Someone must have really said something horrible when a bunch of people who can't stand John McCain are incensed over a purported insult of John McCain. Someone needs to explain the rules to Donald Trump: The senator from Arizona, who regularly refers to those who disagree with him as "crazies" and "wacko birds", must always be acknowledged as a
war hero. No exceptions. No room for discussion about whether the designation of "hero" should be limited to those who actually achieve something that furthers the war effort - as opposed to the tragedy colored with honor that characterizes five years as a prisoner of war under the most inhumane conditions imaginable.
Oh, I'm sorry, did I just cross the line too by wondering aloud if the right words are typically applied here? Well then I guess I'm not going to be president either. I'll find something else to do. Not a problem.
By pointing out what is simple fact - McCain is seen as a war hero because he was captured, as opposed to having avoided capture and inflicting major damage on the enemy - Trump is now coming in for the predictably universal condemnation that even sees McCain's biggest critics among the punditry calling for Trump's head. You. Cannot. Question. War. Heroism.
Clearly Trump violated this ironclad rule of American politics, which suggests to me that it's a good time to ask a very basic question: Why do we have that rule? More broadly, why do we have the rule that says any candidate who makes a statement that's rude, insulting, upsetting, obnoxious or insensitive must be bum-rushed from the race?
Let's say such rhetoric is completely representative of the person he is, and it tells us beyond a shadow of a doubt that we'd be electing a caustic jackhole if we put this guy in the White House. Why, America, would that be such a big problem?
Now, all things being equal, would I prefer a nice guy? Absolutely. George W. Bush is a nice guy. I thought he graced the presidency with class and decency. I enjoyed having him there. But my enjoyment of the president's personality (or yours) is not what gives us the results we need from an individual's time in office. The presidency is an extremely difficult task of executive management, policy making and legislative strategy. A lot of people who are very nice may be less qualified to do it successfully than a lot of other people who are complete jerks.
I often suspect the political media care more than the general public about "insensitive remarks" candidates make, and they play up these remarks as major campaign stories whether the public wants such a focus or not. But to the extent people do care about caustic things candidates say, I'd suggest we've lost our understanding of what we really need our presidents to do. It is not the president's job to avoid upsetting people, to make us feel good about ourselves or to put an agreeable smiling face on the ship of state. None of this should be important to you. We need the budget balanced, the tax code replaced, ObamaCare repealed and replaced, domestic energy sources unleashed, the military rebuilt, etc. If a caustic jackhole can get that done, I'll vote for him. If, in the course of doing these things, he regularly makes statements that upset people - why do I care? Why do you? Americans think it's entertaining to watch Simon Cowell insult just about everyone who stands in front of him, but if a politician does so it's the onset of the apocalypse?
This is not to say Trump is necessarily the hypothetical guy I'm describing here, who's so well suited for the presidency that the less pleasant aspects of his personality are worth disregarding. I've got serious issues with Trump, and as regular readers know I'm quite favorably inclined toward
a certain midwestern governor who I believe has all the traits described above and - as an added but unnecessary bonus, appears to be a nice guy too.
But for the sake of argument, if Trump did prove himself to be the candidate who combined the right policy prescriptions with the right governing skill, it would really not matter to me what comes out of his mouth - including the questioning of some doddering senator's sacrosanct war hero status. We've been pretty consistent about electing people who never say anything insensitive or obnoxious, and never accomplish anything worthwhile once they're in office. Maybe we need to toughen up and recognize that caustic words don't do us nearly as much damage as insane public policy.
