Uh, just a moment pls, we didn’t say that the politician himself should be above criticism for not serving, we only said the kids choice of career is their business only! Pls don’t misstate what has been said here.

“your post seems to focus more on Romney and his family “not serving their country.””
Well, dunno for the others, but I didn’t read it this way. the story simply lays the foundation for the question:
“Should any of this be a campaign issue?”

Well, and personally, I like this way of involving the readers into this. It’s nice to see a blogger actually asking for opinions instead of serving a ready-for-takeaway meal.

However, I am quite sure that neither of these two have any children serving in the militray so by Shawn’s thinking we can now ignore the foreign policy positions of these hypocrites as well.

Well given the fact that Obama’s children are 6 and 8 I’m not sure we really want them scouring for terrorists.

You have a knack for coming up with controversial titles that inevitably cause more people to read your post. It’s a clever tactic for drawing more readers, but I think it also predisposes more people to react negatively to your post before they even read the post.

In this case, I agree with some of the above commenters that criticizing a politician and his/her family members for not “serving their country” is not particularly enlightened debate. The majority of Americans both on the pro-war and anti-war side) have not served in the military. Are we to believe that they are inelligble to run for president?

I realize that your post was in response to Romney’s somewhat self-centered claim that his sons are serving America by working in his claim, but rather than focusing on Romney’s comments, your post seems to focus more on Romney and his family “not serving their country.” This soundly strangely similar to war proponents who have questioned the patriotism of war opponents.

I think it’s best that we stop focusing on who’s less patriotic, or less supportive of America, or less supportive of the troops, and focus on what policies are best for this country. When a pro-war candidate who hasn’t served in the military criticizes the patriotism or courage of an anti-war candidate who has served in the military, then it is perfectly acceptable to call out the pro-war candidate for the chickenhawk he/she is. But to go on the offense and attack a candidate (not to mention his/her family) for not having served in the military does seem like fair play to me.

I guess that leaves us with John Mcain as the only possible presidential canidate.

Paul, Kucinich, and Gravel.

Indeed not: “So, it is no longer enough to question a candidate’s military service when smearing them, now if they don’t force their adult children to serve, that is also fair game.”
Imho Shaun did interprete something in the accusational tone of your comment that wasn’t really there – only way his outburst makes sense to me. And then you kind of counterattacked, and that’s what I was referring to. So, ’twas all a big misunderstanding. I should have scrolled up in order to get the whole picture before posting, sry!

As for your point on those Country Club Republicans: The more the world changes, the more it stays the same, right?

The fact that Shaun and you took it as directed at him says more about your and his biases than mine, IMHO. Go read my first post again, and tell me what exactly is the criticism against Shaun I committed?

FYI – I also agree that Romney’s statement about ‘serving via his campaign’ was beyond stupid, and jumped right to offensive. I just thought that so obvious as not even needing comment.

Yup, Wow! That gotta hurt!

Great shot, straight in the bull’s eye, Comrade Rudi!

It’s ironic that those who are ambivalent or against the war send or sacrifice their children, while the strong supporters only sacrifice their rhetoric.

Ouch! That’s a good one!

Doris Kerns-Goodwin, Bacevich and Webb sons/children are/have served. It’s ironic that those who are ambivalent or against the war send or sacrifice their children, while the strong supporters only sacrifice their rhetoric.

Let’s focus on the war hawks themselves, who got notes from their doctors, or “sort of” served in the NG ( who today are putting in more time over there when they could have been helping out over here) or got deferrment after defferment because they had “better things to do”.

Personally, I know one of the sons, and frankly he’d make a lousy soldier.

Romney, McCain, Bush, Kristol, etc, keep telling us that the fight in Iraq is essential to the survival of western civilization. Is it really too much to ask your sons to go fight in a war that will stave off our impending doom?

Of course Romney won’t ask them, because he doesn’t really believe that we’re facing an existential threat.

Hmm, maybe I misunderstood you, AR. To make my position clear:
- I also hold the opinion that it shouldn’t be a camapaign issue whether the kids are in the military or not.
- I further think that Romney deserves criticism of his cavalier remark.
- I don’t think Shaun is to blame for raising this valid question (that is also discussed at other sites). Your comment appears as if you criticise him for even asking, and I don’t support this.

You said: I’m always a bit uncomfortable when I see politicians being criticised for not having a soldier in their family. After all, what should the kids do, disregard their own life plans, even possible objections against the war in Iraw and join the army just to better their father’s (or mother’s!) chances to become elected? This doesn’t seem fair to me. Let the candidates stand on their own, their kids won’t be on the ballot!

I said: What happened to the concept that they are their own individuals, and make their own choices? I for one would find it beyond crass to have a parent force their children, adult or otherwise, into any major life choice for simple political expediency for themselves.

Seemed like similar positions to me, but if I misread your position, I apologize.

Wealthy kids are far less likely to join the military than middle class and lower class kids. Simple fact of life.

But his response is just stupid. I don’t know if he thought he was being witty but to compare working on his campaign to being the military is insulting.

Now truth be told if Romney was a Democrat I am CERTAIN that the Right would be crucifying him for comparing being in the military with working on a campaign. They would say that this proves how out of touch he is with the military.

But neither side is very consistent when it comes to their stalking horses.