“Is Sarah Palin Politicizing Son’s Military Service?”
That’s the question posed by ABC News.
But it is even a question? Of course she is.
Just as she seems to think that living near Russia gives her foreign policy expertise, so does she seem to think that having a son deployed to Iraq gives her military and national security expertise.
Which is why she keeps bringing up Private First Class Track Palin’s imminent deployment. She’s using it to try to score political points, to boost her credibility, of which she has none, and to try to reinforce her small-town family values myth, much of which is connected to military service.
Unfortunately, if predictably, the article doesn’t go there. It fails to consider Palin’s political motives, which are, as ever, completely transparent. It fails even to answer the question it asks in its headline. Instead, it contrasts Palin’s talking up of her son’s deployment to McCain’s barely even mentioning his son’s military service in Iraq. (Biden’s, as well, but only in passing. His son Beau is off to Iraq soon.) Even then, though, it does so only casually, without delving into, or anywhere near, the not-so-small matter of political opportunism.
Then again, this is the media outlet — ABC, that is — that is giving Palin a cozy, high-profile platform from which to continue to lie and misrepresent herself to the American people… and to spew with arrogant ignorance the usual Republican talking points on national security, about which she knows nothing (like Bush and McCain, she wants Georgia and the Ukraine in NATO, which is dangerously insensitive to Russia’s concerns and the source of much of the current tension)… and, most crazily of all, to commit to war with Russia.
So what do you expect?
(Although, to be fair, Charlie Gibson actually did a decent job at times, particularly in terms of asking the right follow-up questions — on the Bush Doctrine, for example, which Palin apparently had never heard of, proving, once more, how dangerously ignorant she is.)
17 Responses to ““Is Sarah Palin Politicizing Son’s Military Service?””
I agree with you Michael, of course she is. But by now the whole war has been politicized. I wonder why ABC would even bother asking this question. It makes me think that since the whole lipstick charade ran out of legs we need some other “issue” to talk about. Outrageous indeed, a politician using an event for political gain!!
So about those minor issues…Venezuela/Russia, the particle accelerator (read science education). I suppose we can deal with those issue later, after the outrage over this goes away.
so does she seem to think that having a son deployed to Iraq gives her military and national security expertise.
Wrong, again; it must become tiresome. She's demonstrating that she and her family walk the walk, not just talk the talk. She is politicising her character, not her son – he is just a prop for the politiciazaton of her character. I'm sure that you are angry that messers Obama and Biden have no character which to politicize, but you get what you get and you don't get upset.
I can't wait to read the postings on this Blog from Mullen and Stickings on November 5th. Perhaps you could help Shaun out on that day and the two of you could enter into a murder/suicide pact?
Mr Smith Goes to Washington.
That's what this kind of strikes me as. An outsider bringing a “common sense” variety of morals, but without worldliness (arguably wisom as well). I don;t necessarilly go for it, but I'm more cynical than I probably need to be.
Biden's son is going to Iraq…
PWT,
Beau Biden is going to Iraq this fall too. Why does Palin need to exploit Track's deployment so much and Biden hardly needs to mention his son's?
Because Palin has no qualifications for VP, that's why. She's a phony and she got outed on national TV but lightweight Charlie Gibson.
Biden's son is going to Iraq…
Was Biden politicizing his son's deployment to Iraq when he mentioned this back in August? More than likely, he was using his son's deployment as a prop to demonstrate his character and fitness for the office of VP. Although, since that kind of character, duty, service, love of country etc…., enrages most partisan democrats, he doesn't bring it up very much. If his sone was one of the pole sitting dirt-bags in Berkley, I'm sure we would hear about it every day.
Jim Webb made a huge deal of his son going to Iraq. I wonder if all of the progressive bloggers can provide links where they critcized him for doing it. I doubt it.
Of course, talking about Palin's family gives the Democrats a method of ignoring the differences between their promises and their policy proposals. juding by the repsonses on the education post, people actually want to talk about policy but both candidates staffers do not want to talk about policy.
On the subject of the military…one angle Obama should sieze on and sieze on very quickly is the allusions to instituting a mandatory military draft that McLame kept making in his latest interview with the press.
“Retention isn't enough” “we need to expand our service” and about a dozen other quotes indicating that as soon as that man's shoes cross the threshold of the Oval Office, our sons and daughters? will be marched off to die to make Texans and shieks even more wealthy.
This war abroad is due directly to the oil monopoly. Our next president must insure that we go to alternatives FAST and furious. Our country cannot afford the type of wars we will be facing in this day and age. China, Russia, Iran and their neighbors are formidable. If they decide to buddy up, we may be losing this beautiful land we love.
And to think…all for the sake of a small elite group of tycoons…
The GOP is ALL ABOUT removing choice from its citizens…all the while squeaking about keeping government “small” and “unobtrusive”.
Friggin' liars..
PWT,
Speak for yourself. You obviously don't know many Democrats. But I'm sure you've seen some hippies in the movies.
Two Points:
(1) In the spirit of this election, I have to call PWT on his OUTRAGEOUS smear of the “pole sitting dirt bags in Berkeley.”
They are, in fact, “tree sitting dirtbags” . . . from whence elevated site they fling feces and piss bottles down at the botanical workers trying to remove them.
(2) I think Elrod called this whole business correctly last night.
The politicization of service, like the “war with Russia,” are red herrings).
Elrod, in his post looked beyond ABC's obvious “war in Russia” teaser . . . to Palin's “deer in the headlights” expression when asked about the “Bush doctrine”.
This was not a “gotcha” question in the same way as Bush was asked in 2000 about the name of the president of Kazakstan etc. Or Clinton and Obama were asked a similar set of “gotcha” questions in a debate earlier this year.
The “Bush doctrine” — like it or not — is a core aspect of America's diplomatic and military doctrine today. It will likely influence the nature of US foreign affairs for years to come. Palin's lack of basic foreign policy knowledge is evident.
Democrats would do well to approach Palin as Elrod suggests. Focus on the concerns many have for the prospect of “Palin as President”.
She is clearly not a “lipstick Nazi” or an “Islamic fundamentalist in lipstick” as some critics on the Left have tried to smear her. These tactics have will backfire . . . as did the attacks on her family.
Instead, Democrats should hammer her lack of qualifications.
Read the subtext in a lot of conservative commentary on Palin. They concede this point. In fact, the GOP foreign policy establishment seems very concerned about it.
Note, for example, Sec. Rice's recent reluctance to talk about Palin's qualifications!
Palin is the least qualified VP pick since Quayle (though she is clearly smarter).
Fortunately for the GOP, the Democrats seem unlikely to abandon their scatter-shot approach to Palin.
Keep talking about Palin's family, and we will all be arguing about President Palin's invasion of Georgia in the not too distant future.
Uh- if we agree the families should be off limit for the campaign–shouldn't bragging rights be off limit too? Beau Biden is also going to Iraq (and probably sacrificing a run for the Senate in doing so), but its not in every one of Joe's speeches.
Sorry- Elrod- I didn't read all of the comments before I brought that up! But it remains a good point. Joe doesn't need to prop up his street cred with America.
So everyone is OK with McLame's allusions to a draft?
Forced service to keep us in the BigOil financial headlock? No problemo eh?
Like we could win against China, Russia, Iran and the gang….
Not…
Is discussion on whether a candidate's (or any politician's) child is going to Iraq necessarily politicization? And really, should that be the concern here? Isn't it important that such discussion may put that child (ok, they're adults if they are in the services…) at greater risk. Would it be reasonable to think that the focus on Palin's son could make him a target? Wasn't that the issue when Prince Harry was removed from his unit in Afghanistan?
“Is Sarah Palin politicizing son's military service?”
Um, of course she is. How else can you interpret it?
I wonder how warm and fuzzy she'll feel about the BigOil hostile takeover of sovereign Iraq if her son comes home in a box like thousands of other families' sons and daughters have?
Would she be 'proud” to learn her son died as a result of her party cohorts lying to Congress in order to invade that country on false pretenses?
I hope we'll never know.