I've always wondered how journalists define "pro-military" and "pro-defense." The terms are usually applied to someone advocating more money for the Pentagon or opposing any cut from any budget item ever considered at any level of the Defense Department. The labels are rarely applied to someone who wants to cut a failed program or shift money into a promising alternative.
Thus I read with interest Heather Hurlburt's piece listing several areas where congressional conservatives are at odds with mainstream military thinking -- on the Law of the Sea Treaty, alternative energy sources, war with Iran, and military custody of terrorist suspects. Why don't the analysts call these ideological lawmakers "anti-military"? The shoe seems to fit.