Don’t peace activists have a say in who will be our next commander-in-chief?

commander-in-chief-forumA lot of Democrats also thought that it was just fine when Matt Lauer and NBC hosted their September 7 Commander-in-Chief Forum and decided to have an audience exclusively of men and women currently or previously in the military. It is true that these individuals have a unique view of the role of the commander-in-chief and they are the first at risk if the commander-in-chief falters in his or her job. However, decisions made by the commander-in-chief affect all Americans, in fact all peoples of the world. Why were there not peace activists and other who have opposed recent wars in the audience? Why weren’t there teenagers who might be asked to fight in future wars? Is it because we as a nation, and the media in particular, feel an element of guilt for sending the military in recent years on fool’s errands, and we want to pay them back? I don’t know, but I am certain that more people than just those with military connections are deeply interested in decisions to be made by our next commander-in-chief.

  • Stacy Mergenthal

    I think nationalism might be the answer to your question, “Why were there not peace activists and other who have opposed recent wars in the audience?” To question why our country is at war on a regular basis is to put your own patriotism in doubt. Peace activists ask uncomfortable questions and make people think about pesky things like motives, “collateral damage”, and debt.