As proclamations go, MSNBC’s Katie Phang went far out on a limb this week with a wild one concerning Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. She labeled the potential Republican candidate for president a “national security threat” for his stance on the Russia-Ukraine war.
Her inexplicable commentary followed DeSantis answering a question from Fox News host Tucker Carlson. The governor was asked to explain his stance on the war.
DeSantis listed several vital interests to Americans, including military readiness, energy security, the rising threat of Chinese communists, and others.
Then he declared that “becoming further entangled in a territorial dispute between Ukraine and Russia is not one of them.”
He decried the Biden administration’s “blank check” funding of the Ukrainian side for “as long as it takes.” The governor also called for specifically defined goals and accountability for the funding.
👍DeSantis calls Russia war 'territorial dispute,' suggests Biden curtail Ukraine funding | Just The News https://t.co/wbgLRsWOAA
— Stooge Report (brain cells matter) (@stooge_report) March 15, 2023
That comment was enough to send MSNBC off the deep end. Enough to smear the popular Florida governor as a threat to national security.
Reasonable people may disagree on the nature and proper course of action with the war in Ukraine. But to deem a person a “national security risk” for having an opinion counter to that of the majority of Washington is more than a little extreme.
As National Review senior writer Dan McLaughlin tweeted, “I guess we should just start arresting people who disagree with our foreign policy. As he put it, not having a “hard line” on Putin puts Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and Hillary Clinton in jeopardy.
A tweet by Scott Howard called Phang’s position “nuts.” He added that foreign policy disagreements hardly qualify as “national security risks.”
Mike Cote took exception to DeSantis’ position, as many certainly did. However, he correctly pointed out that disagreements may arise on how to address a foreign war “without being a national security risk. The U.S. isn’t even at war!”
The Daily Caller’s Geoffrey Ingersoll wondered when journalists are going to cease promoting criminalizing dissenting thoughts.
And the National Review’s Pradheep J. Shanker noted that former President Obama had a remarkably similar view in 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea.
Granted, MSNBC is hardly a beacon for rational thought and sane expression. However, to label a foreign policy disagreement as a “national security threat” proves once again the lack of seriousness employed by the left-wing outlet.
