Thursday, March 1, 2007

Wasted: McCain v. Obama

The Democrats are atwitter today.

John McCain said "wasted" when he appeared on David Letterman's show yesterday.

"Americans are very frustrated, and they have every right to be," about the situation in Iraq, McCain said. "We've wasted a lot of our most precious treasure, which is American lives."

The word "wasted" drew a sharp rebuke from the Democratic National Committee:

"Senator McCain should apologize immediately for his comments," Democratic National Committee Communications Director Karen Finney said in an e-mail to reporters. "McCain should also explain this poll-driven change in his tune. How is it that John McCain now believes American lives are being 'wasted,' yet he so stubbornly supports the President's plan to escalate the war in Iraq and put more American lives in harm's way? Clearly in looking at his sinking poll numbers, he really will do or say just about anything to win."

...McCain's wording was similar to that of Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., another presidential contender who got criticized for saying last month that "we now have spent $400 billion and have seen over 3,000 lives of the bravest young Americans wasted." He quickly apologized, saying that "even as I said it, I realized I had misspoken."

Liberal bloggers at Daily Kos and Big Tent Democrat have noted McCain's "wasted" remark and wonder whether their conservative colleagues will do the same.

Before that can happen, though, McCain has moved to calm the waters. His staff just e-mailed a statement from the Republican senator, acknowledging that he too agrees he shouldn't have used the word "wasted:"

"Last evening, I referred to American casualties in Iraq as wasted," McCain says. "I should have used the word, sacrificed, as I have in the past. No one appreciates and honors more than I do the selfless patriotism of American servicemen and women in the Iraq War. We owe them a debt we can never fully repay. And America’s leaders owe them, as well as the American people, our best judgment and honest appraisal of the progress of the war, in which they continue to sacrifice.

"As I have said many times, I believe we have made many mistakes in the prosecution of the war. With a new Commanding General and a new strategy, we are now trying to correct those mistakes, and I believe we have a realistic chance to succeed.

"That does not change the fact, however, that we have made many mistakes in the past, and we have paid a grievous price for those mistakes in the lives of the men and women who have died to protect our interests in Iraq and defend the rest of us from the even greater threat we would face if we are defeated there."

Although both McCain and Barack Obama used the term "wasted" to refer to the deaths of Americans in Iraq, there's a simple yet major difference between them.

It's about context.

I'm not on McCain's bandwagon, but in his defense, he did not say the same thing that the articulate, clean Obama said, "[W]e now have spent $400 billion and have seen over 3,000 lives of the bravest young Americans wasted."

American lives wasted -- The words are the same, yet their meanings are dramatically different.

Obama wants to cut and run from Iraq.

McCain doesn't want to cut and run.

Obama opposes the successful troop surge and wants to surrender, which would ensure chaos and likely unleash a genocide.

McCain supports the surge and wants to win in Iraq.

Obama believes Americans have died for nothing.

McCain is highly critical of Donald Rumsfeld, his mistakes, and how the war has been waged. However, McCain does not believe that the Americans who sacrificed their lives in Iraq have died in vain.

The bottom line:

Obama believes that the war in Iraq has been a meaningless exercise. The American dead may be heroes, but he considers them to be victims first.

McCain believes that some American deaths in Iraq have been the direct result of poor planning and other mistakes. He thinks it's possible that some of those deaths could have been prevented had the war planning been better.

Obama is actively seeking to undermine our chances for success in Iraq while members of our military are in harm's way and continue to sacrifice.

McCain is actively seeking to achieve success in Iraq and provide the necessary support for our military to succeed as they so bravely serve the country.

Both presidential wannabes made a poor choice of words.

The important difference between them lies in the substance of their messages.

Obama is choosing to back defeat in Iraq.

McCain is choosing to secure victory in Iraq.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

As far as I am concerned, we are arguing about semantics. Many great discussions and great men are felled by poorly used words. Our current administration functions by empty words. We must hear what hearts are saying. Not merely words. We must see actions not the words that make empty promises.
The fact is that any promising young life cut short is a waste. It doesn't matter what the cause. Whether it be as a martyr or for any noble cause, or because of illness, drug use, or drunk driving - It is still a tragic loss of hope for a beautiful life that that soul will never have. It is the loss of a spirit that may have been able to lift someone or even to lift us all. It is the loss of the gift of a life entrusted to us. It is the loss of their children that will never exist.
A life that does not reach its full potential IS a waste.

Mary said...

Obviously, it's not just semantics. If that were the case, then McCain and Obama wouldn't have been stumbling all over themselves to clarify their comments.

I agree with what appears to be your heartfelt sentiment that there's something tragic about a life cut short. That "what might have been" is so difficult for the survivors to bear.

However, I don't agree that a short life is, by definition, a waste.

It's not how long one lives, but how one lives that matters.

People can live to be 100 and accomplish less than people who live for far, far fewer years. You can't measure the value of one's life in years.

I also disagree with you on the point that the cause of one's death is irrelevant.

There's a qualitative difference between someone dying in service to one's country, for a cause, and someone dying because one chose to get behind the wheel and drive drunk, or because one intentionally overdosed, etc.

For example, Jesus died for a purpose. He sacrificed His life to save others. I wouldn't call that a waste. Did He reach His full potential?