10 January 2012

Troop Lovers in Name Only

Katie Kieffer, who I’ve ragged on before, finally gets something right:
If we want to win the general presidential election, we need a strategy for attracting new voters to the GOP’s “Big Tent.” Preaching to the choir is not a strategy. Burning bridges is not a strategy. And insulting our active duty military men and women by smearing the lone GOP candidate (Ron Paul) that they overwhelmingly donate their money to as “crazy,” “nutty,” and “half-witted” is downright feckless. [Emphasis added.]
The whole article is worth a read, in my decidedly biased opinion, but I want to focus on the point of emphasis here.  It amazes me how conservatives describe themselves as “pro-military” and lambaste leftists for not supporting the troops, yet absolutely refuse to support the one candidate that our precious troops willingly (and overwhelmingly) DONATE THEIR OWN MONEY TO!

The truth about neo-conservatives is that they don’t love the military but rather that they love war.  They cloak their love for war in high-minded rhetoric, claiming to love and support the young men they send overseas to die.  Really, though, their love and support for the military is only seen during times of war, for neo-conservatives simply love war, and showing the world who is boss.  They love bullying foreign people, and they love displays of military might.  And when anyone suggests that maybe, just maybe, the united states might want to leave a foreign country, neo-conservatives become apoplectic with rage and marginalize anyone and everyone who suggests that war may not be the answer.

And really, there is no clearer evidence of this assertion than the very simple fact that neo-cons simply refuse to support the candidate most supported by the troops.  As such, it is simple to see that, all protestations to the contrary notwithstanding, neo-cons simply do not support the troops.

No comments:

Post a Comment