The Wasted-Chance Debate Last Night
I'm not bitter, I'm livid.
I didn't bother watching the debate last night, because I knew what was coming. Each and every time we have our candidates in the same place at the same time, it's one big game of stupid. Flag pins? Tuzla? Who the hell cares? Distractions like this are what got us into Iraq in the first place -- a media unwilling to do the tough reporting or ask the tough questions, and instead getting caught up in the emotion of the moment.
Yesterday a major new report was released by Rand Corporation. It found, according to USA Today:
Roughly one in five U.S. troops is suffering from major depression or post-traumatic stress from serving in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and an equal number have suffered brain injuries, a new study estimates.
Only about half of them have sought treatment...
Rand described this, rightfully, as a major health crisis among Iraq and Afghanistan veterans.
Where was the question about that? You think that ABC could nix one question about pointless stupidity, and ask the candidates what they would do about this crisis. I know we veterans would have sure appreciated it.
The excuse from pundits stepping up to defend ABC is that, well, we've had 20 debates and we've gone over all the issues, and people don't want to hear it anymore.
Oh really? I don't remember any debate where we talked seriously about when it is proper and not proper to deploy our military. Are we going to continue preemption and nation building? Is there any situation where that might be called for? I haven't heard that question asked in a debate.
Have we talked about the GI Bill in the debates? What other benefits for veterans would they increase or decrease, and by what amounts?
How do they propose, with the budget crunch, to ensure that the Department of Veterans Affairs is fully-funded?
There are, literally, dozens of hours of debate that we have not had on troops' and veterans' issues alone, because no one wants to ask the questions. ABC had a chance to, last night, in what could be the final Democratic debate. They could have run the gamut of issues that haven't been talked about in any debate, but are critically important to Pennsylvania and the nation.
Instead, we're stuck with an hour on pointless games, and no answers. Thanks a lot.
Follow Jon Soltz on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jonsoltz
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
Could it be that no questions about veterans issues are being asked of the candidates for the USA plans to discard this generation of war veterans as it did with the vets of Korea & 'Nam? It could be a tacit bi-partisan policy & a tradition.
If Obama can't answer the the light questions, how can he answer the serious ones? Obama did poorly last night because he couldn't answer the questions. If he's the nominee, the rethuglicans are going to make mincemeat out of him. Lord help us all.
That is a complete canard. A debate betweemMc cain and Obama on issues will be more robust because the differences are more stark and McCain - and right-wingers in general haven' been pressed on their positions in years.
I thought all you demorats were atheists? Sorry, but God is on our side. Keep praying to your global warming god! Maybe IT will listen to you.
Thanks, Jon. I concur completely with your sentiments.
It's really something being powerless in a supposed representative democracy, isn't it? I'm despairing for our Republic:
Nancy Pelosi, today at her weekly news conference, paraphrased:
'To fulfill our most important duty to protect the American people.'
'So as to protect our national interests wherever they are.'
Those two statements, uttered basically as afterthoughts - by the same woman who refuses to allow justice to be done on behalf of the exploited American people - define "American Empire," and spit in the face of a limited federal Constitutional Republic determined to live and let live, and to preserve liberty at all costs. I spit with contempt at both sentiments by the Speaker.
No legislative body full of amoral politicians, and no Executive Branch cherry-picking Generals who are impervious to the inherent moral hazard of their occupation, will EVER "protect" or safeguard me or other Americans, if what has transpired the last 7 years is defined as "protectio
Pelosi continued:
'I had breakfast this morning with Defense Secretary Gates to discuss Iraq.'
How nice for her.
'I was at the White House last night, at the invitation of the president' [to show off my Catholic faith like a shiny bauble and bask in the glow of my own self-defined piety].
Ask the U.S.-terro
Barack Obama, yesterday:
"The Commander in Chief sets the mission [in Iraq]."
Oh, really?
These two public servants - one an extremely powerful Speaker of the House, the other a Senator (and allegedly a former Constitutional law professor) hoping to be president - are collaborating with those corporations with a vested interest in pretending that our Constitution does NOT vest the immense power and responsibility "to declare [and set limits on] War" in our LEGISLATIVE BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT ALONE. You can look it up. I dare worshippers of Der Leader to do so.
The military (and political party) hierarchy of command ain't how democratic government is done.
So thanks anyway, Pelosi, Reid, McCain, Clinton & Obama, but I think we've all had - most grievously the American boots on the ground in, and people of, Iraq - just about as much military-i
No your view is incorrect. Congress's role is to declare a war and then the President is in charge of setting the mission. For instance, in WWII, when the Constitutional scheme was followed, Congress declared war the day after Pearl Harbor. Once that was done, FDR set the mission and ran the war. The Legislature appropriated the funds and oversaw the spending. The President decided when and where to engage in the various theaters of war. And the generals followed the orders. FDR was intimately involved in the general decision-making and planning of missions along with Churchhill.
After WWII with nukes at our disposal, the President took more power. Then in '73 came the War Powers Act which, in my view, concurrently enabled and limited the President's hand. The Iraq War represented an abysmal breach of the constitutional scheme as congress granted prospective power to wage war based on a condition that was never satisfied by any objective criteria: whether Saddam cooperated with inspectors. Bush made the decision without ever making a case that the inspectors were barred from the performance of their duties or, of course that any WMDs had been found.
Wow....I wonder if there is any truth to the rumour that Hillary had a list of questions that were going to be asked Senotor Obama before the debate....
Jon, do you seriously believe that either candidate is going to say anything of substance and specificity, in regards to any of the issues you have highlighted? Get real, all you're going to get is a bunch of euphemistic language and generalized platitudes that don't say anything, because neither candidate wants to say anything controversial or they may be held accountable for. On the "issues," you're not going to hear anything that you haven't heard a hundred times before.
Mainstream Media is all about Flag Lapel Pins, not Flag-Draped Coffins.
God help us all.
FYI...the flags draped over the coffins of our fallen troops were made in Communist China.....
You have a right to be livid.
We all do.
The MSM is playing us, all of us.
The only saving grace was that Gibson-Ste
The Bush Administration, with the help of both Republicans and go-along Democrats, are ruining our military. Those who control the MSM could care less, and they are.
I haven't heard you compiaining when Matthews, Olbermann, Russert, Blitzer, et al have unfairly treated Hillary while Barack got a pass.
Believe me, my heart bleeds for you.
Well said, Mr Soltz. When we are in the middle of two wars, with troops living, dying, and both they and their families paying the brunt of the costs for our policies, those troops deserve better than a "gotcha" debate.
Not spin, platitudes or generalities.
The war, America's foreign policies and all veterans issues deserve a public hearing, with questions posed by those who are fighting and those who have lost loved ones in this fight. Those who actually have to bear the weight for the decisions being made.
That we haven't had such a debate is a disgrace.
A diary on dKos by deOliver47 linked to a comment on TPM by Eric Mclure, who is currently serving in Iraq.
You might want to give it a read.
http://tpm
McCain has made it clear he will not support a new GI bill which on face value makes no sense when he has always played the POW military supporter war mongering man. The amount of mental health care for our soldiers just has the bodies adding up for the suicides and that is the soldiers not the families at home. No much if any support for these people who have substandard equipment to fight and use in the middle east and and just sent back again and again with worse odds of making it back alive and mentally ok. To not even offer these people who risk their life an limbs a chance to a better life when they do get out of the military is just a part of the anger I feel. And yet who is talking and who left it out of last nigts debate ABC?
You are so right Jon.
More than 50% of the debate was baiting for a tabloid style sound byte that could be used by John McCain in the general election. It was pathetic. Without a doubt this was a total disservice to our troops and our citizens. It shows that the main stream media is an acitve particpant in avoiding the real issues in lockstep with the Bush administration.
John McCain has already really shown his true colors as far a support for the troops- by being opposed to the GI bill. Deplorable! John McCain is not the affable old man the media makes him out to be.
You are right. There's way too many important issues that were not discussed. ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK! Makes me wonder if Bill and George got together prior to the so called debate. After all, he must have pledged in blood for life long loyalty.
The point is to keep all these issues out of reach of the voters.
And about putting the presidential race permanently out of influence of insurgents and popular movements.
Jon, question: had ABC started with more substantive questions dealing with major issues, how many would have clicked off because it was too boring, not enough entertainment? I hear the Monday morning quarterbacks slamming the pathetic level of discourse, which it was on some levels, i.e., flag pins, it was the 21st debate! I thought all voters got substantive information of their plans for Iraq and also taxes. Better discussion on these two subjects than the "gotcha" approach of NBC/MSNBC.
I think there should be no more debates with moderators
they should go to a Lincoln-Douglas debate style from now on
flip a coin
the first person goes for an hour
then the second goes for 90 minutes
then the first person goes for 30 minutes
these reporters all want to ask the Bernie Shaw question "If Kitty Dukakous was raped and murdered would you still be against the death penalty"
the Candidates looked tired and Obama looked annoyed with the media as if
don't you know I have won this thing
i am 28-14
Amen brother Soltz. I am a Soldier currently in Iraq, away from my wife and two daughters, and there is no way you can tell me "all the questions on policy have already been asked". I will never watch World News Tonight, This Week, or anything on ABCNews for that matter. I am not upset because I am an Obama supporter and they tried to cream my candidate; I am pissed because we have VERY SERIOUS PROBLEMS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED that the media is ignoring by running Jeremiah Wright and the original "bitter" comment over and over and over again. Go ahead and call me a crybaby, but I want to hear how to fix 1) this war in Iraq, 2) health care, 3) this recession, 4) a nine trillion dollar debt, 5) a dollar in the toilet in the international exchange, 6) the new GI Bill, 7) you get my point. Me, personally, could easily have a five hour debate on just the situation in Iraq.
WAKE UP AMERICA! IT'S TIME FOR CHANGE IN OUR COUNTRY!
May you return safely to your family. May all of you serving return safely.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
