Wednesday, September 10, 2008

Obama Campaign Questions John McCain's Honor

Responding to a campaign ad highlighting Barack Obama's support for comprehensive sex education for kindergartners, Obama press secretary Bill Burton issued the following statement: "Last week, John McCain told Time magazine he couldn't define what honor was. Now we know why."

Now, the campaign is close and heating up, and both sides are taking hard shots at each other. Each side believes that the other side isn't always being fair; it's normal for those in the thick of the battle to feel that way.

But does the Obama camp really think that it's a good idea to question McCain's honor? Most Americans believe that a man who fought for his country and suffered through five and a half years of torture as a POW--which worsened after he refused early release because it would violate his honor code--has demonstrated enough honor to last several lifetimes.

I believe that Barack Obama and Joe Biden are both honorable men, but have they ever proven their honor in the way that McCain has? Attacking John McCain's honor will only make people remember Sarah Palin's pointed line in her speech at the convention: "Though both Senator Obama and Senator Biden have been going on lately about how they're always, quote, 'fighting for you,' let us face the matter squarely: There is only one man in this election who has ever really fought for you."

After the raucous applause died down, Palin elaborated on her point: "There is only one man in this election who has ever really fought for you in places where winning means survival and defeat means death. And that man is John McCain. You know, in our day, politicians have readily shared much lesser tales of adversity than the nightmare world, the nightmare world in which this man and others equally brave served and suffered for their country. And it's a long way from the fear, and pain, and squalor of a six-by-four cell in Hanoi to the Oval Office."

In this election, each side will have plenty of legitimate grounds to criticize the other. It's a free country, and anyone is free to question John McCain's honor. Those who chose to do so, however, will only succeed in demonstrating that they don't know the meaning of the word.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

"It's a free country, and anyone is free to question John McCain's honor. Those who chose to do so, however, will only succeed in demonstrating that they don't know the meaning of the word."

Isn't that the same rhetoric you are so critical of in the post below? Although I greatly admire McCain's service to his country, I do question his honor based on his hypocrisy on various issues: he was against torture before he was for it; against disastrous, budget-busting tax cuts before he was for them; critical of right-wing televangelists before he embraced them; and so on. I am critical of Obama for the same flip-flops on offshore drilling, immunity for telecoms, and other issues.

People are complex and do all kinds of things during their lives that are honorable and dishonorable. Nobody gets a pass because they did one, big honorable thing. If McCain gets drunk and drives into a crowd on the sidewalk, must we continue to accept him as the epitome of honorableness because of something he endured bravely 35 years ago? No, of course not. I think it poisons the well to say if I think McCain's flip-flops are dishonorable, then I must not know what honor is.

Sad Commentary said...

Your argument is not unreasonable, and I agree with you that McCain's history as a POW does not earn him a pass on everything. In my view, however, it does earn him a great big benefit of the doubt that the type of adjustments in position that all politicians make do not make him a dishonorable flip-flopper. I also don't automatically assume that Obama's adjustments to his positions reflect a lack of honor. They're both politicians and they both need to sensitive to political reality. That does not make them dishonorable.

The one Obama change that I do have the biggest problem with (although I will not call him dishonorable over it) is breaking his pledge to accept public financing until he realized he could raise more money without it.

Anonymous said...

I agree. He lost the moral high ground on that issue when he allowed his fundraising success to overshadow his previous commitment. And I take my hat off to McCain for sticking to his guns on McCain-Fiengold Campaign Finance Reform.

Sad Commentary said...

Noni, it appears that you're trying to outflank me on the reasonableness and evenhandedness front. How dare you! :-)