McCain v. Bush--the Clash of the Conservative Titans

The more I hear about the confrontation between John McCain and George Bush, the more respect I have for McCain. It's refreshing to hear that there's at least one person in Washington that is willing to make the tough call even when it's going to cost him political support (yeah, I know it will soften liberal resistance to him, but you don't generally win politics by softening your opponent, but rather by solidifying your own voter base.) I could maybe even bring myself to set aside my general disdain for politicians, in this case...

I find it very illuminating that pretty much every Republican senator that has joined McCain's cause on the issue of POW treatment has a military background...when a pair of military lawyers, not to mention a former head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and several others with distinguished military backgrounds, are looking at an issue like this and saying, "Wow, that's just not right..." C'mon, only a moron would not stop and look at that (of course, I should keep in mind that we ARE talking about George Bush...)

Seems like the only people that ARE supporting the Bush side of things, outside the White House, are in the CIA. Big surprise, they wouldn't have much concern for issues of retribution (spying isn't protected in the Geneva Convention)--and the CIA has an unfortunate track record of being willing to sacrifice military lives in the interest of what's expedient for them (nearly every major military catastrophe that's happened since Vietnam has ultimately been attributed to 'poor intelligence'--boy, the levels on which that statement could be taken...)

The thing that just floors me, every time I read one of these articles, is the extremely specious nature of the argument FOR the proposed legislation...the Geneva Convention is vaguely worded and leaves doubt as to what interrogation methods may or may not be legal. Huh? The answer is pretty simple...if you think it MIGHT be illegal, DON'T DO IT. For Hell's sake, we're SUPPOSED to be the good guys, right? I was utterly amazed to hear Bill Maher saying the same thing earlier tonight--I don't normally agree with much of anything he has to say, and don't generally appreciate much his way of saying it, either. But on this one, I'm in total accord.

The political pundits are having a hey-day, predicting that John McCain is effectively excising his conservative support by breaking ranks with the President. Y'know, he's just gained huge strides in my book for the fact that he DID break ranks, and he did it to do what he feels is right. I would have thought that kind of dedication to principle would be bread and butter for the conservative side of the tracks (not claiming they've got an exclusive claim to it, just that in my mind, I tend to equate doing what is 'right', regardless of costs, with the conservative mindset...maybe it's all the Sunday School lessons from my childhood or something.)

There's a lot of speculation, some of it by McCain himself, that he may seek the Presidency in 2008. Columnists nationwide have been writing on his defiance of the President in that light, some scathingly accusing him of selling out his country, some predicting that he will lose all the ground he's gained in the last two years with the extreme right, some praising him for standing his ground on what he feels is a moral issue. They pretty much all label him as a maverick.

Maybe that's what we need. Someone who's willing to defy traditional political positions in order to make sure the job gets done more effectively. Someone who has already demonstrated their ability to work outside partisan lines, who has even managed to get key leaders of the opposing party to sing their praises a time or two. Someone willing to do what is right, regardless of what is popular.

Because, goodness knows, the status quo has sure been a let-down.