Blogs › Take it like a Man

Obama: In over his paygrade, if not his head.

Posted August 19, 2008

Saddleback Church hosted a Presidential Debate on Television this past weekend. Rick Warren, Saddleback's Pastor, mediated the proceedings.

I could list at least 57 reasons why a Pastor probably shouldn't darken the doorway of the bordello that is post-modern American politics, much less bring the bordello to the sanctuary of his church, but, that's a hot-potato my oven-mittens can't handle.

I heard Barack Obama answer 2 questions before I decided to tune in to something a little more intriguing, like Olympic Ping-Pong.

The first question had to do with identifying when a war is worth fighting, and when one isn't.

His answer was, in a nutshell, that wars are worth fighting when having to do with "matters of National Security" and those having to do with "Human Rights". Things like Genocide. Fratricide. Terror, etc. He cited Bosnia as a good example of American intervention, in spite of NATO objections, in a situation that merited putting our troops in harm's way to correct.

Okay. Good answer.

The second question had to do with Abortion. The question was, in a nutshell, "When does a fetus become a human/have human rights?".

To which, in a moment of elusive pandering that would have made Bill Clinton proud, Obama remarked rather philosophically: "The answer to that particular question is well above my paygrade".

I held my breath, expecting to hear him follow that whopper up with "Which, in turn, depends upon what your definition of is is."

It was an odd sensation, being morally patronised by a presidential candidate from the bema of one of America's leading Evangelical churches.

So, to be sure we're on the same page:

Human Rights for people in Bosnia? Yes. Let's ask our soldiers to die for those.

Human Rights for people in the womb? Probably above my paygrade.

Are you kidding? "Above your paygrade"? Excuse me, Senator, but what else is going to be "above your paygrade"?

Obama amazes me. He champions ambiguities like "vision" and "change" all the way to the steps of the White House, and then backs down from the very ambiguities he must know that, as President, he will be called upon to face.

Ambiguities are as much a part of the American experience as "life, liberty, and the pursuit of property". And American Presidents have been dealing with them since Washington took the first Oath.

Things like "should we free all of the slaves, some of the slaves, or none of the slaves while we fight a costly, bloody, highly unpopular 3-front war with the Confederacy?"

Glad that little moral ambiguity wasn't above Lincoln's paygrade.

"Should we drop the atomic bomb and kill 300,000 Japanese, or invade mainland Japan and lose 1,000,000 Americans?"

Glad that little moral ambiguity wasn't above Truman's.

"Should we fight a costly, bloody, sure-to-be unpopular 2 front war on Terror which the Administration before us didn't have the courage to fight, or just cross our fingers and hope someone doesn't drive another couple of commercial airliners into the Sears Tower?"

Glad that one wasn't above our current CinC's paygrade.

Whether they admit it or not, the world looks to the United States to set the standard for what a Human Being is, what a Human Being has certain inalienable rights to, and what a Human Being should be protected from.

Unless, of course, one of our top two Presidential candidates goes on the record as saying such things are "above his paygrade".

In which case we just look foolish.

I won't discuss how quickly McCain answered the same question. I'll just say that at least he answered it.

If you don't have an Independent-Mail.com account, register here to comment on this and all Independent-Mail blogs