I don’t honestly know how much war deferments matter these days. Dick Cheney had five and still was able to openly tell John Kerry he was unpatriotic and allow others to suggest Kerry did not deserve his purple hearts. Bill Clinton before Cheney was still able to become president in-spite of his so called “draft-dodging” and so those still wanting to fight the Vietnam War in American politics seem to have less of a voice then ever.

The latest revelation about Mitt Romney, that he received deferments for academic and missionary work during Vietnam, might not matter directly then. It is, however, a continuation of a counter-narrative. That his varmint hunting wasn’t the grand NRA vision of manliness, that his constant flip-flops represent a potential for mistrust for social conservative and that his years of service in Massachusetts might not equate enough experience to manage a global war.

Republicans are attempting to take a hardline on Iraq & fighting global terrorism. They are reprising the 2004 theme of “voting against us is voting against winning the war”, which might work if the candidate is adept at security issues, it doesn’t stack up so well if the candidate isn’t a credible source on the subject.

Also it doesn’t help he was in FRANCE at the time. Which should rile up some conservatives as well.