If there is one strong advantage that the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, John McCain, has over either of the remaining Democratic candidates, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, in vying for the presidency, it is his service, both in peace and war, as a naval officer, retiring with the rank of captain.
Widely admired for his ability to survive over five years of captivity in a North Vietnamese prison cell, following his release, he went on to command the largest air squadron in the Navy and then broaden his knowledge of strategic level military-politico affairs by attending the National War College. By comparison, neither Senators Clinton nor Obama served a single day in uniform.
Sen. McCain, as he ratchets up his qualifications for the presidency and position as commander in chief of the armed forces, especially in terms of his military background, recently chose to highlight this perceived shortcoming in regard to Senator Obama.
Having received criticism from Senator Obama for McCain’s failing to be present to vote (McCain opted to attend a fund-raiser in San Diego by the football Chargers owner Alex Spanos) on what is widely perceived to be a desperately needed new, expanded GI Bill, which was strongly backed by both the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the American Legion and passed the Senate by a 75 to 22 margin, McCain lashed out at Obama by stating that, “ I take a back seat to no one in my affection, respect and devotion to veterans, and I will not accept from Senator Obama, who did not feel it was his responsibility to serve our country in uniform, any lectures on my regard for those who did.”
The point, that of not serving in uniform, raised by Senator Mc Cain, although discussed in the media and press as quite possibly politically expedient, should be looked at and debated in a broader light.
With the title of commander in chief, and all that entails, should it be mandatory that the occupant of the White House to have served, as noted by Sen. McCain, “in uniform”? If addressed in isolation, and given an either/or option, with all other qualifications for the presidency excluded, there is no doubt that an overwhelming majority of the American populace would opt for a president with prior military service. But, here is where the discussion becomes a little more, to put it mildly, complex.
When looking at military service as it relates to the presidency, just what level, time and experience should be considered?
Although all voluntary military service involves a high degree of patriotism and personal sacrifice, what other factors contribute to preparing an individual for the presidency?
Does a teenager who serves in a stateside assignment during peacetime, say as a clerk, cook, or administrative vehicle driver and then returns to civilian life after three years, present the same level of military experience/qualifications for the presidency as someone who has gone through a series of service schools, physically demanding training, service in combat, and increasingly challenging leadership positions?
The patriotism and love of country may be the same in both cases, but what about an overall ability to examine national level crisis scenarios?
In a related, but important consideration, how does one view the completely civilian service of a young American who loves his/her country every bit as much as the military member, but opts to serve his/her country by learning a difficult foreign language and volunteers to exhibit the care and love of the United States for those less fortunate by working as an educator or health care provider in somewhat barbaric conditions in a third world country?
Should this individual, who has acquired a deep understanding of foreign affairs by actually living in and truly understanding one or more foreign cultures, be considered, with all other factors being equal, less qualified for the presidency than someone who has “worn the uniform”?
What is somewhat puzzling concerning the views of Sen. Mc Cain, as they concern the importance of prior military service in serving as president, is his current list of potential vice presidential running mates.
The most widely mentioned possibilities are: former governors Huckabee (Arkansas) and Romney (Massachusetts); present governors Pawlenty (Minnesota), Crist (Florida) and Jandel (Louisiana); and, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
As you examine this list you will note that there is one common factor: Not one has served a single day of active duty “in uniform.”
Just as Sen. McCain’s staff failed to do the proper research in acquiring the now-disavowed endorsement of televangelist, the Reverend John Hagee, they have also let down Sen. McCain in researching what to Sen. McCain is a key experience factor in serving in a position ”one heartbeat” from the position of commander in chief, that of vice president.
Sen. McCain cannot have it both ways — if he is to sharply criticize Sen. Obama for not serving “in uniform” he had best, in the spirit of “straight talk,” jettison his current slate of VP running mates.
Wade J. Williams
Colonel, USA (Ret)
Peachtree City, Ga.