Big Sky Cairn

On October 26, 1967, John McCain was shot down while flying over Vietnam. McCain parachuted into a lake, breaking both arms and a leg before he nearly drowned. After he was pulled from the water, a crowd attacked him, crushed his shoulder with a rifle butt, and bayoneted him. But his nightmare was just beginning.

McCain spent nearly six years in the infamous Hanoi Hilton. And despite being tortured and beaten on a regular basis, McCain turned down a 1968 offer of repatriation unless the North Vietnamese would release every American soldier taken in before him was released as well.

Due to the injuries that he received in service to his country, McCain has been rated 100% disabled by the Veterans Administration. So, when I read an article in the LA Times saying that McCain is not fit to be president because of injuries, I wanted to scream. Luckily, I have an electronic soapbox.

By any measure John McCain is a hero, who suffered unspeakable torture in service of his country. He then spent the next three decades in public service. And arguing that the injuries he sustained in Vietnam disqualify him from the presidency is abominable.

McCain is hardly the first person with disabilities to enter politics. Max Cleland and Tammy Duckworth are both 100% disabled, and they are both excellent public servants. Should their injuries make them ineligible to be president?

Franklin D. Roosevelt, the hero of the Democratic Party, was horribly disfigured and disabled after contracting polio but he served as President for 12 years. His disability didn’t get in the way of his accomplishments, and they certainly didn’t hinder his ability to bring his country out of the Great Depression and lead us to victory in WWII.

So, if these politician’s disabilities don’t hinder their ability to serve, why is McCain different? Because he’s a Republican? Because some moron at the L.A. Times who is neither a doctor nor a therapist says so?

Anyone who has ever volunteered on a statewide campaign can tell you, the trail is a grueling test of the candidate’s physical and emotional health. And in the last 25 years, McCain has breezed through three campaigns for the House of Representatives, three campaigns for the Senate and two presidential campaigns. Not to mention the travel and schedule he had to maintain in order to become one of the nation’s most heralded and powerful politicians.

If he can do all of that despite his injuries, I have no doubt that he is healthy and strong enough to serve as president.

But perhaps the most deplorable part of the LA Times article and the constant speculation about how McCain’s disability impacts his health is what it says to the thousands of young disabled veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. Thank you for serving your country and putting yourself in danger to protect my freedom, but you are no longer qualified to be president. So, if you aspired to a life of public service in government, be advised that your aspirations will be limited to only certain offices. What kind of message is that to send to the brave men and women who have sacrificed more than many of us can imagine in the name of freedom?

McCain’s doctors say he is in great health. And his performance on the campaign trail over the past several months should silence the naysayers. But even if you think that he’s too old and frail to be president, don’t start insinuating that the brace men and women disabled in combat aren’t fit to hold public office. Because anyone who can survive the pain of his injuries, the grueling recovery therapies and the stigma of being disabled while rising to a position of prominence in the unkind world of politics is tougher and more qualified to be president than most of us will ever hope to be.

Check it out. A lot of Vietnam veterans think McCain got special treatment. If you liked the Swiftboat boys, you’ll love this, except that these will get no press attention. McCain is protected.

And quite a few Vietnamese aren’t to thrilled with McCain considering the horrors he unleashed on them. But I don’t suppose you look upon bombing innocent civilians as something that anyone might get mad about, want to beat him up … after all, they were only Vietnamese.

One thing about Mark T, he can always make me puke!

Is it me, Mike, or the fact that I make you look in the mirror?

Good one Mark!

I was speaking symbolically - Americans in general cannot stand open examination of our own behavior in places like Vietnam where we managed to kill over three million and pave the way for Pol Pot.

Wasn’t intended for Mike personally.

Mark, is it your opinion then that McCain and his fellow vets of American wars ought to be convicted of war crimes?

Wow Mark that is an impressive series of comments. First you repeat Sen. Rockfeller’s line that McCain was a coward for being a fighter-bomber pilot…nice…

Then that was not good enough so you lay a blanket accusation that the US military is a bunch of war criminals…

To top it off you say the US caused a genocide led by a communist government.

truly impressive.

P.S. the number of casualties you say for Vietnam is made up. It is O.K. to admit it, hell clearly you have not posted a well thought out remark yet in this thread.

Estimated war dead - 1.1 million dead soldiers and 600,000 wounded during Vietnam’s conflict with the United States. Civilian deaths are put at two million in the North and South.Add another 500,000 dead civilians in Laos and Cambodia. Total non-US casualties: 4.7 million, or about 80 of them for every one of us. That’s a typical ratio for conflicts between a highly sophisticated military society and peasant farmers - I’m sure there are many precedents going back to ancient history for that kind of slaughter.

The U.S. dropped more bombs on Cambodia alone than all of the tonnage in WWII, leading to the destruction of that society and paving the way for Pol Pot. That’s why he came to power - we destroyed the country, and in the wake of our attack, it was easy picking for tyrants. Naomi Klein calls it the shock doctrine, although she applies it to different historical events.

Is targeting civilians a war crime? If so, and if John McCain targeted civilians, then he is a war criminal. I think that’s what he was doing when he was shot down. Did the U.S. commit war crimes? Absolutely, just as in Iraq - though since the U.S. is the strongest military force on the planet, no one can prosecute it.

I know I’m at a conservative web site, and you all are caught up in the rosy lies told about all of our adventures abroad. I can’t change your minds or attitudes except to say that I once lived among you and believed the same lies. If only you would get out of your Heritage/American Enterprise bubbles now and then and look around, you’ll discover a lot of things about your country and the world you live in that you don’t know. You need a good eye-opening.

Mark T.,
Outstanding! When our Vietnam vets returned from the war they were spat on and called baby killers. I know because I was a six year old with my dad when some freak spat on him after he returned.

I find it fascinating that you think it helpful to Obama to start the disrespect and “spitting” again. You guys just can’t help yourselves, can you?

I hope you and your buddies keep it up. It will play well with those undecided and independent voters.

Mark T - The enlightened philosopher who has seen the shadows on the cave wall for what they are and ventured out into the sunlight only to be shunned by The People unable or unwilling to accept the Truth. It must be frustrating.

Truth, by the way, established simply by the assertions of Mark T who knows everything.

Wiley - you are much smarter than Andy and capable of a much better response. Two very dumb rejoinders.

Says the man who, just hours before wrote: “Is it me, Mike, or the fact that I make you look in the mirror?”…

Mark T loves those swiftboaters. The real question is, what does Obama and a famous swiftboater have in common? Answer below.

TheObamafile:
From the time Barack Obama was sworn in as a United State Senator, to the time he announced that he was forming a Presidential exploratory committee, he logged 143 days of experience in the Senate. That’s how many days the Senate was actually in session and working.

After 143 days of work experience, Obama believed he was ready to be Commander In Chief, Leader of the Free World, and fill the shoes of Abraham Lincoln, FDR, JFK and Ronald Reagan.

Swift Vets:

John Kerry’s service in Vietnam lasted 4 months and 12 days, beginning in November 1968 when he reported to Cam Ranh Bay for a month of training. His abbreviated combat tour ended shortly after he requested a transfer out of Vietnam on March 17, 1969, citing Navy instruction 1300.39 permitting personnel with three Purple Hearts to request reassignment. So far as we are able to determine, Kerry was the only Swift sailor ever to leave Vietnam without completing the standard one-year tour of duty, other than those who were seriously wounded or killed.

Big Swede,
Do you think Obama is a puppet with somebody behind the scenes pulling the strings?

Andy, maybe its “Baby Mama”.

“And quite a few Vietnamese aren’t to thrilled”

are they at least “to mildly interested”?

or have they not gotten to “somewhat apathetic”?

McCain’s not the only disabled vet to run. Bob Dole got abandoned by the far right in his bid…perhaps as McCain will, too. MarkT’s not going to support either one, but perhaps all Republicans can remember the Dole mistake and get behind another disabled vet this time.

I think the 2006 race proved that Republicans have a tendency toward political suicide when the chips are down and we’re not happy. Candidate X isn’t conservative enough? Don’t vote for him, and live with candidate Y who’s twice as liberal.