Tuesday, August 24, 2004

Physical courage and moral cowardice

I wish I had the time and talent to write what I think needs to be said about the whole ‘What was John Kerry doing in Vietnam?” debacle. In the spirit of George W Bush, I’ll simply let someone else do it. The following was posted today at the excellent blog Talking Points Memo. Once again, Josh Marshall pretty much says it all. You can read the entire post here. This is just a brief pithy excerpt:

The current debate about these two men's military service has put the spotlight on physical courage. But that really is a side issue in this campaign, if we're talking substance. The real issue isn't physical bravery but moral cowardice.

President Bush is an exemplar of that quality in spades. And it cuts directly to his failures as president. Forget about thirty years ago, just think about the last three years.

Before proceeding on to that, one other point about the two men's service. On the balance sheet of moral bravery, as opposed to physical bravery, the two men are about as far apart as you can be on Vietnam. On the one hand you have Kerry, who already had doubts about whether we should be fighting in Vietnam before he went, and put his life on the line anyway. On the other hand, you have George W. Bush who supported the war, which means he believed the goal was worth the cost in American lives. Only, not his life. He believed others should go; just not him. It's the story of his life. That is almost the definition of moral cowardice.

posted by bkopec @ 9:08 AM   2 comments