JOHN F. Kennedy once said "a young man who does not have what it takes to perform military service is not likely to have what it takes to make a living." For much of the twentieth century, a variation of this sentiment was applied in presidential elections. In voters' eyes, the military service records of presidential contenders have often been as important considerations of presidential suitability as voting records and political experience. Kennedy is a prime example of this. A decorated Navy officer in World War II, his military service was a consideration in 1960 and presumably gave him superior insight and judgment during the Cuban missile crisis.
Although military service was a major yardstick of presidential fitness in the past, thus far it has been nearly irrelevant in the 2008 elections. In 2004, it was a major issue. At this point in the previous presidential election, John Kerry was frequently referencing the Mekong River during Vietnam. Rassman actively campaigned with Kerry and emotionally told crowds, "I owe this man my life." Aided by his late caucus push, and significant support from Iowa's veterans, Kerry won the state with 38 percent of the vote and rejuvenated his campaign. Notably, he defeated fellow veteran, and West Point-trained general, Wesley Clark. Kerry followed up this performance at the Democratic National Convention, where he began his July 29, 2004 acceptance speech by saluting and stating "I'm John Kerry, and I'm reporting for duty."
Kerry's focus on his military experience ultimately backfired, however, as the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth attacked his service record. As a result of Kerry's loss, many strategists and consultants concluded that focusing on one's military record was not a good campaign strategy. Despite serving with distinction as a Navy pilot and prisoner of war in Vietnam, John McCain has yet to emphasize his military service record.
Ironically, in the 2000 election, during a time of peace, McCain made his service a central campaign issue. Now, while the nation is at war in Afghanistan and Iraq, McCain rarely mentions it. As a result, few voters realize that he is the most qualified candidate in the areas of foreign policy and national security.
Instead, Rudy Giuliani, an attorney and former New York City mayor, is considered by most Americans to be the foremost security expert among 2008 candidates. His national security experience consists of reducing crime in the Big Apple and responding to the September 11 terrorist attacks. These claims to fame pale in comparison to John McCain's wartime experience as a combat pilot and six-year resident of the "Hanoi Hilton," where he was kept as a prisoner of war and tortured. Today, largely due to his military experience, McCain serves as the Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Armed Services.
Overall, the 2008 contest must put more weight on the military service, or lack thereof, of potential presidents. When discussing candidate biographies, the media focuses onmarital status more extensively than military service. This must change, as the most important campaign issue is the War on Terrorism, and specifically how it is being conducted in Iraq and Afghanistan. Candidates have labored to differentiate and distinguish themselves through their stances on troop levels in Iraq. Yet, in the face of two controversial conflicts, few voters are weighing the military experience and expertise of candidates.
Granted. all soldiers turned statesmen are not perfect public servants. The 2005 bribery scandal concerning Rep. Randy Cunningham, a veteran, illustrates this point. Yet, former servicemen are for the most part some of the nation's most passionate, committed servants. Anyone who voluntarily risks his life to serve America is devoted to doing what's best for the nation. The election of several Iraq veterans to Congressional seats during the 2006 election shows that voters across the nation realize this. However, we as voters must now apply this military service filter to national as well as congressional elections.
When considering who to support in the 2008 election, and Virginia's February 12 primary, voters must place more emphasis on military service.The duties of Commander-in-Chief are best executed by someone who comprehends both the political and military implications of decisions. Lifelong civilians are not in a position to understand adequately the military repercussions of their actions, and no executive should completely rely on advisors when making security-related decisions. By barely considering the military service records of presidential candidates, we are doing ourselves, and the nation, a great disservice.
James Rogers's column appears Fridays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at jrogers@cavalierdaily.com.
.
Read More
WILLIAMS: Donald Trump will be a threat to student loan forgiveness
By Ryan Williams | 18 hours agoTo be sure, this is not a problem of the University’s making. Nevertheless, understanding the uncertainty of financial accessibility in education, the University must step up to the plate.
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 5 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 6 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
