McCain: Stiff or at ease?
Which debate were you watching? It probably has a lot to do with point of view — figuratively and literally — but reporters and analysts were all over the place on whether John McCain was at ease or stiff in last night’s debate.
Post-Dispatch Washington Bureau Chief Bill Lambrecht wrote that McCain looked at ease:
“In the town hall format that he prefers, McCain appeared comfortable immediately, striding toward questioners on the stage while Obama initially held back.”
USA Today’s Susan Page echoed that view:
“McCain was clearly more relaxed, strolling around the stage, joking with moderator Tom Brokaw and even clapping one questioner on the back.”
But they were watching a different debate than other pundits.
Opinion writer Harold Meyerson of the Washington Post — in a piece titled “The Town Hall Debate: Old John” – said:
“Well, so much for the idea that the town hall format helps John McCain.
“In the town halls staged by his campaign, where the crowds are composed almost entirely of his supporters, McCain has been relaxed, and has been on the stage by himself. In Nashville tonight, neither of those particulars applied. Instead, as he and Barack Obama wandered around the stage, McCain overwhelmingly conveyed the impression — not to put too fine a point on it — that he’s old.
“In fact, McCain looks older than he is. He cannot move as easily or fluidly as he could had he not had his limbs broken while a prisoner of war. But he was stiff in a format that rewards fluidness.”
Another Washington Post opinion writer, David Ignatius, added:
“Is it ‘presidential’ to speak in clear sentences that have a beginning, a middle and an end? If so, we heard a very presidential Barack Obama in tonight’s debate — a man who was fluid and precise in explaining his policies and in critiquing those of his opponent.
“John McCain, in contrast, seemed stiff and uncomfortable, explaining himself in sentence fragments and jokes and gests that didn’t quite register. He looked awkward whether he was standing or sitting, and his speech was that of a man who wants to chide his opponent and assert his own fitness for office — but can’t explain himself or his policies in clear language that forms complete sentences and paragraphs — or even complete thoughts.”
And the Washington Post’s Colbert King offered this opinion:
“The sight of John McCain moving around the set did it for me. I can’t help it: His on-screen performance made me think of the ’70s sitcom “Sanford and Son,” specifically the grumpy, patronizing and sarcastic Fred Sanford, played by the comedian Redd Foxx.
“McCain was the incarnation of Fred Sanford.
“McCain’s movements, his awkward stiff-legged strutting toward and away from the audience, called to mind ol’ Fred when he was spouting off some of his insults and barbs directed at his son and at his top nemesis, sister-in-law “Aunt Esther.”
Newsweek.com’s Richard Wolffe had this take:
“That lesson was lost on John McCain in Nashville on Wednesday, who seemed to think that a town-hall debate on television was the same as a town-hall debate in a real town hall.
“He paced up and down in fits and starts as he spoke. He leapt from subject to subject, sound bite to sound bite. Between answers, he sat down and scribbled page after page of notes, then jumped up and paced around silently. Early on, he seemed ill at ease in engaging with his questioners; how close should he stand? And how much should he look at them? His approach seemed to present a serious challenge to the show’s producers, as they struggled to find the best way to frame McCain’s interactions.
“There was no questioning the GOP nominee’s energy level; he seemed to have enough pent-up force to power a substation.”
Granted, these quotes are from a mix of opinion pieces, commentaries and analytical news articles. But we’re not talking about diagreements over the validity of what the candidates said. We’re talking about something as simple as whether McCain looked at ease or stiff. The divergence in views is amazing.
Steve Parker is the deputy managing editor for news, and oversees the Post-Dispatch's front page. STLtoday's online news editors are on his newsroom team. Parker has been at the paper since September 1980. 
People who make comments about how - in the physical sense - he moves around are totally ignorant of John McCain or his history of service to this great nation. The man was physically abused and tortured in a Vietnam prison camp, MY FRIENDS. Again, the same reporters making this comments only have one candidate on their minds. The rest are just a threat which they want taken down.
Please stop! Obama is the last hope. And he’s smooth and calm and brilliant.
You are just jealous. Sarah doesn’t have the brains to match the, ahem, brawn.
Don’t even get me STARTED on the doddering old curmudgeon who has no original thought in his silver-spooned head–that guy. Sit down, grandpa, you’re blocking my view of the best president this world has ever seen in America!
As someone who does not move as fluidly as he did 20 years ago, I can identify with Senator McCain’s “stiffness”. Here is the point, however, it is not how physically stiff you are that is the problem, it is how emotionally “stiff” you are that is. I had a friend who lived until 80 years old. He had arthritis in both knees and hips to the point when he was 70 he had them all replaced. But even while he was in severe pain, he still had a great smile and sense of humor, and was one of the most genial people you would ever meet. That is what I missed from Senator McCain — geniality.
The man is dealing with Obama - who can be genial with someone who has a history like this? We need more people to direct their shame and quiet towards someone who has maintained relationships with those who hate this great nation, not one who has served it his entire career.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_HZMD97nMw
OBAMA - Dumbo The Elephant, or not?
How about that for a story headline? Rediculous.
Scott, I’ll go ahead and assume that you’re a practicing Christian. Even if I’m wrong, it should be no news to you that there’s a certain character in the Bible who spent a lot of time associating with unsavory individuals. One of his best buddies was a corrupt tax collector, for example. Isn’t it just a bit hypocritical for you to be excoriating Obama for who he associates with?
Religion aside, I’d much rather have a leader who is willing to sit down and talk with those who are upset with this great country, and find out what can be done to peacefully settle our differences, than one who makes up a cute little song about bombing them right off the planet.
Dave - In a perfect world, I 100% agree with you. I am a Christian. Obama represents the beliefs that a lot of my college professors held, except that the world of reality is far different. Iran’s leader is like Adolf Hitler. Do you sit down and appease the guy, or are you convinced as a result of his comments what he really wants to do with Israel and the peace of the world?
Last night, I actually started to feel sorry for John. He is clearly an old warhorse that doesn’t know it’s time to be put to pasture. I respect the guy for all of his service, but his time to be president has passed him by.
Obama absolutely slapped him around. He was succinct, he explained everything clearly, he was very presidential in how he spoke and presented himself. John looked like an elderly magazine salesman.
No thanks, my friend.
Ahmadinejad is a little nutty, yes. He has some strange ideas. But he’s not insane, he’s a rational person. I think he’s burned up over the idea that the U.S. is allowed to do whatever it wants (regarding nuclear energy, for instance) and then dictate that certain other countries aren’t allowed to do the same things.
I’m not talking about appeasement, but I believe that a policy that includes dialog and a mutual understanding, and abandoning the image of the U.S. as the bully on the world playground that tells everyone else how to play, will be less expensive in finances and human cost, will restore our respect on the world stage, and will actually keep us safer than a policy of refusing to discuss our differences and declaring the situation intractable.
I certainly don’t expect any American leader to allow Iran to take any action against Israel, and Ahmadinejad needs to know that in no uncertain terms - but that doesn’t mean we have to pretend as though Iran doesn’t exist. There are other issues on which agreement may be found.