So, a Democratic plant asks McCain if he really called his wife the “c” word. In front of a group of people that, in many cases, may never have heard the word uttered out loud. His reason for asking - he wanted to get a rise out of McCain - an angry response that would hopefully be caught on tape and whisked around the world.
PARRISH: This question goes to mental health and mental health care. Previously, I’ve been married to a woman that was verbally abusive to me. Is it true that you called your wife a (expletive)?
Notice how he leads up to it - states he wants to ask a question about mental health, talks about having a history of being verbally abused, and then - out of nowhere - the “C” word. McCain handled it well, and was applauded for his answer.
Parrish’s reason for the sneak attack? He feels that the Obamessiah has been unfairly treated by the press, what with them focusing on Jeremiah Wright’s anti-American, hate filled diatribes that formed a core part of his ministry. A ministry that Obama attended for 20 years, and a man he described as a moral and guiding force in his life. Obama, who has gotten more of a free ride from the press than any presidential candidate in recent memory.
In an interview with IowaPolitics.com, Parrish said his intentions were simple in posing the question to McCain. The former Joe Biden campaign worker stressed he is very concerned about the Republican presidential nominee’s temperament.
“We have a man whose temper can get the best of him,” Parrish said. “What I am worried about is his temper. Our country is in a serious crisis. This election is the most significant one since 1860. It appears America is asleep — so I stood up and asked the question.”
Parrish signed in as a Huffington Post contributor and was taking pictures at the town hall meeting.
He handed out a leaflet prior to the event alleging McCain called his wife the name in 1992 while on the campaign trail running for re-election in the Senate.
The leaflet asked members of media why they were focusing on the controversial statements made in the past by Democratic candidate Sen. Barack Obama’s pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright and ignoring the alleged comment McCain made to his wife.
“Barack Obama spent three weeks defending that,” Parrish said afterwards.
“Why does the news media continue to ignore this outrageous statement by John McCain, but fixates on Barack Obama’s truthful observation that some people are bitter?” the leaflet reads.
I’m sure Mr. Parrish was disappointed in the lack of fireworks from McCain. I’m sure Parrish feels he has made some kind of profound statement - and he may have done so, just not the one he intended. I think a lot of people will look at this interaction and wonder about the wisdom of letting people who have the support of nutjobs like Parrish run the country.
UPDATE:
Via Gateway Pundit, we learn that it was a team effort by a couple of Huffington Post reporters. Someone must be getting nervous about McCain’s chances, what with Obama and Hillary trading shots to the groin to see who will still be standing come November. Once again, members of the Progrssive community prove to me that the word progressive must mean something other than what I always thought it means.
UPDATE II:
7 responses so far ↓
Sandy // May 8, 2008 at 4:50 pm
But is it true or not? Instead of focussing on the questioner, what about the nominee?
Did he actually attack his wife in public with such a low-life misogynist word?
Expat Texan // May 8, 2008 at 5:05 pm
It isn’t alleged to be in public - but a private conversation. It is sourced with….nothing.
And focusing on the questioner seems quite fair, since it’s already clearly evident that he’s not what he claimed to be - a Baptist minister.
Speaking of focusing - since you’re so concerned about misogyny in the White House - I’m sure you roundly condemned Bill Clinton, right? Or is uttering a word, even a terrible on, worse than actual misogynistic behavior - as long as the practicer of said behavior is a Democrat?
Sandy // May 9, 2008 at 1:06 pm
I am an Obama supporter. I voted for Bill Clinton to my shame and regret. I would never vote for Hillary Clinton because I do not trust her. However, I think it is difficult to understand that her feminist supporters would even consider voting for McCain.
As far as being sourced with nothing. Why doesn’t somebody ask McCain’s exwife? If it is true that he spoke to her with the words attributed to him, I am sure it was not the one and only time.
Expat Texan // May 9, 2008 at 2:26 pm
That’s the point, isn’t it, Sandy - why doesn’t someone ask McCain’s ex-wife. Don’t you think they have? Repeatedly? And the story is still sourced with….nothing.
Remember - there are partisan books out there that accuse the Clintons of murdering their friends and enemies alike - similarly filled with stories that can’t be sourced.
If you want to attack McCain on something - do it on his record. Using these kind of tactics just makes the Democrats look desperate - or stupid.
If you think a 20 year old conversation/argument between McCain and his ex-wife is fair game, then you must be comfortable with the Jeremiah Wright stuff being in full play. Which is worse - something said 1 time in a fit of anger - or 20 years of listening to racist “black theology” and not only not denouncing it, but naming the source of that racism as your “moral guide”?
Sandy // May 9, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Point well taken about McCain. I have policy reasons for not wanting to vote for him.
However, I do not think we have to be apologetic as Americans about voting for the person we “trust.” Trust is a gut reaction, not only visceral but made up of a complexity of our own experiences, fears, beliefs, and temperaments.
I do not trust McCain. You do. You do not trust Obama, I do. I think it is possible for a person to be a moral guide in some areas and a bitter, delusionary hater, also. After all, world history is full of flawed people who did good, but were bigotted and driven by prejudice and fear.
I do not equate Barack Obama with Jeremiah Wright. What I think the entire episode has revealed is how trusting and magnanimous Barack Obama has been about a man whose narcissism he did not see.
I have also had that happen to me, personally, so I forgive it.
That Tuesday election in November will tell us whom the majority of American voters trust and identify with.
I hope it is Obama, but if it is McCain, we Americans will have the president we have chosen and elected.
And we will all have to live with that. After all, Americans have only one president.
I was hoping the general election would be about a choice between two very clearly different world views, and plans for America, and not about the Reverend Wrights or the Hagees who both thrive in a free society.
Expat Texan // May 9, 2008 at 3:02 pm
Actually, I don’t trust McCain all that much. I think his stance on immigration is untenable and amounts to pandering. But I trust Obama less. My leanings are more centrist/libertarian than conservative right. But I do believe in small government, a strong national defense, and tend to be a social liberal.
For me, the deciding factor is defense. I think McCain has the credentials to be best prepared to protect America, and that is the deciding factor for me.
As you say, we shall see what happens in November. My believe is that Obama is the next McGovern - powerfully appealing to the already committed base, but not so much with the other demographics who will go out and vote.
Sandy // May 9, 2008 at 4:26 pm
I have been volunteering for Obama for over a year. Been to New Mexico to get out the vote, wrote letters to Pennsylvania. I think what people don’t realize is that Obama is not the movement, he is the spokesman for the movement.
I have met old white ladies, young white men, old white guys who used to be Republicans, and young white women who believe that Obama is the real thing. They believe and trust his rhetoric and his motivation for running for president.
I believe he really does believe in the American people and our ability to work together to solve our problems and promote the safety and welfare of our own people.
Obama is a social liberal, he is no one size fits all, pacifist or anti-war ideologue.
Small government is like apple-pie and motherhood or free trade. It sounds like who could be against it. However, when small government means no governrment intervention is the corporate greed that actually rules the country, I don’t like it.
If by small government you mean, stop spending trillions of taxpayer’s money on failed boondoggles and pandering to people who think the government owes them a living, I agree with you.
I think Obama’s universal health care which does not force anyone to buy it is a hint that we would not have a MEDICARIZED private health sector if his plan were adopted.
Leave a Comment