Profile in Courage? Not John Murtha

Earlier this month, the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation announced the 2006 winners of its Profiles in Courage Award. The Award, given to celebrate the ideals championed by President Kennedy in his Pulitzer-Prize-winning book Profiles in Courage, honors "public servants who have withstood strong opposition to follow what they believe is the right course of action." One of the 2006 winners is Congressman John Murtha, the Pennsylvania Democrat who argued for the immediate "redeployment" of American troops from Iraq. Honoring Murtha is a dubious choice and one that waters down the meaning of courage as defined by Kennedy.

To define courage, the Foundation points to the following excerpt from Kennedy's book: "In whatever arena of life one may meet the challenge of courage, whatever may be the sacrifices he faces if he follows his conscience - the loss of his friends, his fortune, his contentment, even the esteem of his fellow men - each man must decide for himself the course he will follow." On its website, the Foundation elaborates further on what Kennedy meant: "Political courage has many meanings. As used by President Kennedy, the words refer to elected officials who, acting in accord with their conscience, risk their careers by pursuing a larger vision of the national, state or local interest in opposition to popular opinion or powerful pressures from their constituents."

In its announcement of this year's winners, the Foundation described its reasons for honoring Murtha: "Congressman Murtha... was recognized for the difficult and courageous decision of conscience he made in November, 2005, when he reversed his support for the Iraq war and called for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from the conflict. His... dissent also made him the target of withering political attacks and resulted in efforts by political opponents to discredit his Vietnam War decorations."

What the Foundation did not describe is how these reasons were consistent with President Kennedy's definition of courage. How did Murtha's opposition to a U.S. presence in Iraq contravene popular opinion? If opinion polls and press reports are to be believed, most Americans oppose the Iraq War.

Furthermore, how did Murtha's Iraq announcement threaten him with "the loss of his friends, his fortune, his contentment, even the esteem of his fellow men"? If anything, Murtha arguably benefited from his reversal. For one, he now stood with the vast majority of his fellow Democrats. And rather than bring him ignominy, his switch made him a prominent voice in the debate over Iraq. He was either a guest or a topic of all the Sunday morning talk shows.

Murtha's announcement of course subjected him to criticism from Republicans, who largely support the war. But how is that so different from what other politicians face that it deserves a prestigious award? If political courage is defined as facing criticism from one's opponents, then the term has lost much of its meaning.

A significantly better example of political courage is that shown by Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut. In contrast to Murtha, Lieberman has been a consistent supporter of American efforts in Iraq. And in further contrast to Murtha, Lieberman has faced real consequences for this stand.

Lieberman supported the liberation of Iraq from Saddam Hussein even before George W. Bush was elected president. In 1998, he co-sponsored the Iraq Liberation Act. Passed unanimously by the Senate, this legislation made regime change in Iraq official U.S. policy. Unlike other members of his party, Lieberman's support of Iraqi liberation did not waver after a Republican became president. In November, he penned an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal entitled "Our Troops Must Stay" in which he wrote that "the outcome of this war is critically important to the security and freedom of America." Lieberman has supported American involvement in Iraq even though most of his supporters do not. According to USA Today, eighty percent of Connecticut Democrats believe invading Iraq was the wrong decision.

Because he believes that the United States must stay the course in Iraq, Lieberman has become the target of political attacks. Unlike Murtha, Lieberman is facing these attacks from his own party and his own constituents. The New York Times described him as "an increasingly unwelcome figure within his party." And at least two Democratic town committees in Connecticut have issued resolutions criticizing Lieberman's support of the war. Lieberman's adherence to his principles has not only subjected him to this intraparty criticism, but it has also threatened his political career. Once his party's nominee for Vice President, he is now facing a Democratic challenger as he seeks reelection in 2006. To make things worse, The Daily Kos, the most popular liberal website, is soliciting donations and volunteers to help Lieberman's challenger.

John Murtha, who volunteered for the Vietnam War and earned a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts for his service, has a life story filled with examples of personal courage. His about-face on the Iraq War is not one of them. The Foundation's decision to honor Murtha's return to the Democratic mainstream and ignore the political resolve demonstrated by Joe Lieberman make the Profiles in Courage Award seem more a celebration of orthodoxy than courage.