In combat, few things are more disturbing and unsettling than friendly fire – the accidental attacking of one’s own forces during war. Often, it’s attributed to the fog of war. Now, in this political conflict among the Republican candidates, we are witnessing friendly fire at its worst. The problem is there’s no fog and there’s nothing accidental about it.
In my Vietnam combat experience, I was involved three times in friendly fire. Once was while fighting along the Demilitarized Zone as my battalion fought a numerically superior North Vietnamese force. The other two times were further south, working with small Vietnamese units in thick underbrush. Each incident was an accident on the part of the other friendly, and although there were casualties I was fortunate that no one was killed. But in once case, the resulting animosity was overwhelming and lasting.
Now, in the middle of this political campaign, we see friendly fire at its worst. Trump’s attacks on the opposition, most notably Ted Cruz and just as often the media writ whole, are relentless. “Liar” is his catchphrase. And now Rubio is picking up the ‘liar’ label and throwing it with the same abandon as Trump.
Irrespective of who is using it and whatever the target, the namecalling plays totally into the Democratic agenda.
How can our side reasonably expect to woo independents or even Blue Dog Democrats by calling out Hillary for the liar she is when our side is busy calling each other liars? Where is the distinction for the average voter who knows little about the candidates except what he or she sees during the debates or via political ads strategically placed in the middle of some sit-com?
The term ‘liar’ is particularly shocking and has a way of sticking. I’m not a liar, but if someone keeps calling me one long enough at some point it’s going to take hold.
Ironically, trying to label Hillary a liar simply doesn’t stick. Her supporters could care less. In fact, they’ll have nothing to do with it. But we’d best believe they listen and believe to the core when one of our side calls another of our side a liar.
Let’s get reasonable here. There are plenty of ways to disagree and plenty of ways to challenge each other on matters of substance. The electorate deserves nothing less.
Ronald Reagan was right about speaking ill of a fellow Republican. If our candidates can’t get that right, how can we believe them when they want to say they will be ‘Reagan-esqe’?
When asked about the lying label being thrown about, William Mayer, a professor of political science at Northeastern University, is quoted as saying, “It’s clearly a blow to the civility of the election discourse.”
Like all Republicans, I hope our side wins. I have my own favorite candidate right now and I’m supporting him whole-heartedly. But if he doesn’t prevail, I will fall in lock-step with the candidate who does and support him with the same passion I’m exhibiting now. We do need a winner. But let’s not force the electorate to base it on who is the least of liars – our side or theirs.