The President today went to Ft. Carson, a base that has sadly lost all too many troops in recent weeks. As is his habit he met privately with the families of the fallen. Are the troops themselves offended by his decision to do this, rather than attend individual funeral services? It will be interesting to see how the networks edit their soundbites, but Fox was careful to leave in a split second or two of tape after his sentences had ended, and let background noise play -- by which I mean, the thunderous roar of approving, cheering troops. If the troops were offended by the way their Commander in Chief was handling this, doesn't it make sense, after all, that the White House would stop scheduling events in front of military audiences?
Second, what does a Commander in Chief need to do rhetorically after casualties are taken in war? He needs to tell the nation -- and the military, and especially the families -- that those who have fallen were lost in a noble, just cause. That their lose will not be in vain. That a grateful nation appreciates their sacrifice. When did President Clinton lose the families of the Mogadishu casualties? When he referred to them in the most neutral, neutered language possible.
It has always been a canard, a myth, and a lie that this president has refused to speak of the war dead. But if you didn't believe it before, believe it now.
