'm the only one the special interests don't give any money to."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gEROVh8zK4

Ms. Lois:

In the first place, I admit that I intended to be condescending and dismissive. However, my comments were not sexist, and certainly not intended to be so. The reference to “Little Miss Muffet” seemed apt to me in large part due to the way the reporter acted when:

“along came a spider [McCain],
and sat down beside her,
and scared poor Little Miss Muffet away.”

In other words, I was taking poetic license in reference to the way she choked up when McCain got mad.

I’m sorry I had to spell that out for you. It’s a pity that I can’t draw pictures to illustrate the point (or to let you color them in).

In the second place, I made reference to her in such a condescending manner because she deserved it. The New York Times libeled McCain when it ran that recklessly false and unsupported story about him having a more-than-cozy relationship with a woman lobbyist. You see, unlike you and your friends at the Daily Planet, the New York Times is yellow rag populated by politically motivated scum. The story they ran on McCain – against all good journalistic principles and ethics – proves this. It is obvious to all but the deaf, dumb, and blind (e.g., You), that she was in the process of questioning him in order to dig up more dirt to discredit him. I find that kind of behavior despicable. Thus, IMHO, she more than deserved the kind of condescension that I dished up.

In the third place, I do treat women as my equals. But if one wants to be equal, then they have to accept equality in all things – including criticism. I am an equal opportunity critic. If the reporter was some male slime ball from the Times, I would have found a more gender appropriate metaphor to slam and belittle him for such despicable behavior. The reporter involved doesn’t get a free pass because she’s a woman, and you aren’t advocating equality by suggesting otherwise.

In the fourth place, you are not my shrink. [I don’t even have a shrink.] You also lack the basic communication skills to function as one. Thus, you can take all of your ad hominem remarks concerning my maturity level and my mother (who was a much finer human being than you could ever hope to be) and firmly place them you-know-where.

Have a nice day.

McCain learned a lesson from his hero, Dubya.

The only way that a Republican can compete for the White House is to become a total asshole who has no principles whatsoever, so right after 2000 McCain sold out his character and started sucking up to Bush on a fulltime basis.

If McCain can't handle getting questioned by a reporter without a childish temper tantrum, how is he going to handle getting questioned by Vladimir Putin? Global thermonuclear war?

Posted by: JT | March 7, 2008 4:57 PM

Yes global thermonuclear war! What's wrong with that?

Ha Ha! look at all the angry lefties screeching about McCain not answering questions about something that has been beat to death in the press already. Leftist reporters constantly do this to conservatives. Why isn't the liberal media talking about Rezco? Or Rose Law firm records? Those are equally old stories so why isn't the press pressing on those? Because liberals are hateful haters who cannot see their own hate. McCain is fine here. Every hollywood star understands why stupid questions are irritating. This is a stupid question that has been answered thousands of times. This is a reporter trying to become the story and that is bad journalism. Leftists just don't understand logic and reason; they just feel things and if it feels good then it must be okay even if logic shows it is stupid. Like driving a Prius; it doesn't save any gas. The special components cost more to create and more to dispose of in terms of energy then the energy savings in gasoline. So people who drive these are actually creating more carbon in the atmosphere then people who drive reasonable (non-SUV or Truck) cars. But liberals celebrate Prius drivers as if they have done something good. It is baffling. Liberals don't understand science at all.

Liberals don't understand science at all.

Posted by: Steve | March 8, 2008 9:16 AM

Kinda funny coming from the party who has done away with science in favor of religion. Next time you get sick, don't go to the doctor, go to church.

In the fourth place, you are not my shrink. [I don’t even have a shrink.] You also lack the basic communication skills to function as one. Thus, you can take all of your ad hominem remarks concerning my maturity level and my mother (who was a much finer human being than you could ever hope to be) and firmly place them you-know-where.

Have a nice day.

Posted by: John W. | March 7, 2008 11:09 PM

Aw, poor little Johnny Boy sure gets sore when some one makes dismissive remarks about him. I guess he's one of those little boys who can dish it out but can't take it.

If it's good for the goose it's good for the gander, little Johnny.

Leftists just don't understand logic and reason; they just feel things and if it feels good then it must be okay even if logic shows it is stupid. Like driving a Prius; it doesn't save any gas. The special components cost more to create and more to dispose of in terms of energy then the energy savings in gasoline. So people who drive these are actually creating more carbon in the atmosphere then people who drive reasonable (non-SUV or Truck) cars. But liberals celebrate Prius drivers as if they have done something good. It is baffling. Liberals don't understand science at all.

Posted by: Steve | March 8, 2008 9:16 AM

Hey rocket scientist, driving a Prius (not that I ever would) is not so much about saving money as it is saving dwindling natual resources. When the world runs out of oil go to church and pray for more. Moron.

Ms. Lois,

I answered your first accusation completely, and the best you can do is heap more ad hominem B.S. in reply to my fourth point? That tells me you can’t answer the first three points, and cannot articulate a defense of your criticism. You are just angry.

Or maybe you’re a feminazi? Are you, Lois? Frustrated in love, so you hate men and seek your security in power? You just can’t stand anyone – particularly men, or maybe just that curmudgeonly boss of yours – being critical of women when they do stupid things? Well, allow me to set you straight. Everyone is capable of foolish and stupid behavior, Lois – men and women both. I am equally critical of anyone who does stupid stuff, regardless of gender. I am giving the same gravy to both the goose and the gander. However, it is precisely that equality of treatment that you seem to hate in this instance.

BTW – Lois – I don’t think of the term “Johnny Boy” as anything but endearing. My parents and siblings have called me that my whole life. Fire away if it floats your boat. As for the rest, get over it.

People are so gawdamned afraid these days. I would say we need people who are less AFRAID of anger these days. Anger is just a mood, an emotional faculty - it's not a sign of character.

Ad hominem attacks seemed like an appropriate response to your Ad hominem attacks on Ms. Bumiller, Little Johnny.

And then we move on to your next classic example of sexism. Guess what Little Johnny? A woman who challenges men is not a woman who can't find love. Some men aren't threatened by a woman who questions men like you are. You probably even have lept to the assumption that I'm a lesbian, right? Typical sexist male BS.

Just so you know, I have a great relationship with a man who is strong and confident enough to accept challenges from women. A man who truly accepts that I'm fully his equal. You could learn alot from him.

You really should look into that therapist. He or she could really help you with your anger and hostility toward strong, confident women.

To: Frank James,

I’m glad you decided to censor my last reply to Ms. Lois. Looking back on it, I am satisfied that the reply was unnecessary and that she can’t do any better than make ad hominem remarks.

I suppose if this is the worst the Times can come up with, McCain is in good shape.
I've watched the video, and even had some Democrat friends check it out. All any of us see is a badgering reporter annoying someone. Annoyance, not loss of temper, blowup, or any of the other adjectives used.

What is scary is how much this is getting passed around online. How many people are actually checking it out for themselves?

*Important Note. The '04 interview she references was in May. Way before Kerry announced his running mate, and possibly before Kerry asked. Or it could just be that McCain felt that Kerry asking was private, and McCain knew it would hurt Kerry if it got out.

The thing is that McCain's answer to Kerry was an absolute NO.

After it had already been brought up and discussed, why was the reporter trying to go back over it. It wasn't a story unless she aggravated him into losing his temper. When he stayed fairly calm, she finally changed the subject.