In the 12 painful minutes he was speaking, Clint Eastwood actually mentioned very, very few specific things. These included job creation and the war in Afghanistan (which he appeared to suggest we should pull out of, eliciting a cheer from a crowd that would be more typically expected to endorse a “these colors don’t run” sort of position).
This was noteworthy because in Mitt Romney’s 4,000 word speech, not only did he not mention Afghanistan, he didn’t mention Iraq, and he didn’t even have a passing reference to active duty military or veterans.
While Bill Kristol is troubled by this (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/what-war_651279.html), I haven’t seen a whole lot of mention of this anywhere. The pointed omission of respect or even acknowledgement of the military is something you would expect from a strawman fictional liberal, not from the Republican candidate for President during his nomination acceptance speech.
Not sure why there was no mention at all. I would have expected him to downplay it since his policy isn’t terribly different from Obamas and he should be focusing more on the economy. But it still should have been included.
Maybe he intends to delegate the “Commander In Chief” thing, so didn’t think it was important to bring up. My guess is that he’ll outsource it to Xe.
IMHO, it was a serious oversight. CIC is a pretty big deal with Iran and all that stuff going on over there… but, meh… better to spend more time talking about how poor they used to be.
I could see omitting a reference to Afghanistan specifically, since the voters don’t seem, by and large, to be pressing the issue.
I would have thought, however, that even a platitude about how much we value and honor the men and women serving in our armed forces would be a fixed part of the template. It seems to me like wearing a flag pin, especially if you are a Republican.
Honestly, it is like the entire Republican party is imploding. I think they thought it would be a cake walk between the amount of money they have and the economy. It should have been the perfect setup so Mittens could finally get to put POTUS on his resume. But he’s barely even with Obama and none of the polls account for Gary Johnson who will also be on the ballot in all 50 states. They tweeked off the Ron Paul crowd and Johnson was down there to scoop them up. They’re pretty tone deaf on women’s issues and oblivious to minorities. Their own kind seem more and more at ease with admitting campaign gaffs (after all, I guess they want to continue to have a career after Nov) even while they continue to give flat, lifeless delivery of the official talking points.
It almost feels like at some point, someone is going to finally call a national press conference, walk to the podium and say “PUNKED! We got you!”
More than willing to rally for them though, as long as doing so wouldn’t interrupt his mission to France (Godless heathens that they are - don’t know how he survived in a country with Socialist medicine).
Y’know, after all the recent troopolatry, it was almost refreshing that he did not feel the need to keep hammering on that part.
Besides, when you (and your surrogates like Dr. Rice) are saying you’re going to take an unapologetic hard line on the likes of Iran and that you’re gonna take the lead where our [del]interests[/del] values may be at stake (what’s wrong with saying we’ll pursue our interests, anyway?), that kind of takes the wind out of any shot against interventions already under way and telegraphs to The Troops that they should keep their bags packed.
I was just discussing this very thing. My admittedly paranoid reaction to the incredible suckiness of the past 2 GOP tickets makes me wonder if the election is staged and the outcome pre-determined. But then again the GOP ticket before that was rather bad as well, and they won two terms with it…
Did you ever see the Southpark Episode where the boys are forced to play Little League Baseball and they try to throw every game but the other team is also trying to lose?
Believe me, I’d be thrilled if we didn’t show our patriotism by wearing flag pins and didn’t show our support for men and women in the armed forces by putting magnets on our cars. Platitudes in speeches are only a little better. If I thought this was a move away from letting bullshit support suffice for the real thing I would he thrilled.
I just don’t think that’s the case. I hate to say this because it’s easy to do, but I have a hard time believing that Obama would be let off easy if he did the same, even though his policies provide more actual support.
Yeah, what happened to the politicians willing to say America will unilaterally employ military force to enjoy “uninhibited access to key markets, energy supplies and strategic resources”?
I agree. Remember the crap a while back when Obama didn’t have a lapel flag in some damned picture or another?
[and I indicate my support with a wedding license of 20 years in duration to a now retired service member. There is a reason that military have a high divorce rate, it takes work to stay married.]
