The anti-military right won’t let up

Fox News’ John Gibson may or may not have been kidding, but his comment while guest hosting Bill O’Reilly’s radio show the other day says a great deal about how the far right looks at dissent and the rights of those in uniform to share their concerns. Here’s what Gibson said:

“Anyway, ‘Get used to the protest, Gibson.’ This guy is in the U.S. Army. He writes to me from Tirrenia, Italy, on a U.S. army.mil [email account]. Can you imagine this? ‘Get used to the protest, Gibson. Americans are finally waking up and seeing the lies and the fallacies of the Bush administration. Fox News has done its best at bird-dogging the Iraq war.’ This guy is in the Army. Who knows? All right, find him and arrest him.”

Listening to the audio clip, Gibson didn’t laugh when he said it; he just moved on to the next caller. For Gibson, if a man in uniform, on active duty, criticizes the president in an email, there’s no hesitation — take him down. It doesn’t matter that the soldier is putting his life on the line; as far as Gibson is concerned, he should be locked up.

It reminds me again of something Digby recently wrote about the recent trend.

I’ve been thinking for a while that we might be seeing the beginning of a new trend in American politics — the anti-military right. Rush is calling marines “pukes,” veterans are being called cowards and fakers, disabled vets are mocked for not having the right wounds or getting them in the right way, GOP hags are wearing cute little “purple heart” bandaids on their cheeks. People are selling busts of the president using his lack of combat experience as a selling point saying outright that physical courage is no longer particularly worthy of conservative approbation. Being a veteran buys you no credibility and no respect in today’s Real Murika.

In this sense, Gibson’s comments were just par for the course for the party known for its “patriotism.”

Really disgusting what the GOP has done to everything, including military service. Ever since those purple heart bandaids at the RNC I find myself pausing whenever I hear of someone’s military valor. Did he really? and then I snap back to reality, or what used to pass for reality in this country: a modest recognition of the sacrifice of others.

I shouldn’t be surprised at anything anymore. The Reagans welcomed the Marcoses with open arms (she was just a shoe nut, but Ferdinand had begun his accumulation of wealth through teenage prostitution in SE Asia). The same Reagan bunch ridiculed Mother Teresa as some kind of nut case for living with the lepers in Calcutta.

The closest the GOP ever got to giving (or appreciating giving) was Libbie Dole’s Red Cross presidency (at a $250,000 salary). I should say “modern GOP” because the “old rich” truly did feel obligated to return some of their bounty to the nation which made it possible.

  • Every time the issue of GOP patriotism comes up, I’m reminded of a comment “Floyd Alvis Cooper” (almost certainly a troll) left at http://www.thepoorman.net

    In war, there are no excuses. You find a way to stay alive, whatever it takes — if you’re a good soldier. Sheehan’s son didn’t do that. He paid the price. but he als failed the mission and let down his buddies.

    As a soldier, he was a failure. He was brave (maybe), but he was also incompetent.

    So, really, how much exactly are we supposed to grieve over this guy? Isn’t a certain amount of disapproval in order for the guy — and by extension his mom, for making such a fuss over a person who was, in the last analysis, by definition a loser?

    He may be a troll, but I can see the GOP headed that way.

  • Last week, I listened to Mary Matalin tell Laura Ingram on the radio that military service confers no special right to formulate foreign policy.

  • This is a golden opportunity for Dems, especially veterans, in the heartland red states. The huge group of independents that are critical to winning elections still value service in the armed forces. The more the GOP disrespects the people in the military, the wider that window of opportunity opens. Liberals may wring their hands over the shift to a more muscular foreign policy advocated by Dems, but they need to remember JFK.

    We can make huge gains on the domestic policy front as soon as we assuage the fears of the independent voter. Honoring our veterans and active duty members of the armed forces and their associated National Guard organizations is the right thing to do (policy) and the smart thing to do (politics). Dems in congress should push hard on legislation for more support of veterans and returning soldiers. Tuition assistance, medical coverage, military-to-civilian transition assistance (occupational and psychological), and housing assistance are all excellent tangible legislative goals that Dems in the House should be pushing for on the floor and in front of the microphones.

  • Comments are closed.