« OBama, FISA and national security | RobertoW's Blog | How to Counter the "Inexperienced" Charge (and Go on the Attack) »
Honor POW's - but do they deserve a special pass to the White House?
Historically, when it comes to running a military man at the head of the ticket, we generally prefer generals, a fine tradition stretching from George Washington to Dwight D. Eisenhower. Not every one of these choices worked out quite as well as those two - Ulysses S. Grant almost managed to undo in the White House what he had secured on the field. But its hard to beat wartime success as a litmus test for coolness, command presence and executive ability under fire.
In addition, in times of great peril when many citizens are forced to serve, an honorable military record at some level is almost de rigueur. It's hard to see how either Kennedy or Nixon could have competed in 1960 if he had sat on the sidelines during WWII - whatever the reason, so many families were affected by that conflict that the inevitable question would have arisen "if my boy served, why not him?" and doomed his candidacy at its inception.
But one form of military service has never been deemed necessary, or even desirable, in a candidate, until this year: long-term imprisonment by the enemy.
Risking all in combat is certainly honorable and politically advantageous, as JFK's use of his experiences aboard PT-109 demonstrates.
Being captured and tortured by the enemy beyond the breaking point hasn't in the past been seen as experience we really look for in our chief executive.
As my title makes clear, I have absolutely no desire to in any way impugn the character or honor of any person who has ever been imprisoned and tortured during wartime. I just want to ask what the extreme stress of involuntary servitude adds to executive ability.
Just as John McCain's face and body bear testimony to his imprisonment, it is surely relevant to ask if his imprisonment has affected his ability to judge and command. That he is also an elderly man, has shown multiple signs of confusion and disorientation during his campaign, and has a history of inappropriate emotional outbursts in his Senate career, should intensify our concern that someone who to my knowledge has never been treated for the severe PTSD he undoubtedly suffered now wants to head one of the world's richest countries, with sole command of the largest military in world history.
In addition, in times of great peril when many citizens are forced to serve, an honorable military record at some level is almost de rigueur. It's hard to see how either Kennedy or Nixon could have competed in 1960 if he had sat on the sidelines during WWII - whatever the reason, so many families were affected by that conflict that the inevitable question would have arisen "if my boy served, why not him?" and doomed his candidacy at its inception.
But one form of military service has never been deemed necessary, or even desirable, in a candidate, until this year: long-term imprisonment by the enemy.
Risking all in combat is certainly honorable and politically advantageous, as JFK's use of his experiences aboard PT-109 demonstrates.
Being captured and tortured by the enemy beyond the breaking point hasn't in the past been seen as experience we really look for in our chief executive.
As my title makes clear, I have absolutely no desire to in any way impugn the character or honor of any person who has ever been imprisoned and tortured during wartime. I just want to ask what the extreme stress of involuntary servitude adds to executive ability.
Just as John McCain's face and body bear testimony to his imprisonment, it is surely relevant to ask if his imprisonment has affected his ability to judge and command. That he is also an elderly man, has shown multiple signs of confusion and disorientation during his campaign, and has a history of inappropriate emotional outbursts in his Senate career, should intensify our concern that someone who to my knowledge has never been treated for the severe PTSD he undoubtedly suffered now wants to head one of the world's richest countries, with sole command of the largest military in world history.
Advertisement





This is probably the best-written statement regarding the effects of McCain's POW experiences that I've ever read. Rec'd.
August 22, 2008 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink