Sunday, September 30, 2007

Jenna Bush Answers The Question

Money quote from the New York Times reporting on Jenna Bush's book tour:

Ms. Jackson, of HarperCollins, said Ms. Bush was well aware that by exposing herself to the kind of news media scrutiny she has never had before, she will get questions that run the gamut, from why she and her sister have not served in Iraq (“I think if people really thought about it, they know that we would put many people in danger,” she told Ms. Sawyer) to her wedding plans.

And, here's more of Media Lizzie defending Henry Hager (see comment 10, 27 September 2007, 02:09):

Finally, having Henry Hager enlist or be a commissioned officer - while it would enable you OYE folks to claim a domestic political coup - would be a disaster. As a Gold Star Wife, I damn sure wouldn't want such a high value target standing next to my man.

As the son
[-in-law] of the man who presided over the war, Hager would not only be a target - his presence would compromise the lives of others - lives already hanging in the balance.

There is more at stake than domestic political points folks. Real lives. Not just "republicans" or "democrats" - but real people.

OYE Comment:

Clearly, this is the latest White House talking point in response to Operation Yellow Elephant. Will that require kicking Presidential nephew George P. Bush out of the Naval Reserve, since he's not deployable?

Hat tip to August J. Pollack of


At 30 September, 2007 18:46, Blogger a progressive crank said...

So how to explain that all members of the UK's Royal Family serve in uniform, and in many cases, in theater? Even the current monarch served in uniform during WWII.

The flipside of this is that Media Lizzy doesn't think the US military can manage operational security sufficiently to protect Henry Hager from an attack. I think she misunderestimates the Army's competence and errs the other way as to Mr Hager's importance.

At 01 October, 2007 00:32, Anonymous CV Rick said...

Our aristocracy is more protected than the British are. Point of fact, our aristocracy is profiting more from the war than the British are also.

At 01 October, 2007 23:16, Anonymous Josh said...

and I think that it's sad because in the wars of antiquity it was the aristocracy's duty and honor to lead in war. just my point of view. I served as a Marine in Iraq and my Company CO was a Harvard grad who was born with a silver spoon

At 06 October, 2007 17:02, Blogger Media Lizzy said...

Actually, I have nothing but confidence in the OpSec abilities of the US Army. But no organization is infallible. And certainly not in a TOA where we are collaborating with folks that may embrace the idea of allowing OpSec to be compromised, and allowing someone such as Hager to be targeted.

On the matter of Hager v. George P. - I will say this: George P. is a nephew, and has not been a part of the Bush Administration policy or political team. Hager is not only betrothed to the First daughter, but was a high profile staffer to Karl Rove.

And the British have seen fit to keep Prince Harry out of Iraq for similar reasons. No doubt they will do the same for Prince William.

However inconvenient a truth, there are few families among the 300 million Americans who ascend to the halls of power. As for my point, or Jenna Bush's point being a "White House Talking Point" - let me remind you the "White House" is a building. Is there someone specific who wrote it for me? No. We drew the same conclusion because it makes the most sense.


Post a Comment

<< Home