Karl Rove - who of course never served in the military himself - writes a glowing paean to the troops in the Wall Street Journal:

I felt awe that such men and women exist, and gratitude that they put themselves in harm’s way for our nation. I hope America continues to be worthy of such staggering service and sacrifice.

The subtext being - of course only Americans who value/cherish/elevate/idealize the military, like Republicans, are worthy. Because the troops, we see, trend more Republican.

All of which brings us to this extraordinarily prescient piece from October, over at (conservative!) Culture11, in which Philip Primeau writes of the new, right-wing Praetorianism:

In fact, let’s imagine that not 68% but 98% of the military backs the Republican ticket. Hell, let’s imagine that every single man and woman in uniform, active and reserve, wants Mac in the White House.

Would that deserve “serious consideration”?

Nope. End of the day, soldiers are regular citizens. Their electoral preferences are no more or less important than those of bankers (who support Obama) or cops (who support Obama) or any other profession. Does it really matter that military men and women stand behind McCain? Let’s not mince words: It only means that they see something for themselves in a Republican administration.

What is worth serious consideration, however, is that Lopez naturally figures the troops’ opinions are owed special attention, as if they are more weighty and relevant than those of your average joe (unless, of course, that average joe is a certain Midwestern plumber).

In many sections of the American right, it is widely accepted that the military is the only virtuous and worthwhile state organ. The views of service people are given preferential treatment: They are automatically assumed to arise from a selfless and impeccable patriotism.

You sometimes get the feeling that Lopez et al. would have no problem with the vote hinging upon military whimsy. They are somehow disturbed by the fact that soldiers are “merely” the Constitution’s protectors, rather than the nation’s political arbiters and moral exemplars. They are possessed by a deeply-held and thinly-disguised Praetorianism, a frightening impulse that is likely to become more defined and profound in the coming years, especially if Obama’s election leads to particularly inept handling of Iraq and Afghanistan (a definite possibility).

Emphasis all added. Rove’s essay isn’t merely a pat on the back - there’s a purpose behind it. And a frightening one at that.