Public service and principles | Inquirer Opinion
Reveille

Public service and principles

/ 01:02 AM January 23, 2012

Many congressional trips are simply junkets paid for by the taxpayers. In some instances, however, a few distinguished political figures move around seriously looking into specific concerns that affect the national interests of their country as well as that of their allies.

Earlier, a delegation of US congressmen led by Rep. Harold Rogers was in town to conduct discussions with their counterparts over national security issues. Last week, four US senators arrived for talks on expanding American presence and strengthening security arrangements in the Asia Pacific region. They were Republican John McCain and Kelly Ayotte, Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse and Independent Democrat Joseph Lieberman. Two of them, McCain and Lieberman, are probably among the most distinguished members of the US Senate to visit our country.

* * *

Article continues after this advertisement

In one of my trips to the United States a few years ago, I was browsing a bookstore in a small, suburban village near Chicago. On a bargain table outside the shop, I came across a book by Sen. Joseph Lieberman, “In Praise of Public Life.” A passage from the book dwelt on his role during the impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton. While he voted for acquittal of his party-mate Democrat Clinton, Lieberman remained disturbed by the actions of his president. A few days later, he delivered what he described as the most difficult statement he had ever made in his 10 years in the Senate. In defending his vote to acquit, he said: “I called the President’s behavior ‘immoral,’ ‘disgraceful,’ ’harmful,’ and ‘too consequential for us to walk away from.’ I took strong issue with the President’s argument that his relationship with Miss Lewinsky was nobody’s business but his family’s and that even presidents have private lives…

FEATURED STORIES
OPINION

“Although the American people struggled with what the President had done and how to react to it, they ultimately reached a clear judgment that his behavior was immoral and had hurt our country. But they distinguished that moral judgment from [the political judgment of the impeachment court] and concluded that under the Constitution, the behavior the President had admitted to, did not make him a danger to America or unable to continue to perform his duties and therefore could not justify his removal from office.”

Lieberman goes on to say, “The public wants a quick and honest admission of error, an apology, and perhaps a plea for forgiveness. If they are given that, they will usually respond with remarkable fairness and tolerance.”

Article continues after this advertisement

Perhaps there is no similarity between the Clinton impeachment and the current trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona, but it provides us with some insights into the distinctions that have to be drawn between political and moral judgments.

Article continues after this advertisement

Despite increasingly blurred lines between legal and moral issues, Senator Lieberman continues to encourage young people to pursue careers in public service. Using a Hebrew phrase tikkun olam, which is translated as “to improve the world,” or “to repair the world,” he explains that people, although imperfect, are intrinsically good and act to benefit the community in which they live. “We are constantly improving and becoming complete.” But he also warns that as the political and cultural values of America have eroded, the onus is on the people who must make their voices heard in support of moral standards, distinguishing between right and wrong, acceptable and unacceptable behavior in public life. “Our country’s future requires that they reengage—at least to vote, at best to serve.”

Article continues after this advertisement

In the 2000 US presidential elections, Democrat Al Gore chose Joe Lieberman to be his running mate because of his strong position on values and moral standards. Although Gore and Lieberman would win the popular vote by a slim majority in the race against Republicans George W. Bush and Richard Cheney, they would lose in the all-important electoral vote count.

* * *

Article continues after this advertisement

John Sidney McCain III is the scion of one of the most illustrious families in the history of the US Navy. His grandfather and his father, both graduates of the US Naval Academy, ended their careers as four-star admirals. His father, Adm. John McCain Jr., was the commander of US Forces in the Pacific during the Vietnam War. McCain himself is a 1958 graduate of Annapolis. Although he did not reach star rank, he was the Republican candidate for the presidency in 2008 against Barack Obama.

There are two stories about McCain that illustrate the character of the man. Early in his sophomore year at the academy, McCain was dining at the mess hall with plebes and upperclassmen. The table was presided over by a first classman who kept berating the Filipino steward attending to their table. Suddenly McCain, an underclassman, called him down and said: “I don’t think it’s fair for you to pick on the steward. He’s doing the best he can.” The firstie (cadet parlance for first classman) snarled, “What’s your name, mister?” McCain, his eyes blazing, shot back “Midshipman McCain, third class. What’s yours?” (Robert Timberg, “The Nightingale’s Song.”)

The incident showed McCain’s contempt for anyone using rank or position over others; unusual for someone aspiring to join the military organization. Reflecting this maverick attitude, he would graduate No. 891 in his class, fifth from the bottom. Thirty-five years later, he would return to Annapolis to deliver the commencement address before the graduating class of 1993.

In October of 1967, while on a bombing run over Hanoi, his A-4 Skyhawk was hit by surface-to-air missiles. For five-and-a-half years, he would be a prisoner of war. When his captors realized that he was the son of the commander in chief Pacific (CINCPAC), they offered to release him ahead of other POWs as a gesture of goodwill. The order of release of POWs was usually first in, first out. He refused the offer of early release, resulting in even harsher treatment by his guards.

* * *

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

These two senators—men of courage, character and principles—are worthy of emulation by people all over the world. They faced difficult choices in their lives, but both had the strong moral fiber required to carry out those choices.

TAGS: Government, public service

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our newsletter!

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

This is an information message

We use cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more here.