ARCHIVE
CONTACT
PODCASTS
THE CHAMBER
LINKS
RSS

Politicizing the Troops: How Low Will the White House Go?

Thursday, December 17, 2009

By Jacob M. Jordan

If Michael Goldfarb’s story is true, Americans have a lot to worry about. In case you missed it (and if you’re a Keith Olbermann fan you most surely did), Michael Goldfarb of The Weekly Standard states a Senate aide revealed to him that the Obama White House threatened Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson—a Democrat—with a base closure in his home state if he fails to support the healthcare vote. Nelson is opposed to any bill that contains a provision for taxpayer-funded abortion. Specifically, the base (US Strategic Command or “USSTRATCOM”) is the one used by President Bush while the September 11th attacks were occurring. The base happens to employ about 10,000 military personnel whose lives would be upset, as they and their families would abruptly be relocated elsewhere.

The White House denies the allegation, as does Senator Nelson’s office. The White House’s denial is not surprising at all. If the accusation itself is true, however, it would be expected that Nelson himself was instructed not to alert the public of the ultimatum given to him by the White House, making his denial predictable, as well.

The confirmed fact that President Obama met with General McChrystal only once in over two months to discuss Afghanistan says mounds about Obama’s disregard for important military matters. One could chalk it up to incompetence. If Goldfarb’s story is true, however, the politicization of the military is brought to a level of downright malice. Congress has picked up on the “rumor,” and twenty senators signed a petition urging the Senate Armed Services Committee to investigate the allegation.

To think that the Democrats stressed over the possibility of seven US attorneys losing their jobs for politically-motivated reasons. Where is the liberal outrage over allegations that the new president is playing politics with 10,000 government jobs?