At 55, I am old enough that I am no longer considered desirable by TV advertisers, no doubt because by my age most people learn that advertising claims are not as reliable an indicator of product quality as their own — and their friends’ — experience. And it is my experience listening to American presidential campaign claims starting in the mid-1960s that leaves me scratching my head about John McCain and how he would behave as president.

In 2000, McCain was the “maverick” Republican who seemed to realize that de-taxing America’s richest and greediest citizens was not only bad policy but an insult to everyone who works for a living instead of profiting mainly from investments or inheritances. He was scrappy. We knew McCain came from an elite military family — his father and grandfather were Admirals — but it also seemed that McCain, like most good military officers, knew that he had to take care of the enlisted personnel at least as well as, if not better than, his fellow officers.

In “field” situations, enlisted soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen almost always go through the chow line ahead of the officers. It is a commander’s responsibility to make sure the men and women for whom he (or she, these days) is responsible get fed before he or she — and the other officers — fill their plates. I used to see a lot of that attitude in McCain. I wouldn’t call it liberalism, but rather a sense of fair play. Officers, like rich people, have plenty of privileges ordinary workers (enlisted personnel) do not, so it is only fair that the enlisted personnel get to eat first, just as it is fair for the Richest and Greediest Americans to pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes than the working people pay.

Another old military axiom is that a unit can only move as fast as its slowest member; that everyone sticks together, and if a couple of people are having trouble marching due to illness or injury it is everyone’s responsibility to help the slower ones along — by carrying them if necessary. Move this same thought pattern into a civilian context, and it becomes shocking that the Richest and Greediest Americans are willing to cut or remove any help for our society’s weakest and neediest members in order to save themselves a pittance in taxes.

In any military unit whose leadership operated the same way as our current antisocial “conservatives” run our government, morale would plummet and the unit’s fighting ability would soon diminish to the point where that unit would be incapable of winning battles.

Barack Obama, despite his lack of military experience, seems to understand the basic principles of military leadership, which can be learned by reading and conversation with former military personnel, not just by being in the military. Much of his talk about change in America sounds just like the kind of speech a competent commander makes when taking over a unit demoralized by a previous commander whose management style was based on self-aggrandizement and cronyism rather than troop-centered leadership.

Even as Obama embraces the rules of sound military leadership, McCain seems to be forgetting them. Suddenly he’s running around boasting that he is today, and has always been, a “conservative,” a word he seem to use in its modern Republican sense, where it is code for “helping the rich get richer while making life harder for everyone else.”

So which McCain are we supposed to vote for? The sensible but flawed 2000 (and earlier) McCain, who talked like a decent, compassionate leader? Or the 2008 edition, who seems to have forgotten most of what made him a decent person, and talks as if he wants to continue most of the Bush administration’s worst policies?

When I consider voting for McCain, this is the question I ask myself.

I do not know how to answer it.

Do you?

This entry was posted on Wednesday, May 14th, 2008 at 8:25 am and is filed under Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.