Last night, Bob Dole told Larry King that he recognizes John McCain’s temperament problem, but he “always sort of rationalized that because the poor guy had been locked up” as a prisoner of war during Vietnam. McCain’s temper, Dole said, is “not a problem anymore.” It didn’t sound like a ringing endorsement.
There have been questions about McCain’s temperament percolating just below the surface for a while now, thanks in large part to aggressive, almost violent, confrontations McCain has had with his Senate colleagues in recent years. (“The thought of his being president sends a cold chill down my spine,” Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., said about McCain. “He is erratic. He is hotheaded. He loses his temper and he worries me.”)
But the question is now taking on a slightly different salience, in light of Hillary Clinton’s recent “3 a.m.” ad. What happens if a President McCain and his dubious temperament is confronted with a crisis? Salon’s Mark Benjamin found that some senior military officials aren’t entirely comfortable with what McCain would do with that middle-of-the-night call.
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.
“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 and is now campaigning for Clinton. “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.”
Eaton is hardly alone on this.
“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 who is supporting Obama. “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.”
“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, a former Republican, former chief of staff of the Air Force and former fighter pilot who flew 285 combat missions. McPeak said his perception is that Obama is “not that up when he is up and not that down when he is down. He is kind of a steady Eddie. This is a very important feature,” McPeak said. On the other hand, he said, “McCain has got a reputation for being a little volatile.” […]
Retired Rear Adm. John Hutson, who has been a Republican his entire adult life, but who now supports Obama, 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.”
It’s hard to know exactly how widespread these concerns really are. Last week, the far-right Washington Times had a report indicating that “members of Washington’s military and defense establishment are expressing trepidation about Sen. Barack Obama,” but ended up quoting just one person — retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney — who is an unhinged conservative activist with a record of wacky political opinions. For the Salon piece, Benjamin seemed to do a lot more legwork, which makes his piece seem far more credible.
Regardless, I continue to think McCain’s “temperament questions” is one of those side issues that could become a relevant factor in the campaign. Indeed, campaigns sometimes take on little buzzwords — “character” in 1992, “authenticity” in 2000 — and I’ll be curious to see if “temperament” takes on that kind of significance this year.