Citation

Hasian M. Pres. Stud. Q. 2007; 37(4): 693-716.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2007, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1111/j.1741-5705.2007.02620.x

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Given the growing resonance of presidential rhetorics that are filled with tales of “unitary executive” power, wartime necessities, and unlawful combatants, critics of the administration need to find novel ways of dissenting. In recent years, several generals and other soldiers have assiduously avoided using frontal assault strategies in their critiques of Bush administration policies. Instead, they have used dangerous supplements, strategies of mythic reappropriation, where detractors have claimed that the Vulcans of the Bush administration have betrayed their masculine duties. Several case analyses of military tribunal debates and the generals' ouster of Donald Rumsfeld show us both the rewards and costs that have attended the embrace of some of these martial rhetorics.