Time magazine has a profile this week of Senate Republican buddies John McCain and Lindsey Graham, and one passage really stands out–not for what it reveals about them, really, but about the media.
Michael Crowley writes:
Graham and McCain have been friends for more than a decade, a partnership born of their shared passion for national security (McCain was a Navy pilot, Graham is still an Air Force Reserve lawyer), a willingness to poke their party’s base in the eye and an uncanny knack for attracting the media’s attention. More surprising and quotable than bland party leaders like Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, they are virtual fixtures on the influential Sunday talk shows, a platform they use to drive the Washington agenda. Last March, McCain’s 64th appearance on NBC‘s Meet the Press set the show’s all-time record. Graham may break it someday, having appeared on at least one Sunday show five of the past 10 weeks.
What exactly is a “shared passion for national security” supposed to mean? In the real world, McCain and Graham are super-hawks, supporting most any effort to use military force, almost anywhere in the world. In the corporate media, this is transformed into a concern for “national security.” But a rational observer might argue that supporting the Iraq War did not serve this country’s security, but undermined it.
Or one could note that both men supported military action in Libya–despite the fact that, a few years prior, they were in Libya meeting with Moammar Gadhafi and were pushing to provide him with military equipment. Were they not concerned with national security then? Or does the term just get affixed to war promoting Republicans?
The only other insight gleaned from this excerpt is that both men are obviously beloved by the Sunday television talk shows–apparently because they’re more “surprising” and “quotable” than some other Republicans.
There’s always a place for a “national security” Republican–no matter how wrong they’ve been.
A “rational observer” might also make the argument that the war on Afghanistan, in addition to being a horror show for its people, also undermines national security, if that’s defined as abrogating the principles that are claimed to be the bedrock of its founding, and wasting its treasure for the securing of profit for its plutocracy.
As all imperial adventures and misadventures do.
So why is it that rationale only extends to the war on Iraq here
And in so many other instances?
I could not agree more with you, Doug. I believe that this constant warmongering has weakened our nation, and may, if it keeps up this nonsense, will ruin the country altogether, if there is any justice in this world.
These two guys are idiots, and really are not good Americans in my eyes.
I believe the common term for “national security passion” is “warmongering.”
“pushing to provide him with military equipment”
There’s the operative phrase in this story.
I caught that, too, Andy. McCain and Graham are nothing more than lobbyists for the MIC.
McCain has been wrong on so many things it is scary.During his run I rightly said that between him and Obama( who had not a clue) ,it was the worst ever put up for the presidency.Then you had Sarah Palin a novice,who i must admit has been right on most of her calls(drill bay drill being one).Then drunk, laughing, bewildered Joe Biden.Terrible terrible picks