McCain Inherits Bush's Moral Credibility Crisis

A term has been kicking around in my head over the last few days. Actually it was a term created in my mind when the original version and its true author slipped my mind. My version is ‘moral accountability’. The burden placed on anyone who creates, judges or advances a moral agenda on to anyone else. In other words, if there was a moral accountability insurance policy, item one would say, ‘must not live in a glass house’.

The genesis of what was on my mind is ‘moral legitimacy’. It is a term written by retired Lt. Col. Conrad Crane in the US Army’s new Field Manual on fighting counterinsurgency wars. The full context is simple yet profound and convicting, “lose moral legitimacy, lose the war”. With the Abu Ghraib scandal in its rearview mirror, US troops needed such a basic reminder. Time seems to have revealed that Col. Crane’s wise message has for the most part reached most of the frontlines. The memo didn’t seem to make it to the oval office, however.

The weight of the undeniable conviction of one simple line like this should hit the Bush administration like a ton of bricks. I have no doubt that it doesn’t, but it should. It would anyone else, but then again most of us don’t spew morality on to others, much less the rest of the world. The world watches when a government pimps liberty and polices the moves of every other country yet spies on its own citizens’ emails and listens in on their phone calls. When the Bush administration fights at every turn basic human rights for war prisoners and combats any argument that torture is… well, torture, the rest of the civilized world sees. When newspaper columnists are asked to reveal the identity of covert CIA operatives, everyone else takes note. Moral legitimacy compromised – again and again and again.

Of course the world is not shocked by any of this. They’ve gotten used to our status of ‘morally over-extended’. After all, President Bush chose his administration’s only credible figure in the world, Colin Powell to lie to it in making the case for an unnecessary war. This is starting to sound like a Bush administration Greatest Hits album!

It seems logical that this moral debt be passed on to John McCain since he has chosen to align himself with so many of the morally corrupt policies. It’s sort of a nostalgic way that Bush can screw McCain over one last time - for old time’s sake. It brings back memories of Karl Rove’s strategy during the 2000 Republican primaries when Bush called McCain’s patriotism into question while he was hold up in the Hanoi Hilton. Of course that was during the Vietnam War; an inconvenience Bush chose to avoid. Never mind that, says McCain. Press ahead.

In running a campaign (especially lately) with a position supporting staying in Iraq, John McCain takes on all of the baggage that comes with that position. American voters have proven over time that we are a stupid and simple group only capable of understanding simple issues like patriotism, lapel pins and where the candidate goes to church. Luckily for Barack Obama they also see the war in simple terms: for or against. Obama called shotgun on the ‘against’ position way back, and McCain not only believes in the war effort in Iraq, but he sort of has to. The far right of the party has been very forgiving of McCain’s “liberal leanings” on issues like campaign finance reform, immigration and the environment. For him to drift even slightly to the left on the war isn’t even negotiable.

As Senator Obama has been touring the middle-east with the fanfare of Springsteen in Jersey, the world has shifted their focus on the contrast of the positions of the two candidates. More importantly, the voters have too. US troops are standing in line to see him and Israeli leaders even seem to have a soft spot for him. But more than anything else, the (Bush) hand-picked President of Iraq backs Obama’s plan for staged withdrawals of US troops. The Iraqi people do too, and with no distractions like Tila Tequila, Branjalina’s twins or the new Batman movie, they pay attention to everything.

So as everyone in the region, including the party’s hosts seems to agree with a policy of gradual withdrawal, the only ones in the room protesting are Bush and McCain. Music to every Democrat’s ears; Bush and McCain, McCain and Bush! As Obama garners the support of Iraq and Israel in the same week, John McCain is inheriting the Bush moral credibility crisis.

Proof that the McCain campaign realizes this burden is clearly seen in exactly how they are attacking Obama these days. McCain is rewinding the clock and insisting that Obama did not “believe in the surge” and thought that it would fail. The point is to convince the voter that Obama lacks the international insight and understanding to be President. An assertion that might work if he were not continually referring to Czechoslovakia in the present tense (four times in the last ten days) and skewing the timeline of the war and calling it a “matter of history.” He is asking the voters and the world to never mind the ruckus behind the curtain; ‘President Malaki is delusional and doesn’t really know what Iraq needs. Surely most of the troops want to keep fighting. Why would they want to come home? Obama wants to surrender! The surge has worked!’ We’ll see if American voters prove Col. Crane’s wisdom transferable. Lose moral legitimacy, lose the election.