If you polled the military, the active duty and veterans, and said ‘would you rather have a president of the United States that never served a day in the military or someone who is a veteran?’ They’ve going to say, I would venture, that they would like to have a veteran.His assertion is that troops would rather take orders from someone who knows what it's like to serve in the military. While I don't think it's necessarily true, I don't have any qualms with Governor Perry's thoughts on the matter. He served as a C-130 pilot for the air force and left having achieved the rank of captain. Honestly, a distinguished career serving our armed forces.
But maybe he should ask the follow-up question... would the military want to follow a male cheerleader? Would they want to follow a male cheerleader for the second time in the last three presidencies? Why does the GOP keep insisting on pushing former male cheerleaders to the front of their party? Why does Texas now seem to require their GOP governors to be former male cheerleaders that graduated with GPA's less than 2.4?
We gave the male cheerleader commander-in-chief thing a shot with George W. Bush and from my perspective, it went horribly. Faced with the most tragic terrorist attack, Bush et al. macho'ed logic aside like a rival school's football mascot during sideline time-out antics and invaded the wrong country. How do we protect ourselves from future train-wreck male cheerleader rule? Does the answer lie in changing the constitution?
I honestly don't know.
No comments:
Post a Comment