On McCain's Cancer Again

by: Matt Stoller

Tue Aug 26, 2008 at 02:00


Jon Henke asks whether I have any evidence that POW's face higher rates of disease or illness than the rest of the population.  Here's my source, a POW who was imprisoned with John McCain.

Most of us who survived that experience are now in our late 60's and 70's. Sadly, we have died and are dying off at a greater rate than our non-POW contemporaries. We experienced injuries and malnutrition that are coming home to roost. So I believe John's age (73) and survival expectation are not good for being elected to serve as our President for 4 or more years.

I don't know if John McCain is dying of cancer, and neither does the press.  All we know is that he released 1500 pages of medical records for his 2000 campaign and this cycle he allowed selected journalists to look at certain documents for three hours.

Matt Stoller :: On McCain's Cancer Again

Tags: , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
On McCain's Cancer Again | 20 comments
McCain's father died at 70 of old age and his grandfather at 61 (0.00 / 0)
Genetically speaking, McCain is probably older than a typical 72 year old even withstanding his years of physical stress. His patrilineal family longevity history does not bode well for him.

Help support "CRASHING THE STATES"--a Netroots Film!
Alternately, though (0.00 / 0)
isn't his mother still alive and active?
[ Parent ]
Yes, but patrilineal genetic attributes are better predictors (4.00 / 2)
because recent studies have shown that the telomere length that predicts how many times your cells can divide before they die correlates more to the father's genes for both men and women.

And a correction to my previous subject - McCain's grandfather died of a stress related heart attack at 60. Wikipedia states about John McCain Sr.

...the stress of combat operations had worn McCain down to a weight of only 100 pounds. He requested home leave to recuperate but Halsey insisted that he be present at the Japanese surrender ceremony in Tokyo Bay, Japan on September 2, 1945. Departing immediately after the ceremony, McCain died of a heart attack at his home in Coronado, California on September 6, 1945.


Help support "CRASHING THE STATES"--a Netroots Film!
[ Parent ]
Actually more an 'addition' than a 'correction' as McCain's father (0.00 / 0)
did in fact die of old age at 70, as well as his grandfather dying at 61.

Help support "CRASHING THE STATES"--a Netroots Film!
[ Parent ]
Let's do the math... (0.00 / 0)
Let's say, there are 1800 pages of medical records today. That's 600 pages per hour, 10 per minute, one page every six seconds. And they are full of medical terminology and latin expressions. Even if several journalists share the task of viewing them, how high are the chances that they'll find a smoking gun? The McCain campaign certainly wouldn't change the way of "releasing" those records without having a good reason for that - they know that this will put them in a negative light. So, the conclusion is clear: they have something to hide.

However, Obama can't hammer on the state of McCain's health. This would look incrdible mean. Not even Biden can.
Another campaign topic where an outside group has to make the point.

Classic muzzling tactic (0.00 / 0)
Any time there's a limited amount of time to view documents, it's because they're hiding something.

The classic example in my mind would be the Sandline affair in Britain, where Robin Cook was given a few hours in a sealed room with no assistance or recording equipment to read the report, before having to make the Labour response. It was always said that if he'd had a few more hours, he would have brought down Major's government.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

[ Parent ]
I disagree, slightly (0.00 / 0)
"However, Obama can't hammer on the state of McCain's health."

The word "hammer" is where we might agree - but, raising the issue is legitimate.

The state of the candidate's health is a legitimate issue considering they are being elected for a 4 year term.  It may not be a comfortable discussion to have, but the rigors of the job for which McCain is campaigning shine a spot-light on both his age, and his health.

Its not a partisan, or "ageist" issue - the voters have the right to know whether, or not, the candidate they are voting for has any unrevealed health (or any other) issues that might impede their doing the job.


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

[ Parent ]
Health is a legitimate issue, but ... (0.00 / 0)
great care must be exercised when making one's decision to ensure that the decision is grounded by facts and free of other biases.  I do not find these criteria within the arguments presented by many of the posts on this site.  Make no mistake, I am not a McCain supporter.  However, I will not take anything away from him simply because he is a republican or because I want Obama to win.

One example of the harm that could be done based on [poor] judgment resulting from misunderstanding facts is exemplified by the question: Would the voters have voted for Franklin Roosevelt if they knew about his paralytic illness that left him paralyzed from his waist down?  I would venture a guess that most voters would reject his candidacy.  (In my view, it would be out of ignorance!)

[ Parent ]
True enough, sometimes the truth is hard to handle (0.00 / 0)
Like your story about FDR. But, really, we'll never know what would, or would not have happened had he been more forthright about his physical condition.

I suppose a similar question could be asked of JFK.  Had the public been more aware of his extra-marital affairs and amphetamine use, would he have become the icon that his is today?  Hard to imagine a lower opinion of Dick Nixon is even possible, but it seems his staff (and the MSM) covered up his heavy drinking, too.

Its a fine line - but, I gotta say, I'm not certain that I'm completely comfortable with the idea that the punditocracy gets to decide what truths they think I can handle, and which ones they had better help the politicians keep hidden.

Its a bit condescending, isn't it?  To claim that we shouldn't delve too deeply into a candidate's health, or private life, lest we uncover something to which we feel as though some segment of the electorate might over-react.


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

[ Parent ]
Yes, the base for an "official" attack isn't there (0.00 / 0)
It would be different if reliable, verifiable evidence would raise doubts about McSame's state of health. Then Obama could demand that McCain doesn't leave the public in the dark, but discloses medical informations in the same way that he does. He wouldn't actually talk about heatl specifics, just call for making the documents available to the public. If the republican camp refuses, this would show that their candidate has something to hide, and if not, this would raise severe doubts about his fitness for the job. Either way, the media would make this a major issue.

However, this is idle speculation as long as not only no gun has been found, but there isn't even smoke to be seen. Hmm, apropos media: Who were those journalists who "reviewed" the medical informations, and did they really not find anything substantial?

[ Parent ]
Medical information is often conveyed in jargon (0.00 / 0)
and technical terms.  

I'm not sure that the journalists would have recognized any smoking gun, especially given the very short time they had to peruse the material.

I think the mechanism used by McCain to "release" his health information, ALREADY begs the question, "what is he trying to hide?".

No mental health records included, either, as far as I understand. Given the demonstrated relationship between torture and psychological damage, this seems a major over-sight.

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

[ Parent ]
McCain's health is important (0.00 / 0)
I think the perfect way to highlight it would be to have Obama honor the service of the vietnam POWs not named McCain.  

He can tie it to both a statement on the current VA system (and against McCain's health card system) and highlighting the health problems of those pows also will give a good indication of where McCain is at health wise.

The liberal wiki
Send an email to terra@liberalwiki.com

John McCain's birthday is Friday (4.00 / 4)
I think it would be so cool if Obama, before his Thursday speech, led the stadium in singing a happy 72nd birthday to Sen. McCain.
Brilliant (0.00 / 0)
That's fucking genius.
[ Parent ]
Straw man argument ... (0.00 / 0)
It is a sad day when intelligent people resort to the untimely deaths of McCain's father and grandfather to say that McCain should not be the president.  Of course, one's life experiences do affect the quality of one's life, but only to look at the negative and draw conclusions in that vacuum detracts from what legitimacy there may be to your argument.

We may not like McCain, and, we may want Obama to win but that doesn't mean we should resort to republican tactics.

Huh? That's pc gone too far! (4.00 / 1)
Fitness for the job is an important issue, science shows that heritage, and life experiences (like the mistreatment as a POW) have an influence on the average life expectation, and the 2008 election is too important for nitpicking about the ethical high ground, when the other side has shown time and agaqin that the y don't feel bound by such considerations. This doesn't meant that Dems should engage in the same level of mud slinging as the rethuglicans, but becoming a beautiful loser wouldn't help the US and the world. Too much is at stake.

Really, do you want to lose in 2008 again?

[ Parent ]
republican tactics (0.00 / 0)
Republican tactics = spreading false rumors. No false rumors here. Just the truth. These are legitimate concerns.

The truth about Saxby Chambliss
oops (0.00 / 0)
That was supposed to be a reply to cabresch.

The truth about Saxby Chambliss
[ Parent ]
McCain's Cancer (4.00 / 2)
As one of the longest surviving Melanoma patients in the US (38 years since the end of Chemotherapy) -- I have a few comments about his situation.

He apparently had a resection of his lymph nodes during the second round of surgery plus chemo, and he has now passed 5 years without a re-occurance, which while it doesn't mean he is cured, gives him a much better prognosis.  With Melanoma you usually consider ten years as being out of immediate danger.  

I don't think his POW experience had anything to do with the cancer.  Melanoma is a result of sun exposure -- particularly overexposure as a kid and a teenager.  The exposure is cumulative, the cell damage is done by repeated overexposures and sunburns, and those who are blond or red haired and have fair skin are much more likely to develop the tumors years later.  It is most common among the Scots, the Irish, Scandinavians and Russians than among ethnic groups with darker complexions and thus less likely to get sunburned. And no -- I don't have a contract to sell sun screen, but I strongly recommend the stuff -- plus long sleeves, a hat, and walking on the shady side of the street.  In fact one of the first things I looked for in the pictures of his various houses was whether he had engineered himself a good bit of shade on his patio -- remember sun reflects off water, such as a swimming pool, or even a nice shady spot on a sand beach.  

My guess is that in his wild years at the Naval Academy or even in High School, McCain spent too much time at the beach or around swimming clubs in tight trunks looking for shapely lassies.  Around her the greatest number of Melanoma patients are Scandinavian Farmers who spent too much time on unprotected tractors in their corn fields.    

He grew up in Panama, didn't he? (0.00 / 0)
This supports the point about "overexposure as a kid and a teenager".
[ Parent ]
On McCain's Cancer Again | 20 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox

Powered by: SoapBlox