On the trail, few mentions of McCain’s health

[Gunny]

By Lawrence K. Altman, M.D.
The New York Times
updated 1:47 a.m. CT, Sun., March. 9, 2008

Along with his signature bright white hair, the most striking aspects of Senator John McCain’s physical appearance are his puffy left cheek and the scar that runs down the back of his neck.

The marks are cosmetic reminders of the melanoma surgery he underwent in August 2000. Mr. McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, sometimes tells audiences that he has “more scars than Frankenstein.”

The operation was performed mainly to determine whether the melanoma, a potentially fatal form of skin cancer, had spread from his left temple to a key lymph node in his neck; a preliminary pathology test at the time showed that it had not.

But because such a test cannot be definitive, the surgeons, with Mr. McCain’s advance permission, removed the surrounding lymph nodes and part of the parotid gland, which produces saliva, in the same operation, which lasted five and a half hours.

The final pathology analysis showed no evidence of spread of the melanoma, his staff said at the time. Mr. McCain, of Arizona, has said he did not need chemotherapy or radiation.

In 1999, during Mr. McCain’s first race for president, he gave the public an extraordinary look at his medical history — 1,500 pages of medical and psychiatric records that were amassed as part of a United States Navy project to gauge the health of former prisoners of war. This reporter, who is a physician, interviewed the senator’s doctors in 1999 with his permission.

But this time around, Mr. McCain has yet to make his full medical records or his physicians available to reporters. At least three times since March 2007, campaign officials have told The New York Times that they would provide the detailed information about his current state of health, but they have not done so. The campaign now says it expects to release the information in April.

So Mr. McCain’s prognosis for the recurrence of melanoma can be gauged only by talking to experts not connected with his case. Those experts say his prospects appear favorable.

more ...http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23542188/

The NYTs, ever the casters of doubt no matter how miniscule.

IMO, McCain's age and health make his choice of VP candidate rather crucial.

 

[Paulie]

The NYTs, ever the casters of doubt no matter how miniscule.

IMO, McCain's age and health make his choice of VP candidate rather crucial.

I think his VP choice is going to be either Rudy or Kemp.

It makes me so fucking sad to see what the GOP in this country has been offering to us for the last 20 years.

 

[onedomino]

I think his VP choice is going to be either Rudy or Kemp.

It makes me so fucking sad to see what the GOP in this country has been offering to us for the last 20 years.

Rudy or Kemp? McCain has no prayer of carrying NY in any event. McCain needs to choose someone who can help win a crucial state, like Charlie Crist, Governor of Florida. Obama needs to choose someone who can win in Ohio. I do not know if anyone qualifies. Perhaps Rendell, Governor of Pennsylvania.

 

[Paulie]

Rudy or Kemp? McCain has no prayer of carrying NY in any event. McCain needs to choose someone who can help win a crucial state, like Charlie Crist, Governor of Florida. Obama needs to choose someone who can win in Ohio. I do not know if anyone qualifies. Perhaps Rendell, Governor of Pennsylvania.

With Rudy, he has a chance of carrying NY or Florida. But really, he has no chance of winning PERIOD, so why does it even matter?

I know Rendell favored Hillary, but I guess that doesn't mean he couldn't jump on with Obama for party's sake.

I don't see it happening though. Ohio always votes Dem anyway. You'll probably disagree, but Bush won Ohio because Rove worked his magic. The disenfranchisement that went on in that state in '04 was staggering.

 

[onedomino]

With Rudy, he has a chance of carrying NY or Florida. But really, he has no chance of winning PERIOD, so why does it even matter?

I know Rendell favored Hillary, but I guess that doesn't mean he couldn't jump on with Obama for party's sake.

I don't see it happening though. Ohio always votes Dem anyway. You'll probably disagree, but Bush won Ohio because Rove worked his magic. The disenfranchisement that went on in that state in '04 was staggering.

Ohio does not always vote Dem. It went Red in both 2000 and 2004. And I have more respect for the voters of Ohio than to think they were deluded by Karl Rove. The Republicans cannot win the Electoral College count without both Ohio and Florida. They are by far the most important swing states. If the Dems win either one of those states, then their candidate will be President.

 

[Paulie]

Ohio does not always vote Dem. It went Red in both 2000 and 2004. And I have more respect for the voters of Ohio than to think they were deluded by Karl Rove. The Republicans cannot win the Electoral College count without both Ohio and Florida. They are by far the most important swing states. If the Dems win either one of those states, then their candidate will be President.

I don't know about that this year, though.

I don't see this election year being the same old guaranteed red and blue state wins that are typical.

McCain may not win all the otherwise guaranteed red states, especially against Obama. Is there any reason you might disagree?

 

[onedomino]

I don't know about that this year, though.

I don't see this election year being the same old guaranteed red and blue state wins that are typical.

McCain may not win all the otherwise guaranteed red states, especially against Obama. Is there any reason you might disagree?

There is no reason to think otherwise, especially after Obama is worked over in the campaign. The only states that are likely in play are OH, FL, and NM. You mentioned NY? McCain would have a better chance of carrying Venezuela than New York.

 

[jreeves]

I don't know about that this year, though.

I don't see this election year being the same old guaranteed red and blue state wins that are typical.

McCain may not win all the otherwise guaranteed red states, especially against Obama. Is there any reason you might disagree?

Yes, most polls are saying that a general election matchup, is within the margin of error?

 

[Gunny]

Rudy or Kemp? McCain has no prayer of carrying NY in any event. McCain needs to choose someone who can help win a crucial state, like Charlie Crist, Governor of Florida. Obama needs to choose someone who can win in Ohio. I do not know if anyone qualifies. Perhaps Rendell, Governor of Pennsylvania.

You bring up an interesting point. I was referring to "ascendency to the throne" in the event McCain kicks the bucket.

I have to admit, for the time being at least, I've lost interest in this Presidential race. It doesn't really matter which of the three current sad sacks running win.

 

[jillian]

With Rudy, he has a chance of carrying NY or Florida. But really, he has no chance of winning PERIOD, so why does it even matter?

I know Rendell favored Hillary, but I guess that doesn't mean he couldn't jump on with Obama for party's sake.

I don't see it happening though. Ohio always votes Dem anyway. You'll probably disagree, but Bush won Ohio because Rove worked his magic. The disenfranchisement that went on in that state in '04 was staggering.

Ummmmmmm... I'm going to put the idea of NY voting red in the catagory of seriously unlikely (about on par with oh... Texas voting blue). Too many "Don't blame me, I didnt vote for Bush" type bumper stickers. And he may have been "America's mayor", but most of us in NYC think Rudy was a bully who didn't play well with others who stuck it to city workers and was too quick to defend certain police actions even BEFORE full investigation (Amadou Diallo, anyone?).

Wrong about Ohio, it went red in the last election....though I agree about disenfranchisement (thank you Daibold!!)

Whatever happens with the dem nominee, I think Rendell will go wih either one if they offer him the second spot.... I also think with Rendell, either would win, though part of me still sees a Clinton/Obama ticket as the one that's unbeatable.

As for McCain's health... well, it is and it isn't an issue... if he currently has cancer, THAT'S an issue. If he doesn't, he's 7 years clean and that puts him back to the same statistical possibility of getting it again as the general public.

 

[Snidly Whiplash]

I doubt it would be Rudy. How much did his one delegate cost him? Obama and Hillary, on the other hand, almost have to be on the same ticket to win.

 

[Brian Crooks]

Frankly, I'm glad that his health hasn't become an issue. I want the dems to win the presidency by being better on policy, not casting doubt that McCain might die. As for VP's, if Crist can get a re-vote in FL that drags the democratic race out an extra few months, I think that makes him McCain's de facto VP.

On the democratic side, I see the Obama-Clinton ticket as a disaster. The things Clinton will claim to bring to the ticket (experience, strength, machinery) can be better brought with someone like Jim Webb or John Edwards. I particularly think an Obama-Edwards ticket would be very strong. If he wanted to really make a strong statement and try to bring in the female vote and swing states, he would think about bringing on Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas or Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri. Either one of these impressive ladies could put their traditionally red states into play, considering Obama's landslide wins there in the primaries.

If, somehow, Hillary gets the nomination, she would almost have to bring on Obama as a VP (though I doubt he would take the job). Without him, she loses a lot of new voter support and may be risking the Black vote. We won't go to McCain, but we'd probably stay at home in big enough numbers to concern her. But her VP appointment would be more of a vice vice president, since Bill would truly be her second in command.

 

[Gunny]

Frankly, I'm glad that his health hasn't become an issue. I want the dems to win the presidency by being better on policy, not casting doubt that McCain might die. As for VP's, if Crist can get a re-vote in FL that drags the democratic race out an extra few months, I think that makes him McCain's de facto VP.

His health WILL be an issue ... just wait. The Democrats are not going to win by being better on policy since they aren't.

The Presidency is won by one party or the other putting a candidate out their that can catch the public's fancy. It's a popularity contest.

On the democratic side, I see the Obama-Clinton ticket as a disaster. The things Clinton will claim to bring to the ticket (experience, strength, machinery) can be better brought with someone like Jim Webb or John Edwards. I particularly think an Obama-Edwards ticket would be very strong. If he wanted to really make a strong statement and try to bring in the female vote and swing states, he would think about bringing on Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas or Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri. Either one of these impressive ladies could put their traditionally red states into play, considering Obama's landslide wins there in the primaries.

If, somehow, Hillary gets the nomination, she would almost have to bring on Obama as a VP (though I doubt he would take the job). Without him, she loses a lot of new voter support and may be risking the Black vote. We won't go to McCain, but we'd probably stay at home in big enough numbers to concern her. But her VP appointment would be more of a vice vice president, since Bill would truly be her second in commandOn the democratic side, I see the Obama-Clinton ticket as a disaster. The things Clinton will claim to bring to the ticket (experience, strength, machinery) can be better brought with someone like Jim Webb or John Edwards. I particularly think an Obama-Edwards ticket would be very strong. If he wanted to really make a strong statement and try to bring in the female vote and swing states, he would think about bringing on Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas or Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri. Either one of these impressive ladies could put their traditionally red states into play, considering Obama's landslide wins there in the primaries.

I disagree. Hillary-Obama pretty-much solidifies the Democrat vote. The only problem I foresee with that ticket is the same problem they are going to have individually -- those who either won't vote for a female and/or those who won't vote for a black. And don't kid yourself, there are as many gender and race-biased liberals as there are conservative ones.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

His health WILL be an issue ... just wait.

You are damned right it will be. However Reagan stood tall and used his age to his advantage. Maybe McCain will as well.