It finally happened. Scott Brown is returning from Afghanistan safe and sound…wait, he left?
Several months ago, Brown announced–then claimed it had been leaked–that he was going over to Afghanistan to “do some missions.” It was never entirely clear why a JAG National Guard officer would be better trained in Afghanistan as opposed to here as it seems unlikely the adjudications of a war zone would be applicable at the Milford Nat’l Guard HQ. But whatever. The announcement, however, seemed oddly (or conveniently) timed as it came out around the time that Setti Warren was prepared to enter the race. Setti Warren, mind you was already an Iraq war veteran, and, on paper at least, had the biography if not the political resume, to challenge Brown. As I have often harped, these adventures or “missions” to Afghanistan, seemed like more evidence of the construction of Scott Brown his media men (and women, no offense former staffer Gail Gitcho) have sought to create for the politics-consuming Massachusetts public.
It seems, however, that the meaning behind Brown’s mission has deflated somewhat. With Elizabeth Warren sucking the air out of Democratic nominee room and Alan Khazei bearing the brunt of the Brown camp’s injections of “levity,” Brown’s visit to Afghanistan is getting much less play now. Indeed, the scant AP articles about it do not do much to actual offer Brown a poltical benefit. Even the quote from a Brown spokesman the Globe posted implies the trip had more the air of a visit by a Congressional delegation (of one) than anything else.
Why am I saying this? Because with the media and Brown for that matter appearing to take some of the wind out the sails of those “missions,” we do ourselves no favors in blasting him right now. It will just look small and petty. This could certainly change, but frankly, I doubt it will. I suspect that if the Brown camp wanted to make hay out of this now, they would have chosen different words or even waited to make a statement until he actually got back. Remember these people very carefully and meticulous sculpt Brown’s image for the little people like us back in Massachusetts, so surprises are pretty rare for those that follow these things. Changing up the message now would be such a surprise.
Why tread lightly? Because the biggest fear I have and have always had is that Brown would use these “missions” for political benefit in a disingenuous way. Maybe Brown will be classy and he won’t actually do that (HA!), however, if he doesn’t make the political play w/ his “missions” we do nothing for our cause by attacking him ad nauseum now. If a year from now photographs from these “missions” start showing up in campaign literature or talk of him being an Afghanistan veteran starts appearing that’s different, but save the big guns for then. For now snicker amongst yourselves, repost the stories that are out there, point out the media’s errors or inaccuracies (if any), or limit your criticism to short, delightful, witty snark.
Yes, it was like a Congressional delegation visit, but what’s wrong with that? It was also different from a visit because it was his service obligation, so he slept and trained with the the troops and probably gained more of a feeling of their morale and their concerns than walking around with a bunch of Congressmen. Even if pictures come out, the pictures will be accurate pictures of him doing his yearly service obligation in Afghanistan, like he did. I don’t see why anyone would criticize or snicker about it, unless they were just idiots.
WTF, didn’t he fully appreciate them before? What a stupid statement.
It did seem obvious, with the dubious timing that Brown wanted pictures in a war zone because of Setti. Things change and there are others in the race now. Our troops are not props for political campaigns, those who use them in that regard are assholes. Don’t you think they have enough to do and to worry about, other than needlessly adding risk to their lives because Scotto wants a photo-op?
For 31 years he figured out a way to hide his ass in Massachusetts, state rep and all, important stuff, Wrentham really needed that extra liquor license approved, sorry, can’t go into a war zone.
Like Miski points out, it does not help to attack him or mock him given the low key statement.
You however overstate what he did – he was not part of the MA NG actually called up for a tour of duty. He was not at any more risk than ANY Senator who goes over to Afghanistan.
I agree that he deserves credit for his time in the National Guard, but looking at comments on the articles where it is mentioned – it is grossly overstated. He is not Wes Clark, who was in the military for 30 years. He gave about 2 weeks a year – sum them and it’s slightly less than one year – and this is the first time in a combat zone.
You might also consider that those of us on the left saw the right attack John Kerry for spending ONLY 4 months in Vietnam – ignoring that that was 4 months more than Bush, Cheney, and for that matter Scott Brown. (In fact, Kerry was in active duty for about 4 years.)
It is that backdrop that makes me think the Republican infatuation with Brown’s NG service – which even the Boston Globe wrote front page articles on in January 2010 – is overblown.
The fact is that even as Senators, Kerry many important trips to Afghanistan are more significant than this week or two by Brown. (Not to mention the last two Pakistan trips Kerry made.)
need to edit better
It’s about context. He once said such a scenario of him doing his service overseas was unlikely because it could put troops at risk. Obviously nothing happened and that’s good. Visiting troops is par for the course of politics and if that is essentially what he did so be it. Twisting his own national guard service, made possibly by his pull as a Senator, to serve a political end is what COULD be a problem. I’m not saying it will be and based on the fact that the statement actually plays down the situation, we have nothing to complain about as of yet. I am merely encouraging my fellow BMGers to not attack him over this since, again as of yet, there’s no there, there.
Have been waiting to see the “CrazyKarzai” tweets.
It is certainly relevant, however, to ask his position regarding our involvement in Afghanistan.
…is NEVER inappropriate!
…
I was a big fan of the show and miss it very much, but I’m not sure what the reference is here.
I forget which season (5? 6?), the one where the primary campaign is heating up. Jimmy Smits — the pilot — is called up for Guard duty, and both campaigns go back and forth about the optics.
I think it was perhaps intended as a reference to similar things that came up with W (don’t I remember him landing a jet on a carrier or something equally silly?)
All seasons are available on netflix, btw. That’s how we’re watching — we’re halfway through the final season now … no spoilers please 🙂
and there were photos of Bush in the plane – I think including some that looked like he was flying. But, Bush lost flying privileges in the National Guard and never piloted a plane again.
The media – icluding Chris Matthews conflated the two to make it seem our brave President flew and landed the plane – followed by the speech in front of the Mission accomplished sign. In the 2994 elections the only candidate who could and did fly a plane was Kerry – unless another Democrat challenger did.
You mean … he didn’t FLY the plane??? You mean the whole thing was just a photo op?
I’m shocked. Just shocked.