As is well known, many of those in the current Presidential campaign have kids in the military–kids who are or have or will serve in Iraq.

Although the details are slightly different, this is precisely the same situation as Britain had earlier, when Prince Harry was kept from serving with his unit in Iraq, and then was pulled out of Afghanistan after his presence there was leaked.

First and foremost, I respect everyone involved for their service, and for not attempting to use political influence to change where their soldiers are/were/will be stationed. I believe that a lack of military service is one thing that lead the current administration to make so many bad mistakes in Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s one thing to make hard decisions that will cost the lives of Americans.But I believe those hard decisions are even more complex when you know the individuals who will doing the bleeding and dying.

However, being the son or daughter of someone who holds power–or represents power in the case of Prince Harry–makes the situation different.

There are, I believe, two important things to consider. First, knowing a child is in danger is a distraction to any parent. I may not have kids of my own, but I’ve felt a sense of dread and worry knowing that someone I loved could be in danger. This level of distraction cannot be a good thing for someone in power.

But this is actually the lesser concern I think. The greater concern is the one addressed with Prince Harry: simply by being who they are, these soldiers place themselves and their units at greater risk. The wars were are fighting now are against individuals who don’t follow the rules of war, and for whom taking a high value prisoner would be an incredible coup. I believe they would pay any cost to capture such a politically valuable prisoner.

Never mind the emotional toll the president and vice president would pay in such a situation. Do we want those in power to have to choose life or death for their loved ones–which is precisely how the terrorists would present the situation.

Yes, former presidents have had children who have served in wars. However, I believe the instantaneous transmission of information around the world changes the situation, never mind the very nature of the enemy we are fighting.

So as important as the military service of these individuals is, I don’t think it is a good idea for their presence to place both the lives of their comrades and the ability of their parents to govern at risk.

As is relatively well known, I’m not a fan of the Republican party.

I agree with little they stand for, and on a state and local level the party is just horrible, with many members taking money from Don Blankenship.

So I find myself shocked to say that I strongly agree with McCain’s decision to scale back the Republican convention until the affects of Hurricane Gustav are known. I am impressed by this, especially in comparison with Bush’s fiddling while Rome burned mentality towards Katrina.

Even if there is nothing a politician can do, they should still be cognizant of the fact that their actions are going to be criticized or praised by the populace. Better to go for praise than criticism. (I may not like Manchin, but his actions upon learning of th Sago Mine disaster were 100% correct.)

And the recommendations that money go towards disaster relief? Kudos again. I’ve been saying for years that if politicians want to impress me, they’ll put their fund-raising money to a use other than stupid ads.

Of course this doesn’t mean I’ll vote for McCain. I disagree with his past decisions too strongly for that. But I am pleased to see he has made a decision that not only reflects well upon him, but serves to ask the American people to consider the plight of others and do what they can to help.

So Kudos, Senator McCain,