The Right Silent On Politicizing Soldier Casualties: Fallen Heroes Belong to Families not a President

The Send Off

Pamella Geller’s “Today’s War Dead” & dishonoring soldier deaths

Most issues can easily be politicized without much of a writer’s reputation being put in jeopardy. After all, if they are a political pundit of sorts most of their audience expects them to bend at just the right time to defend their ideals. These flexible boundaries for characters who operate in the spirit of expediency are rarely criticized; mostly because it serves their means and hopefully properly aligns them towards their ends. Unfortunately the hazy and undefined standards of expediency sometimes leave enough room to violate issues which should remain sacrosanct.

The politicization of fallen heroes is an area in which both political parties have been allowed to exploit. Criticism comes only from opponents while people who share the ideology of those politicizing the situation always remain silent. When power changes hand, the cause of soldier casualties are firmly affixed to either the new and/or current Commander in Chief, the majority party in Congress, or both. When this happens the honor and memory of these Heroes is cheapened; their sacrifice is desecrated all in the interest of placing blame on political opponents. They become nothing more than statistics or political props and names on a list; when in fact they were real human beings who were loved. Such is the case with the crass and extraordinarily inarticulate updates from Pamella Geller’s “Today’s War Dead” where she prefaces the list with “Obama’s disaster…the daily toll is devastating.”

While there has been considerable criticism of the changes in the rules of engagement adopted by the Obama administration, that is not addressed in Geller’s tally. But maybe I am asking for too much here, or maybe I am spot on. Thomas Hobbes wrote in Leviathan that “The source of every crime, is some defect of the understanding; or some error in reasoning; or some sudden force of the passions.” That was in 1651 and we can see clearly that it rings true even to this day. Geller’s force of her passions to prove her point, and strengthen her stance against the current commander in chief, are done at the expense of the honor of the fallen heroes. Their memory, their honor, and their sacrifice belong not to a President; their glory belongs only to their own legacy extending to family, friends, and the grateful nation.

After all, the returning soldiers whom have not given their lives are not greeted and told “Thank you for being one of [insert President’s name here] great victory.” They are simply thanked for their service. So why is it when their service leads to the ultimate sacrifice do the rules change? As if losing their life isnt enough of a toll on families, those operating from the sidelines as pundits now feel emboldened to reset the discussion’s parameters in order to tailor it to shift public opinion. Sure the family can still be proud of their child’s service and sacrifice; but this rather shallow caveat must be added for a political edge. A technique which I can guarantee was not run by, nor approved, by the families of any of the servicemen listed.

It is always easy to hold your ideological opponents accountable. They tend to pop up on your radar frequently and you are already well aware of everything you disagree with them on. What is much harder is holding those accountable that you agree with and tend to look up to. Pamela Geller is someone that shares my political philosophy and is someone that I look up to. However, the cheap attempt to use casualties to foment dissent harms all parties involved. First the families of fallen soldiers have to be submitted to the political tug of war, by using them (soldiers) as post-mortem pawns. Secondly the reputation of the opinion writer is put into question. Albeit the least important aspect of this issue; I would think it should trigger pause on the writer’s end. After all, announcing the dead, and fixing blame to a President is sophomoric at best. A reader of Geller’s post should be asking why this is necessary especially since their is no further commentary supporting her claim of these soldiers deaths being solely President Obama’s fault. The entire country knows we are fighting a radical theology that seeks to gain strength through terrorist acts. They also know that Obama’s Afghan surge, while using far below the requested number of troops, is in full affect. So what is Geller’s opinion of this? Are troop levels too low? Are the rules of engagement responsible? Is it both and more? The reader isn’t told.

Her quick post does the exact same thing that Liberals did during the Bush administration. It screams foul, offers no explanation to how or what could be causing such a tragedy, and then continues a politically advantageous hit by listing the names of these heroes in blood. A hit and run in the same fashion that we on the right have spent the past 8 years fighting back against. Since the strategy has now been adopted by Geller, and others, I will expect them to be silent when power shifts to a Republican administration. After all, the tactic of smearing the honor of our soldiers has now been justified and embraced by both sides. We are even now. Except for the families; they have to bear the brunt of their loss and the continued politicization of the ultimate sacrifice. In effect, Ms. Geller and those who use these tactics which they once denounced, have become what they once despised. And it is this double-standard, we on the right have been standing against.  To retreat from that victory now for the cheap satisfaction of lambasting a president seems hardly worth it. I hope Geller and others, will retreat from their immoral stance before it is carried out to its logical extreme. Soldiers in full dress returning home have been spat upon in airports in the name of a president’s strategy. We worked so hard to prevent that. Yet some are now using the same strategies that produced that very same result in the past.

By the way, below is a picture of Joshua Sparling. He is a military vet and amputee spat on by leftists at an Anti-War Rally. I am not fit to lick the wheels on that chair even after he pushed it through a cow pasture. Back story here and transcript from Fox News Hannity & Colmes HERE

Joshua Sparling-spat upon by leftists at an Anti-War Rally