|
||
Why Has John McCain Abandoned the American Soldier?
George Bush, Dick Cheney, and John McCain are sending a razor-sharp message to the fighting men and women of America.
It's underlined again in bright, fresh, blood-red every time a tank in Bahgdad is blown up by an IED and shrapnel rips into another soldier's flesh.
It's written in script-letters of grimy dust along the floors and walls of fly-infested VA hospitals.
It's spelled out in the invisible ink of the GI Bill that's still not passed -- the critically-important Webb/Hagel bill, sponsored by two gutsy Senators (and veterans) with the courage not to quit in the face of cold-blooded Bush/McCain resistance.
That secret message is everywhere the American soldier and veteran looks nowadays. But it's a secret message that's not really all that secret -- it goes something like this: pssst. Hey dude and dudette. Come. Be All You Can Be. We'll sing you national anthems and write you flowery speeches. We'll solemnly call you the pride of a nation, the Best of the Best, as we Stop-Loss you back to Iraq for tour after tour. But then, goddamn it--if you DO manage somehow to keep your ass from gettin' blowed up, and find your way back home, you're on your own. Understand?
To which The Happy Warrior, John McCain, might add: This is America, "my friends!" Do what I did! Marry some billionaire Cruella-de-Ville lookin' chick, and you won't NEED health-care for your war injuries! Over and over, McCain has chosen tax-breaks for the rich over the desperate needs of our wounded GIs. Whatever his private reasons, in addition to fighting non-stop to block the GI bill, McCain has -- as reported by Aaron Glantz, author of The War Comes Home:
-- voted against nearly every effort to increase funding for healthcare and disability benefits for wounded soldiers
-- voted against the interests of disabled American veterans 80 percent of the time
-- received a D+ voting grade from the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (when Obama got a B+, and Clinton, to her lasting credit, an A-)
--consistently voted against expanding mental healthcare and readjustment counseling for service members returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, efforts to expand treatment for injured veterans, and proposals to lower co-payments and enrollment fees veterans must pay to obtain prescription drugs.
And it goes without saying that the ex-bomber-pilot never lifted a finger to help Mary Tillman, as she struggled valiantly -- through one Pentagon lie after another -- in a lonely quest to find out what really killed her heroic son Pat.
Some maverick, huh?
For our suffering vets, the "Straight Talk Express" is a runaway train bound to Nowheresville.
Many peace groups make it clear that while they oppose the war, they support our troops. McCain's real campaign slogan ought to be: I support the war, but I oppose our troops.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
PART III
McCain has been none of these things, done virtually nothing to advance the rights and needs of our veterans in this arena.
"Hundred Years War" McCain is demonstrably no friend of the veteran, and it shows in his egregious voting record, as surely as he is no friend of We The People, which shows just as conclusively in his relationships with Charles Keating and the K Street lobbyists, and his slavish devotion to the GOP in all of its corruption and cronyism.
As surely as the GOP has conclusively proven itself to be the most corrupt and inept political party movement since Boss Tweed and Tammany Hall, McCain has shown that he cares not one iota about his fellow veterans, their care needs, or the needs and obligations of We The People. McCain remains a staunch partisan of the GOP, and all that that entails, as surely as his voting record has silently spat upon the service of every deserving veteran who has legitimately sought treatment at their local VA, and was turned away.
As hypocritical as his party has been on the subject of "family values," so too has McCain been a complete and utter hypocrite on veteran's care.
Senator John "Hundred Years War" McCain has earned my unrestrained contempt, his war record be damned.
Leland R. Erickson
Citizen
PART II
It is this voting record that has led me to conclude that John McCain is a traitor to every one of those who have served our country in uniform, as much as he is a traitor to the needs of We The People. By opposing the health and mental health care benefits and the new GI Bill, Senator McCain has proven himself no friend of the veteran, and, given IMHO the absolute moral imperative upon We The People to properly care for those who sacrifice in the service of our nation, a traitor to We The People by so egregiously not seeing to the fulfillment of this very obligation by implementing proper care for our vets through the VA system.
IMHO a real hero, a true American war hero in Congress, would be a tireless crusader for veteran's rights and care, a veritable tiger in pursuit of reforming the Veteran's Administration hospitals, a person incapable of tolerating for a second the current deplorable state of affairs, from vermin-infested facilities, to inadequate care for disabled vets, to inadequate mental healthcare for those vets scared in mind as well as body by their experiences in our nation's service.
Such a genuine war hero turned senator would be relentless is seeing that only truly caring and qualified medical and psychiatric professionals get anywhere near our sick or disabled vets, professionals who place their patients' care front and center ahead of bureaucratic red tape and politics.
END PART II
Sir,
I am an independent voter, the son of a WW2 US Marine, and the equally proud nephew of a WW2 US Army veteran who served in General George S. Patton, Jr.'s 3rd Army in the German Campaign. In my lifetime I have counted many friends, acquaintances, professional colleagues, and other family members who have served our country, in many cases in combat. More than a few I've met were decorated for their service.
I have studied war and soldiering all of my life, starting with family stories of "those times."
I was taught to respect those who serve our country in uniform as unconditionally as possible, no matter how passionately I may disagree with them otherwise on matters of politics, et al.
Whatever service John McCain performed in the past IMHO has been well-and-thoroughly rendered irrelevant by his shameless self-aggrandizement while a member of the US Senate, from his blatant involvement with Charles Keating to his apparent relationship with Vicky Isemann and the K Street lobbyists to this, his voting record contrary to the needs of our troops.
END PART I
Something everyone should see about McCain:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y395Tftgz0E
Watched the video..........George Soros personified.
Oops. Guess I jumped the gun in thinking you were interested in sincere debate.
This is a tactic of the intellectually dishonest (on the left and right): If you can't rebut the material, lob some buzzword or name that your side will identify with.
Are you somehow trying to deny that McCain said those ridiculous things? Why don't you address the evidence instead of trying to distract with irrelevancies?
HuffPo screener: I submitted a contribution pointing out the scurrilous attack upon McCain regarding his opposition to the new GI Bill, pointing out that he wants a provision on eligibility based upon time in service. The orginal GI Bill encompassed those who had fought in WWII but has now been watered down to where 6-month served weenies are covered. Too bad you did not allow my counter to Eskow's massive distortion of Senator McCain's position. Eskow's writing here represents the worst of America's current Democrat political duplicity. Attacking Senator McCain, a proven American military hero, as being anti military is damnable and should be denounced by HuffPo rather than featured.
Care to provide a link to info on the reasons you claim McCain opposes the new GI bill?
Is it even possible to enlist for a period as short as 6 months? (I seriously doubt it.) And if so, why should such a person be considered a "weenie"?
The reasons for McCain's opposition that I've seen cited are 1. It'll cost too much. 2. Making the educational benefits too attractive will hurt retention rates.
Also, I'd like to hear more about why McCain should be considered a "miltary hero". Yes, I know he was taken prisoner and suffered greatly. What about that is heroic? Given his week-kneed stance on the whole torture thing, it would seem that his military service has done little to inform his politics.
It wasn't just his POW status. John McCain was aboard for the USS Forrestal fire. He was trying to rescue another pilot when ordinance exploded, peppering him with shrapnel on the legs and chest. Later as a POW, when his father ascended to the position of commander of that region, he expressed solidarity with his fellow POWs and refused early release. His subsequent torture was the price he paid. Truly, only POWs can truly judge their heroics in captivity, and most seem to agree he's a hero.
Of course, war-time heroics shouldn't preclude us from criticizing policy. I fear capture and waterboarding by Iranians if only because we've now established that this activity is kosher, and the strongest advocate against torture should have been John McCain. On this and many other policies, this man has seemingly sold his soul.
I have no link regarding McCain's (main) reason for opposing a new GI Bill, other than common news stories I've read. His supporting reason of being too costly follows the term of service in determining extent of eligibility, in effect, the longer the service the greater the benefits. And yes, a person can currently qualify based upon six-months honorable service and discharge. Google the VA on this. (Not enough room to describe all the reasons anyone would have left military service after a short period.)
A "military hero"............. the whole scenario of McCain's service is heroic, but let's merely center on multiple sorties into North Vietnam, delivering munitions on target while locked on to it with tracers comin' directly at your sweaty nose. That is, after successfully outmaneuvering SAMs,.......... try it sometime.. Then, as a prisoner of war, refusing repatriation, enduring torture plus deplorable conditions as a prisoner, AND KEEPING FAITH WITH FELLOW PRISONERS. Some may dismiss McCain's military service as what was expected and it may have entailed the risk of capture. These people forget that merely making that decision to face the hardships and dangers is itself, heroic.
I agree with you about McCain's weak-kneed stance on water boarding. Further, I'm really bent outta shape with his naive approach for a civil campaign for the prez office. Obama, a street fighter able to survive successfully in the vicious Chicago political arena, is gonna shred McCain.
"down to where 6-month served weenies are covered. "
Care to explain (1) how one can serve only six months other than being discharged for medical or other reasons, and (2) how that makes them "weenies?"
What if a person in our nation's Armed Forces enlists, is injured in basic in a training accident, permanently disabled and in need of lifelong care? Are they somehow *unworthy* of care through the VA in your view? Does their being injured make them a "weenie" in your humble opinion?
Leland R. Erickson
Citizen
First of all, the GI bill isn't free. The servicemember has to contribute $110 a month for twelve months (at least they did in 1996). Then once they fulfill the minimum requirements to be considered a veteren (3yrs) they can use the benefits. If they are discharged in less than a year for medical reasons then they should be able to get their contribuitions plus interest back. If they are booted out, then they shouldn't get the benefits associated with an honorable discharge. So "six month weenies" shouldn't get jack crap. In my days those six month weenies were worthless pieces of sh*t who don't deserve to be called Veterens.
Hi comrade: read down flor my further answers to your valid questions.
Six-month weenies eh? I say YOU are the traitor.
This bill would be THE MOST FAIR AND EQUITABLE bill to ever come out of our government. You can read the full text here:
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bills&docid=f:s22is.txt.pdf
The easiest way to sum it up would be to say that for every month served on active duty you will receive one month of education benefits.
In actuality, if a veteran qualifies, which could be as little as 90 days of active duty, they will receive 36 months of education benefits. HOWEVER, they only receive a proportion of benefits based on time served on active duty. In order to receive 100% of benefits they will have had to serve 36 months of active duty.
Now, if they only served a fraction of the 36 months they will receive a fair and equal proportion of benefits. Here is the breakdown of benefits earned based on months of AD:
>36mo=100%
30-36mo=90%
24-30mo=80%
18-24mo=70%
12-18mo=60%
6-12mo=50%
90d-6mo=40%
This levels the playing field for reservists who have served any number of months in this war.
Good point Marine, though I would be careful to tie it to character of service.
As we well know not all Marines, Soldiers or Sailors are created equally and more than one has been invited to swim home. And rightfully so.
should have read not there.
Don't worry--we get your meaning--and appreciate your contribution.
John Eskow
McCain has son's in the military, In the air ,on the ground or in a tank it's still dangerous. John McCain is an American hero and we should be honored to have him as President. Obama and Clinton would never serve this country.
Yes he is very heroic as we can all see from this youtube video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y395Tftgz0E
He was traumatized for 5 years and was forced to do all sort of things for the enemy. But he bounced right back and here he is all ready to be a hero again. To lead a (free) nation into another war. This time with Iran.
A war hero is useless without a WAR. That is what they are good for. What use is a war hero if we are not at war. Let's start another war so we can have more war heroes.
FYI, the GI bill would really have helped those who could not serve their country any more. Like those soldiers who came home after 1 month with one less leg or hand or eyes or parts of their bodies.
Those are the guys that are not eligible for free education so that they can find another job according to John McCain. They served less than 6 months so they are wooses or weenies as CASEYBABES call them and should not be given a chance to make something of their lives.
Are those who DIED after 2 days in Iraq or Afghanistan LOSERS? Is that why their coffins cannot be photographed? Is this the type of respect we expect from the McCain presidency with regards to patriotic soldiers who is fighting bush's war.
John McCains son's have nothing to do with their father's fitness to occupy the White House. We are Americans, and do not judge the fitness of one member of a family based upon the deeds of another. John McCain's sons must write their own chapters in our nation's history, if in fact they are destined to do so.
John McCain's service over 35 years ago is a separate matter from his fitness to occupy the White House. His voting record, his partisan loyalty to the GOP, the runaway hypocrisy of his party and its equally runaway cronyism and corruption speak far more loudly and clearly to this independent voter about his thorough *lack of fitness* to be our next President.
Leland R. Erickson
Citizen
Big difference. between; being on the ground or in the air, or better yet no there!
Answer to the title question: for precisely the same reasons every member of the current administration has.
I think the sad truth is that, John McCain, has never met a principle that he wouldn't sacrifice/
Living close to several army posts gives me access to a few GI's.
The troops I talk to want Clinton or Obama.
Ok. Maybe one in 10 say McCain.
Their reason (yep-I ask why!!!) is that McCain talks out of both sides of his mouth. Their buddies are getting killed while McCain is saying the surge worked - dahhhhhhhh!!!
The good news is - the Pentagon just sent a paper to the White House - in order to keep the armed forces combat ready they will have to bring on the draft - all you McCain voters - hope you or your sons and daughters love the military because you are going to be helping out in a big way.
My kids not in the military already are too old for the draft... thank goodness.
Remember all - don't forget to vote.
Other than that the GIs I speak with love the prospect of serving their country since "no loss" gives them that option. YEP YEP YEP!!!
Bobrobert: I have two young sons. Can you please give me more information on the Pentagon paper regarding reinitiating the draft? I'm trying without success to find info online, not surprisingly as this is something I'm sure they don't want widely known. Thank you.
So why, in the face of these facts, do most of the vets I know support John McCain, and consider him an admirable war hero, while hating Hillary Clinton? Is it some kind of twisted macho peer pressure?
I've asked this question of bloggers on HuffPost and received aangry sputtering responses or silence. It seems the case that troops turn to the liberal side for real support, but the rethugs for admiration.
I think a great deal of this self-contradicting behavior is due to the fact this invasion and occupation does not use draftees. Draftees back from Vietnam were open in their contempt for the war-mongers who created the Vietnam quagmire. Few recall precisely why we got into Vietnam, just who signed the orders. Kennedy was despised by conservatives (Birchers, etc.). Cuba had just been taken over by Castro. The Russians launched Sputnik and Gargarin. Ameican hawks demanded a response to communist advances. Vietnam seemed an easy place to draw a line.
Iraq is a case of Bush wanting to prove he is a more manly man than his father, Cheney saw petroleum dollar signs. But the troops don't care. They just fighting "our enemies" and demand support from liberals they aren't getting from conservatives ("My money is mine, beg someone else").
Young vets are a differerent story. "Macho" stuff aside, the two candidates that received the most financial support from troops serving in Iraq were Obama and Ron Paul. It will be up to the Democratic Party to attack McCain on this issue--but I'm not holding my breath.
John Eskow
I wish there would be demographic data available on who these "young vets" are. I'm a "not quite so old" vet due to deploy to Iraq in the not-to-distant future, and I've observed that my young vet peers, while very anti-(this)-war, aren't exactly in the financial position to throw money at any presidential candidate. I've availed myself of the education benefits McCain seems keen on neglecting, and therefore probably have already been counted in other demographics of contributors for Democratic candidates.
Many of my young peers are bumming cigarettes and gas money to come to training, let alone donating funds to candidates. I might make the case that voting for John McCain wouldn't help, but these are conditions that have existed in Central Pennsylvania since 1972/Hurricane Agnes.
What regions of the country are they donating from? Major combat commands like Fort Bragg, Camp Lejune, or NAB Coronado? Training or combat service commands? It's all relevant to determine whether or not those donations say anything about the service aggregate.
I'm a vet...100% disabled Vietnam era...The fly Jocky has no clue as to the smell and the work on the ground.
The view is different at 10000 feet....On the ground you have to live it smeel it se it 24/7...no day off and carry what you need!
Most vets, including myself, are not happy with our choices. McCain in particular.
The reason soldiers and vets tend towards Republicans is because democratic administrations have historically allowed pay and benefits to stagnate during their administrations. That's not a shot, it's just a fact. Military people, are for the most part, married and have young children. Carter nearly wrecked the military in this way and later Clinton caused significant damage as well. Starting in 2000, with raises as high as 15% and in some cases twice a year, the exodus was stemmed and a series of large increases continued for several years until there was better parity with the civilian sector. Reagan did the same thing. The military is by nature close nit and doesn't easily forget what they perceive as bad treatment.
On the other hand. There are many vets, like myself, who strongly disagree with this war and the current administration and I think that this will mitigate past neglect to some degree but not entirely.
Support the Troops! It's just a bumper sticker, not a policy.
Yep. That's why I have proudly shown a bumper sticker on my car, for the past 3 years, that says:
Support Our Troops
Impeach Our President
Sadly, it's never going to happen. At least Obama gives us some hope that things can change for the better.
"Many peace groups make it clear that while they oppose the war, they support our troops. McCain's real campaign slogan ought to be: I support the war, but I oppose our troops."
This money quote can be applied to Bush/Cheney as well. The neocons see war as a way to easy profits, population control and elimination of political enemies in one easy (for them) step. Even better, it could last for a hundred years!
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
