Back to my customary challenge:

To every candidate on stage and off, regardless of political affiliation, if they support the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, you must ask the critical questions I've requested so many times before.

- Who in your immediate family is now serving in this war? - Who in your immediate family will soon serve in this war? - Will your children or grandchildren EVER serve in this war? - If yes, when and in what capacity? - If no, WHY THE HELL NOT???

I mean, come on! America's history is filled with wealthy, politically powerful families who served valiantly in the military. Even George Herbert Walker Bush served heroically in World War II (or so it is said).

Just the opposite is true today.

Take the Romney family for example. Have you seen Mitt Romney's campaign commercial? The 'oh so butch' montage of successive Mitts in impressive knits? The G.Q. Mitt pimping American machismo? The ESQUIRE Mitt pumping American strength? The GLAMBO Mitt, posed and poised to replenish our military with as many enlistees as he can? Relying, of course, on O.P.'s. Other People's daughters and Other People's sons.

Did you know that Mitt, the incredibly wealthy war-hawk candidate, has FIVE ADULT SONS? And not one of them, including their Glambo Dad, has ever served in the military? Not even the Massachusetts National Guard which is now serving in Iraq?

This may seem contradictory for a family whose patriarch vows to increase the military, and vehemently supports the war. But the Romneys aren't the least bit concerned with hypocrisy. They're different from the Bushes who hide their service age young'uns from we-the-people so we don't notice they're not in The War.

On the Bush front, however, I am pleased to report the contrived re-appearance and Naval Reserve enlistment of Jeb's eldest son, George P. Naturally, George P. won't see any action. Nonetheless, I do take pride in believing I helped provoke 'P's re-emergence, having written critically of his disappearance in December, last year (http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1216-21.htm).

But Mitt's sons have always been non-militarily "out" to the public. As if to say, 'Come on! We're Romneys. We're wealthy. Yes, our Daddy supports this war, but WE'RE not expected to fight it.'

Instead the brothers are on danger-free duty on the homefront, blogging (http://fivebrothers.mittromney.com) for their candidate Dad, who is proud of their "hard work."

"My sons tell me it's time to contribute to their blog with a dispatch from the campaign trail. Boy, are they working hard – and having fun at the same time! I’m told the Five Brothers blog is one of the most popular features on our web site."

There's that "hard work"stuff again. Pardon my Olberman moment, but... Mr. Romney, HAVE YOU NO SHAME???

It would be one thing if Romney weren't such a rah-rah supporter of this illegal, immoral war. A war that has killed nearly 3,500 of our young men and women in Iraq, nearly four hundred more in Afghanistan, and gravely wounded tens of thousands. But it's beyond reason how Romney and warmongers like him can cavalierly pimp a war for others, yet never send their own.

In this nation and this world, a person's value is measured more by wealth than by character (Donald Trump, Sumner Redstone and Rupert Murdoch as examples). It's ludicrous to presume the sons of the super-rich would be permitted to serve in war. Take for example, Britain's Prince Harry.

Mitt Romney is reportedly worth in excess of two hundred million dollars. Beyond that, his sons and grandchildren have a purported trust fund of another seventy million. The Romney's aren't regular guys like Casey Sheehan, Jesus Suarez del Solar, Patrick McCaffrey, Sherwood Baker, Jeffrey Lucey, Jonathan Castro, Evan Ashcraft, and the thousands more who perished unnecessarily in George Bush's War. The Romneys are special... too precious to be sacrificed.

In truth, I personally don't believe in war. Especially NOT the War On Iraq. I don't want to see ANYONE serving in it. Not a Romney, a Giuliani, or even a Bush.

But I do believe in parity. In equality. In carrying equal weight. Which is why I continue to challenge the media to take warmongers to task regarding their personal and familial sacrifice for the war they all support.

Of course I know there are stock, pre-rehearsed answers to questions like these in the rarefied chance they are asked:

'I don't force my children to do what I want, or believe as I believe. They have the freedom to pursue their own actions and will.'

I also understand that the children of a powerful politician or wealthy individual would likely receive preferential treatment in the military.

Yet the questions should still be asked. If the candidates are honest, they will admit they DON'T WANT their children or grandchildren to serve. Which is why they are chickenhawks. Which is why using the power of the Presidency to sacrifice Other People's children, be they American, Iraqi, Iranian, Palestinian or Darfurian is wrong!

This morning in a pre-debate interview, CNN's Wolf Blitzer interviewed Mitt Romney's eldest son, Tag. He asked Tag's thoughts on Mitt as a Dad and a role model. Blitzer never once asked Tag why he or his brothers weren't serving their nation in the War their father supports.

Why not, Blitzer? It's an honorable question. Why don't you and your cronies do your damn job???

The fact is, absent a pre-existing medical condition, Tag couldn't have a legitimate prohibitive response. Being a father, a spouse, a son, a grandson, a brother, a business owner, a student, or an employee don't exclude one from war. Each of these categories is pemissible for military service and thousands in these categories are serving.

Challenge the chickenhawks. Other People's children mustn't be sacrificed for war!

(Author's Note: The Romneys have been spotlighted in this article. However the issue is the same for ALL candidates. If war-supporting candidates expect OTHER PEOPLE'S children to serve, they should expect the same service of their own!)
 

Did you enjoy this article? Please bookmark it onto: