Hey, I'm just sayin'...

The other day General Wesley Clark made a remark. He said that he didn't think being a fighter pilot and getting shot down qualified someone to be President. The hue and cry went up that he was besmirching the heroic service of candidate McCain (you see, he was a fighter pilot who not only got shot down, but spent six years in a North Vietnamese prison.) McCain's been proclaimed by folks all over the tube as an "American Hero."

It's true that McCain was a pilot; that he was shot down. Question is: does that make him a hero? He was doing his job, it went wrong, he went through hell before it was all over, but does that make him a hero?

Likewise, are the people who died (God rest their souls) in the 9-11 attack heroes? They were in a building that got attacked and they were killed. That sounds more like they were victims to me.

I think the word "hero" gets tossed around quite a bit these days because it evokes sentiments that politicians or pundits believe will motivate the masses. They can evoke sympathy (9-11 victims) or they can invoke patriotism (war prisoners). And it works, but why?

It works because we have so few real heroes in our midst these days, at least at the highly publi level. The paucity of something like heroism tends to make it more valuable. So, at a time when there are few real big-time heroes, labeling someone or some ones as heroic makes it especially poignant.

With this in mind, I think we need a few rules around who can be a hero.

In order to be a hero you must:

1. Selflessly save someone else's life. It would be a bonus if you lost yours while doing it. Not a requirement, but as I say, a bonus.
2. Selflessly help someone who really needs it. Pretty broad, I know, but if you find someone that really needs some help--no matter what it is--and you step up, you're a good candidate.
3. Selflessly keep your mouth shut about saving someone's life or helping someone out.

You are probably specifically not a hero if:

A. You join any uniformed service. There are great career opportunities in the uniformed services. Pays pretty low, but the health benefits are good and the retirement benefits are excellent, I'm told. And, you might get an opportunity to be a hero (see #1 and #2 above). But just joining up doesn't make you a hero. Some of the most unheroic SOB's I've known wore the uniform.
B. You take up a vocation that helps people. More good careers. Again, pays low, benefits are generally bad; retirement bennies are almost non-existent. But you might get to be a hero. The vocation doesn't automatically make you one, though. There are plenty of molesting priests and thieving non-profit executives.
C. You are injured in some way while doing whatever it is you do in A and/or B above. Unless, of course, you're injured while doing #1 or #2 above.

Keeping these simple rules in mind we can all probably think of someone who's a real, bona fide hero. But it's not who you'd think.

Is it just me or...never mind. It's just me.

Watching MSNBC today and heard that "they" are dismayed with candidate Obama because he's slewing hard toward the middle. Bob Herbert, in the NY Times, made some thinly veiled snide comment about Obama lurching toward the middle and enraging his constituency.

Is it just me or is the middle where most Americans are; where most voters are? And if we're all pretty much in the middle and Obama's "lurching" toward us, isn't that a good thing?

I've never been partisan. I'm a pretty practical, non-ideological guy. I like things that work the way they're supposed to and I like to get things done. These two notions would put me seemingly on the outside of the mainstream of American politics. That's too bad because I'm also a pretty political guy. And I believe that there are more of me than there of them. And I don't have a problem with anyone who wants go make things better generally and wants to get things done, and wants to give people hope (in lieu of scaring them to death) lurches generally in my direction.

On the other hand, if there are so many of us in the middle why does the mainstream media feel the need to skew one direction or the other?

It's entirely possible that I'm really full of crap.