X-raying McCain.

A trivial three paragraphs about how John McCain's teeth were being examined in the blogosphere has provoked a mini-firestorm, including a Mitch Berg dismissal that's three-and-half times longer than Molly Priesmeyer's original piece.

Well, not original exactly, since Priesmeyer is simply presenting a slightly embellished summary of what others are saying online.

If bloggers are saying one thing about John McCain this week it's that the 71-year-old has some serious grit. Of course, that grit comes in the form of McCain Mouth, a deformity that apparently causes teeth to look like a mess of yellowed and contorted Chiclets. Today, BuzzFeed.com has picked up on the mouth meme, turning McCain's piano-key chompers into an official phenomenon.

She tries to wrap up the snarky trend-spotting with a clumsy attempt at one more joke while almost making the point that it's unfair to judge any candidate by their appearance. A different slant might've made the little item almost substantive, but instead it simply managed to magnify a cheap shot at the GOP candidate, disrespect a former POW and stir one of America's deepest phobias — dental pain!

Intrepid opposition researcher Michael Brodkorb dredges up a citation in a Vanity Fair article, followed by another from the noted journal The Daily Mail [links mine] to substantiate

THE FACT THAT MCCAIN HAD MANY OF HIS TEETH BROKEN WHILE BEING TORTURED AS P.O.W.

In fact, McCain's teeth were broken at the gum while being tortured as a P.O.W:   

In 1968 he was offered early release, and when he refused, because others had been there longer, his captors went at him again; he suffered cracked ribs, teeth broken off at the gum line, and torture with ropes that lashed his arms behind his back and that were progressively tightened all through the night.

The source for the "many teeth" claim is a British tabloid journalist's summary of McCain's story, possibly lifted from the Vanity Fair article, since it also contains the "gum" detail. McCain himself simply said, "They cracked several of my ribs and broke a couple of teeth."

Much of McCain's dental problems were more likely the product of poor prison nutrition and the difficulty of maintaining dental hygeine in terrible conditions — especially by a man who even today cannot raise his arms high enough to comb his own hair. There's no need to invent details of McCain's suffering or the persistent consequences. But that's what "many of his teeth broken at the gum" appears to be.

Priesmeyer's piece was dumb and insensitive, of course, and now it belongs to the polemicists like Berg and Brodkorb, who will make much more of it than it deserves.

Priesmeyer is not the only one a little vague on McCain's injuries, though. The Vanity Fair article — to which Brodkorb provides no link — concludes its description of the extent of McCain's war-related disabilities with another encounter of the clueless kind, this from someone in a far better position than Priesmeyer:

One of McCain's aides tells me that two years ago, campaigning with McCain, George W. Bush asked him if the senator would like to work out with him. Told that McCain did not, could not, really "work out," Bush replied, "What do you mean?"

UPDATE:

And of course, today's critics would never stoop to mocking a candidate's war wounds.

UPDATE 2: And via a commenter back at the original Minnesota Monitor article, McCain apparently also broke some teeth on rocks in his food.

Comments

[Michael B. Brodkorb]

Mr. Quimby:

I find your post as equally disturbing as the original attack on McCain from Minnesota Monitor. The folks at Minnesota Monitor can claim "we didn't know" that McCain's teeth were broken at the gum while being tortured as a P.O.W. But your post takes a more perverse track by blaming McCain's teeth on "poor prison nutrition" and by questioning whether people, presumably McCain, are inventing "details of McCain's suffering."

If someone believed your ridiculous theory, then the invention of any facts must have been done by McCain, since I and other bloggers are citing McCain's own account of his torture. Your charge of fact invention is shockingly preposterous.

[Ben Keeler]

Yeah making fun of someone's teeth - good call. Probably going to have to do slightly better than that to win the election.

[Charlie Quimby]

No, Michael, I'm not at all questioning John McCain's account. I'm questioning yours.

But nice try.

I think the medical consequences of McCain's captivity were horrendous, no matter how they occurred. But I enjoyed pointing out how you sourced your particular expression of outrage — "many of his teeth broken while being tortured."

It's what you do, and you're good at it, so you should feel complimented when I point out your techniques.

Your short posts are calculated to maximize propagandistic punch, so when attacking the original trivial piece, you had to inflate the grievance to the max.

You couldn't just say what is clearly supported by McCain's own words and the record — that his teeth were adversely affected while he was a POW and a couple were knocked out by his captors. Instead, you selected details from two very recent accounts that do not directly quote Sen. McCain, but contain the words "many"and "broken off at the gum line."

Presumably, of course, those teeth would have been long ago replaced by a man with Sen. McCain's means and would look as good as Sen. Coleman's. But it's important to connect their appearance to McCain's torture, and so you do.

If you can provide me with a direct quote from Senator McCain to the effect that he had many teeth knocked out by his captors, I'll stand corrected. But your post contained no such substantiation, and if you had it, why not give it?

I hope readers clicked on my Daily Mail link, so they can see what a fine publication you used as your source. Is that why you didn't link?

And as for the Vanity Fair article, why didn't you link to it? It contained a poignant description of McCain's injuries far more significant than his dental work.

I think it makes the original chuckling about his teeth even worse. My theory is that you didn't link because your paragraph was followed shortly by an unflattering mention of Bush's cluelessness.

To be clear, I don't think Sen. McCain inflated his torture or is using it for political purposes. I admire his firm stand against torture, and he has greater credibility on the subject than any major world leader. You used it.

Oh, and whenever you're trying to impugn me, feel free to call me Charlie.

[Charlie Quimby]

And for the discourse lovers among you, Mitch and his commenters have an update.

http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/?p=2325

[Michael B. Brodkorb]

Mr. Quimby: I posted links to excerpts of Senator McCain's book that details the horrors of his torture as a P.O.W.. The Herald Sun published excerpts of his book. Once again Mr. Quimby, it's McCain's words from his book.

"They cracked several of my ribs and broke a couple of teeth. Weakened by beatings and dysentery, with my right leg again almost useless, I found it impossible to stand."

This should clear up your confusion.

[serns]

This reminds me of when I was a kid and wanted to know how many "several" was. The dictionary said it was "more than two but less than many." I wasn't really satisfied with the answer. I think I at least wanted a range (3 to 8, for instance). A couple is, I think, two, but could go up to 3 or 4 if you're not a precision geek. And if someone was breaking them off, painfully, there might be a loose usage where 4 would be many, on the grounds that one or two is already a lot. But for me, that would be for the guy whose teeth they were, not an after-the fact interpretation.

[charlieq]

Michael,

The confusion is all yours. I will say it once again: My original post contained the same quote from McCain's book with a link. Please see above: McCain himself simply said, "They cracked several of my ribs and broke a couple of teeth."

To clear up my confusion, please tell me how "broke a couple of teeth" = "had many of his teeth broken." Then we can move on the "broken off at the gum" detail.

[charlieq]

Serns,

In most relationships, "a couple" means two. It could be the same as "several," but several leaves the door open to more. Both are less than "many." And I really hate having to spell it out for one kid in the class who makes a business of making many out of a few.

[Michael B. Brodkorb]

I think most rational people would think that have one tooth broken off, is one too many.

According to McCain, he had numerous teeth broken while a P.O.W.

That is a fact you seem to be ignoring.

[charlieq]

Michael, since your stock-in-trade has been put on full display here for some time, I'm going to ignore further comments that continue to repeat an untruth about what facts I've ignored.

People can read and judge for themselves.

According to McCain, he had a couple of teeth broken by his captors while a POW. I think this is bad and never said it wasn't. Yes, I said much of his dental troubles may derive from the ongoing conditions of his captivity. I did not say this was better. In fact, as someone who's had numerous teeth broken myself, I would still say 5-plus years of the effects of poor diet and hygiene would be even worse long term, but we'll leave that to any dentists in the audience.

Now you say McCain "had numerous teeth broken while a P.O.W." Yes, but that was NOT the statement in your headline or the snippets you quoted.

From the beginning, my post was about how you went beyond McCain's own words to magnify one detail of his ordeal to craft a swipe at liberals. Then you did the same with my post, self-generating more mock outrage at what I did not say.

Now, you repeat your unfounded charge over and over, everything to the contrary.

That's how it works, folks, and good luck getting Mr. Brodkorb to address that fact.

[Sakaki]

1 or 2 is numerous, you fucking jackass.

[Charlie Quimby]

Maybe in your universe. But over here where we still know how to use a dictionary, numerous means "many in number."