|
I hope Vietnam does not, as in 2004, again muddle the wars of today that the next President will have to resolve. Below is my argument as to why:
One cannot deny anyone--especially a man who faced the travails that McCain faced through no choice of his own-- his due respect and appreciation; and I certainly would not. But when he uses his Vietnam experience as the basis of his electability in 2008, the way Kerry did in 2004, he opens himself up...indeed he asks for....that which befell Kerry from the other people who suffered the same, if not more, at the hands of America's enemies in Vietnam. Yet I think it outrageous that a war of more than three decades ago should be used as a trophy by men seeking to command a current ongoing war. McCain would do better discussing Iraq in more depth rather than ride it as a vehicle to electability. Yes, Americans hate to lose...Yes, Americans should, if they don't, appreciate McCain's sacrifice as an aviator and POW. But no, that plus clap-trap about his photo-op Potemkin Tours of Baghdad do not add up to authority to take command. He will have to be more substantive or risk low-blow "Swift-boating" from some fellow POWs who will accept in silence anything but for McCain to use his POW days as a rite of passage to the Presidency. Nor does anyone accept his 5 1/2 years as a POW as military expertise. McCain's military expertise was academically-only acquired in the Naval Academy from where he graduated with a gentleman's pass (given his dad's name) for, as he himself admits, he was then not a very serious person, more gonadal than officer material. So now, as a much older man, McCain has nothing historical to offer as exclusive top-job qualification other than merely being three decades older than Obama.
That said, we all are ready to attentively listen to his views on our current wars-- the Iraq War, the Afghan War, the Mideast War and also the Iran War which he seeks to plunge us into....It is not because of his "military experience" (one acquires little of that as a POW) but because we assume that he acquired much maturity in a long life of political authority, period, that we are so ready to interview him so seriously for our highly prized votes. That means-- given the lower public approval of House and Senate than of Bush-- that he must show his stuff: is it the right stuff or is it just the Right-wing stuff to collar Bush's Rove-made base?
I welcome, not "town halls," but an open (uninterrupted by Narcissistic media) dialogue between McCain and Obama on where do we go next after President Dummy "decider" and VP ventriloquist leave the White House. They MUST REASON AND INFORM....no spin, no jingles...facts and reasoning-- GIVEN THAT...THEREFORE-- of what America would do next. That way, there's no trade of insult, no imputing character, no pretended expertise....only what, how and why, without the cheers of peanut galleries of chosen stooges from both sides. I know that it sounds Booooorrrriiiinnnggg, but I do think we owe seriousness to our dying and suffering sons in all these wars we are in and would be in. McCain/Obama, for the first time in recent history, face the actual generation that is supposed to save America from the mess my generation made so that the next generation after them can inherit something at least as good as the Great Generation of WWII bequeath to us. McCain's thesis quoted above seems to very much agree with what I'm requesting; but when he wrote that he wasn't a Wash DC politico running to move up in the political food chain. I'm ready to devote all my attention and all my maturity in open-mindedness to the dialogue. But we shouldn't allow it to be clouded up with my generation's war when Obama was just a little kid. We made that mistake in 2004 and our kids payed a heavy price for that. The issue is NOW and WHAT FOLLOWS, not Vietnam.
Daniel E. Teodoru
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
