From Jimbo's post today:
John McCain [(R-AZ)] was so loyal to the men he was imprisoned with he endured torture on their behalf.
Barack Obama [(D-IL)] associates with those who can help his career, and throws them right under the bus when they become inconvenient to his aspirations.
Yes, there are a lot of areas where John McCain and I are not in agreement (more on this in a future post), but there's no doubting his honor. This was something that the left never understood about John Kerry (D-MA) and the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. They nominated a "military man" and a "war hero", thinking that this would finally shut up all the people on the right who criticize the left's dedication to the military. They also thought they'd have a strong weapon against George W. Bush's National Guard service.
The problem was they nominated a man without honor. Honor is important in America. At least it is if you're not decidedly left-of-center. The Swift Vets made America question, not only whether John Kerry was in fact a "war hero", but also cast serious doubts about his "honor" (note that people who followed John Kerry's entire life never had any doubts on this matter).
Neither John McCain's honor or his war hero status can be debated. Once again, the left doesn't get that. They think that if it was fair to criticize John Kerry's service, then it's fair to criticize John McCain's. Because there's no doubt that he was in a POW camp for 5 years, and little doubt that his behavior their was beyond reproach. And, while all service, no matter how long or where is something we should honor and respect, it seems that there's likely a big difference between 5 years in a POW camp and 3 months on a boat.
Once again, the Democrats have followed a winning formula. The "war hero" thing didn't work for them so they've gone back to the "anti-war" candidate. But they're sticking to their guns on the honor thing. He's making it almost a daily event to throw someone else under the bus, Rev. Wright, the Trinity Church, and Samantha Power, just to name a few. By November, there may be so many people under Obama's bus that they need a bigger bus.
The only "change" in Obama's politics are the faces of those around him, as more and more "turnover" occurs in the name of political expediency. Is it worse to have these associations? Or worse to dump them when the going gets rough? Neither are good, but, as I've said before, I'd have more respect for the man if he stuck by his longtime friends.
More and more, the Obama campaign is showing itself to be "politics as usual".