Talking Points Memo takes issue with the comments of House Republican Leader Boehner regarding the sacrifice of the United States and its men and women in uniform:
Boehner’s response was ‘inartful,’ as James Joyner points out. But Blitzer’s question clearly referred both to financial cost and lives lost. And either way, Boehner’s main point, that if the war is successful, al Qaeda in Iraq is defeated, and the Middle East is stabilized, then the sacrifice in blood and treasure will have been worthwhile–that seems entirely fair, especially given the fact that the Middle East was far from stable before this war started. Sargent implies that Boehner is unfit to comment on what military goals are worth the loss of life, because they are ‘the sacrifices of others.’ That’s not a serious argument. Our Constitution subordinates the military to a civilian leadership. And in the case of funding the military, Boehner has every right, and the responsibility, to judge what military goals are worthy of American taxpayer dollars. Senator John Kerry is already demanding an apology, but again, as Joyner points out, all Boehner did was comment without the now required “disclaimers about how, of course, even the loss of a single American life is a tragedy and how the nation owes an internal debt of gratitude to all the men and women of our armed services for their sacrifices.” That is a gaffe, but the left makes too much of it–do they really believe that Boehner doesn’t respect the sacrifices of the American soldier? I contacted Congressman Boehner for comment on this episode; he is in Iraq now, but his staff has provided the following statement:
Boehner is right about at least one thing: it’s jarring to see a ‘defense’ of our troops from those on the left who sit silently by when the attacks are coming from their own side. Where was TPM when Kerry accused U.S. troops of terrorizing Iraqi women and children? Or when MoveOn.org was sliming General Petraeus?
