John McCain would become the next president of the United States if, even now or in the next few months, he abruptly turned about and disavowed support of the war in Iraq. Instead, it is my opinion that he has lost whatever hopes he may have had for attaining this office by his Bushian-like myopic approach that has now become the showcase of his campaign. He supports the war wholeheartedly claiming that we need to keep on fighting until we win. Nowhere does he define win or give the public any insight as to what he means by winning. But even if his is a legitimate viewpoint, there are some secondary issues about the war which have emerged that shed some light as to the nature of the man. He opposed a bill that would have given military personnel longer periods of relief stateside between redeployments to Iraq. More significantly he voted against a bill that would have provided more generous benefits to veterans who have honorably served our country in time of war. The recent bill that has passed despite his opposition restores World War II-like benefits to our troops. McCain cherrypicks the reason for his opposition to this bill citing the estimate that 13% of troops will simply leave the service after three years of service and take advantage of the generous educational benefits the bill provides. Why this is cherrypicking is that the same study indicates that 13% more enlistees will result from having this benefit. In other words the basis that caused him to reject this wonderful idea will turn out to have no negative impact whatsoever.
From a more fundamental basis, it is puzzling why McCain would be on the wrong side of this issue. The benefits provided to our fighting forces is the correct and moral thing to do. I think the man is pouting because the bill he supported was rejected at the same time. Is his peculiar opposition to a bill that should have been a no-brainer for him a sign of what lurks behind the public mask?