In case you didn’t already know, last week marked the fifth anniversary of the Iraq war. If you didn’t, don’t feel too bad, for you are in good company. A Pew Research Center poll recently found that only 28 percent of American adults surveyed were able to say that approximately 4,000 Americans have died in the Iraq war. The same survey found that 84 percent of Americans are aware that Oprah Winfrey endorsed Sen. Barack Obama for president.
In cased you missed it, the Pentagon reported that four U.S. soldiers were killed by a bomb blast in southern Baghdad late Sunday, raising the death toll for American forces since the start of the war to an even 4,000 casualties, thus officially marking a new milestone.
As the American public’s attention span continues to shrink and shift away form the seemingly endless war in Iraq, so does the press. According to the News Content Index conducted by the Project for Excellence in Journalism, the percentage of news stories devoted to the war has sharply declined since last year, dropping from an average of 15 percent of the news hole in July to just 3 percent in February.
Moreover, a Pew's News Interest Index survey found that Iraq was the public's most closely followed news story in all but five weeks during the first half of 2007. However, it was a much less dominant story between July 2007 and February 2008, not to mention the Iraq war has not been the public's top weekly story since October 2007.
Maybe if Oprah broadcast her show live from the Green Zone in Baghdad for a week or two, her global presence would ignite a surge of media coverage and Americans would tune into the war more.
Until then, who is to blame for the current surge of sound-bite news coverage of the war in Iraq? The mainstream media? The American public?
Answer: both.
While the corporate media is driven by quarterly profit margins and prey upon its viewers’ psychological vulnerabilities, it is the media consumer who ultimately decides what the media reports and does not report. Although the laws of supply and demand do come into play in this profit-driven context, journalists have a higher calling and obligation to reporting the truth and what people need to know, in lieu of what people want to know.
Nonetheless, as Greg Mitchell’s new book, “So Wrong for So Long: How the Press, the Pundits — and the President — Failed on Iraq,” suggests, the mainstream media has blood on its hands when it comes to its flawed coverage leading up to the war in Iraq and the five years since it began.
Since former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards first announced his bid for the Democrat nomination in January 2007 in Des Moines, the American public has been consumed by the presidential race, which has helped feed the mainstream media’s obsession with covering the political horse race. Meanwhile nearly 1000 soldiers have been killed in Iraq since Edwards announced his candidacy.
While coverage of the presidential race receives top billing in the media, exit polls from many of the states that have already held their primaries and caucuses indicate that the economy is the top concern among voters, trumping health-care costs and the war in Iraq. The loss of jobs to overseas companies and the recent subprime lender meltdown have helped contribute to voters’ fears about the economy.
But rarely does the mainstream media hold the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan accountable for the impending or not impending economic recession. Newscasters and political pundits keep asking the million-dollar question, “Are we in a recession?” and pawn this off a if it was news in and of itself. Meanwhile our government keeps dropping an estimated $10 billion to $12 billion a month into the bottomless money pits of Iraq and Afghanistan. And this is only the front-end cost of the war.
Oftentimes economic experts have argued that the best way to revive an economy is by going to war, but ironically. President Bush’s decision to invade and indefinitely occupy Iraq is what has helped push our economy to the brink of a recession.
It’s the War, Stupid
I sensed the political winds changing during the Michigan primary, or nonprimary as far as the Democratic race goes, when the GOP focused on the economy as a means of shoring up support. This makes sense, given the industrial make-up of Michigan’s job market. Ever since then, the economy has been the top issue polled among likely voters, but the Democratic candidates only serve to shoot themselves in the foot if they ignore the $3 trillion white elephant in the room: the Iraq war.
Obama has made an attempt to connect the dots, but he hasn’t been vigilant enough about framing this argument in the minds of voters. It doesn’t help that the mainstream media has stoked a new fire in the Obama camp, fanning the flames of Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s controversial comments.
On the other hand, his opponent, Sen. Hillary Clinton, has had to spend time putting out small fires on the campaign trail, oftentimes ignited by her very own high-level surrogates such as adviser James Carville and her husband, former President Bill Clinton.
Meanwhile, the inferno in Iraq rages on.
Not only have the front-end costs of financing the Iraq war helped cripple our economy, but it’s the back-end costs that will keep the economy bed-ridden for years to come. In their new book, “The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Costs of the Iraq Conflict,” Linda Bilmes and Joseph Stiglitz argue that Americans will spend decades treating the physical and psychological wounds of Iraq veterans, and when the economic consequences of the invasion are taken into account, the costs will surpass the $3 trillion benchmark, nearly a third of the current debt the Bush administration has already helped accrue since its 2001 takeover.
Not only did the Bush administration not have an exit strategy for ending the war, but it had yet to implement a budget plan for paying for the strategy not have. Sounds like something straight out off Joseph Heller’s “Catch-22,” only more tragic, for the true cost of the war is the loss of human lives. These costs cannot be measured, nor can they be absorbed or paid back.
According to the National Priorities Project, the government has already spent more than $500 billion on the war in Iraq and estimates that Iowa taxpayers have paid $3.5 billion for the cost of the Iraq war through 2007. For the same amount of money, the group estimates that health care for 1,033,512 Iowans could have been provided, or 562,896 scholarships for university students could have been awarded, or 77,321 elementary students could have been hired.
This year, while Iowa lawmakers struggle to find funding to provide children with health care coverage or turn to the lottery as a means of replenishing funding for veterans and their families, try and remember one thing and one thing only:
It’s the war, stupid!
And you don’t need Oprah to tell you this to make it so.
Originally posted on the "Iowa Independent"
Showing posts with label Hillary Clinton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hillary Clinton. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Sunday, December 2, 2007
Human Right Campaign Calls Upon Democratic Hopefuls to Overturn ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’
Friday marked the fourteenth anniversary of the enactment of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) law which prohibits gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military. To mark the occasion, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) partnered with Servicemembers United (formerly Call to Duty), Log Cabin Republicans, Service Members Legal Defense Network and Liberty Education Forum, to host a three-day tribute this weekend. The event, “12,000 Flags for 12,000 Patriots,” took place at the National Mall in Washington, D.C., where 12,000 flags were displayed -- each one symbolizing a discharged service member under DADT.To raise awareness against DADT on the campaign trail in Iowa, the HRC kicked off its “Legacy of Service Tour” in Des Moines in June. "The eyes of the nation and the eyes of the world are on Iowa as we elect our next president," HRC President Joe Solmonese told the audience at the Iowa Historical Museum. The HRC’s mission to repeal the law and educate politicians and the public about the facts have been addressed on its web site.
Moreover, the HRC wants to put a face on the campaign by enlisting veterans directly affected by the policy. Sensing this new call to duty, a number of former service members have stepped forward to share how the DADT policy has negatively impacted their military careers and personal lives. This includes Marine veteran Eric Alva, who lost a leg in the Iraq War. Alva, who has become a spokesman for the “Legacy of Service Tour,” told the Des Moines audience: “I am a man who survived a war, a man who survived a battle, only to come home to another battle, and that battle is for equality.”
Nearly six month have passed since the kick-off event, and the HRC’s efforts to repeal DADT have flown under the radar on the presidential campaign trail. Not until last week’s CNN/YouTube Republican debate did the DADT resurface, albeit under suspicious circumstances, on the national stage.
Meanwhile, on the Democrat side, the HRC has taken a more proactive role in soliciting responses from the leading Democratic presidential candidates to the question: “If you are elected President, what concrete steps would you take to overturn ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell?’” The candidates’ responses were posted last week on the HRC’s web site.
While all of the candidates promised they would repeal DADT, asserting the policy is outdated and discriminatory, only Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois provided concrete steps to overturn the law. Sens. Chris Dodd of Connecticut and Hillary Clinton of New York took the first step by initiating the overturn of the process, but fell short in providing a litany of concrete steps they would use to accomplish their objective. Dodd said he would call for a meeting with the Joint Chiefs of Staff to draw up plans that would put an end to this policy within six months, whereas Clinton promised to work with high profile military leaders and retired military leaders who have called for the repeal of the law.
Although military leaders may share their insights as to what needs to happen, the DADT’s initial fate rests in the hands of the legislative branch, where the law was initially introduced and passed in 1993. If elected, Obama promised to work with Congress and place the weight of his administration behind enactment of the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, which will make nondiscrimination the official policy of the U.S. military.
The Military Readiness Enhancement Act (H.R. 1246), which repeals the current Department of Defense (DoD) policy concerning homosexuality in the Armed Forces, was first introduced in the House Feb. 28, 2007 by Rep. Martin Meehan, D-Mass. The amendment prohibits the Secretary of Defense and Secretary of Homeland Security from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation against any member of the Armed Forces or any person seeking to become a member. Moreover, the amendment authorizes the re-accession into the Armed Forces of otherwise qualified individuals previously separated for homosexuality, bisexuality, or homosexual conduct. Thus far, 136 House members have cosponsored the amendment, including Rep. Dave Loebsack, D-Iowa.
“I will task the Defense Department and the senior command structure in every branch of the armed forces with developing an action plan for the implementation of a full repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” Obama said in a statement. “And I will direct my Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security to develop procedures for taking re-accession requests from those qualified service members who were separated from the armed forces under Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and still want to serve their country.”
Obama promises to go even further, claiming the eradication of DADT will require more than just eliminating one statute. “It will require the implementation of anti-harassment policies and protocols for dealing with abusive or discriminatory behavior as we transition our armed forces away from a policy of discrimination,” Obama said in a statement. “The military must be our active partners in developing those policies and protocols.”
Joe Solmonese speaks at 12,000 Flags event
Originally posted on "Iowa Independent"
Sunday, October 21, 2007
The Politics of Biden’s MRAP Bill Hits Home in Iowa
Just as Beau Biden, a captain in the Delaware National Guard, had predicted in August at the Iowa Democratic Party Veteran’s Caucus Presidential Extravaganza in Des Moines, the vote on the emergency funding for the war in Iraq war has come back into play. Beau, the attorney general of Delaware, spoke on behalf of his father, Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, and told the room full of veterans that his father’s Democratic rivals’ “no” vote on the funding, despite the attached Biden amendment to fast track funding and production for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles, would come back to haunt them.
Beau’s words, prefaced with a common Biden family phrase “mark my words,” recently hit home in Iowa a few days ago when four members from the Ottumwa-based 833rd Engineer Company were wounded by a roadside bomb in Iraq. While patrolling an area near the Iraqi city of Samarra, an improvised explosive device (IED) detonated next to their vehicle. Two of the soldiers were seriously injured and flown to a military hospital at Landstuhl, Germany, while the other two were treated and returned to duty.
"They were in an RG-31 armored vehicle," Lt. Col. Gregory Hapgood, chief spokesman for the Iowa National Guard told the Des Moines Register. "If they'd been in a Humvee, they would have been killed. A Humvee couldn't have withstood the explosion."
Biden’s Democratic rivals, Sens. Hillary Clinton of New York, Chris Dodd of Connecticut, and Barack Obama of Illinois, voted against the bill but have stated they support appropriations for the MRAP– just not when it is specifically tied to an Iraq war funding bill that has no timelines for bringing the troops home. There’s the political rub that Beau alluded to in August. By voting against the funding bill, the Democratic candidates chose to send a political message to President Bush while simultaneously garnering support from the anti-war voting contingency.
In doing so, they risked the possibility of delaying production of vehicles that will protect the troops in what soldiers on the ground call “real-time”– meaning the next five minutes of their lives, which could be their last. In the war zone, there is no such thing as political time, and Beau, whose unit is scheduled to deploy to Iraq early next year, understands this difference. Beau also understands how the Republicans operate and how they will use such a vote against the Democrat who wins the nomination. Now that the MRAP issue has hit home in Iowa, Beau’s prediction has moved from the abstract to the concrete, something that may resonate with Iowa voters.
Asked about his differences with Clinton, Edwards and Obama on when to end the war in Iraq and bring our troops home, Senator Biden was quick to highlight this distinction at a campaign stop in Cedar Rapids today. “Clinton, Edwards and Obama say they cannot commit to bring our troops home until 2013. How can they say that, when they and the rest of the candidates ripped the skin off my back in May, when I was the only Senator running to vote to fund the troops?” Biden asked 150 people gathered at the 238 Teamsters’ Union.
“I voted to give our troops all the protection they needed. How can the three leading candidates, one of whom took out advertising in Iowa saying we need to vote “no,” say they’re going to keep troops there until 2013, yet they’re not going to fund them?” Biden asked. “Folks, that’s what I mean when I say we need to start telling the American people the truth. They’re telling you what you want to hear: End the war. But they are acknowledging they can’t end the war with any plan they have.”
Related reading: John Carlson’s column, “Biden Takes a Hit by Funding Vehicle That Saved Iowans” (Des Moines Register)
Originally posted on "Iowa Independent"
Beau’s words, prefaced with a common Biden family phrase “mark my words,” recently hit home in Iowa a few days ago when four members from the Ottumwa-based 833rd Engineer Company were wounded by a roadside bomb in Iraq. While patrolling an area near the Iraqi city of Samarra, an improvised explosive device (IED) detonated next to their vehicle. Two of the soldiers were seriously injured and flown to a military hospital at Landstuhl, Germany, while the other two were treated and returned to duty.
"They were in an RG-31 armored vehicle," Lt. Col. Gregory Hapgood, chief spokesman for the Iowa National Guard told the Des Moines Register. "If they'd been in a Humvee, they would have been killed. A Humvee couldn't have withstood the explosion."
Biden’s Democratic rivals, Sens. Hillary Clinton of New York, Chris Dodd of Connecticut, and Barack Obama of Illinois, voted against the bill but have stated they support appropriations for the MRAP– just not when it is specifically tied to an Iraq war funding bill that has no timelines for bringing the troops home. There’s the political rub that Beau alluded to in August. By voting against the funding bill, the Democratic candidates chose to send a political message to President Bush while simultaneously garnering support from the anti-war voting contingency.
In doing so, they risked the possibility of delaying production of vehicles that will protect the troops in what soldiers on the ground call “real-time”– meaning the next five minutes of their lives, which could be their last. In the war zone, there is no such thing as political time, and Beau, whose unit is scheduled to deploy to Iraq early next year, understands this difference. Beau also understands how the Republicans operate and how they will use such a vote against the Democrat who wins the nomination. Now that the MRAP issue has hit home in Iowa, Beau’s prediction has moved from the abstract to the concrete, something that may resonate with Iowa voters.
Asked about his differences with Clinton, Edwards and Obama on when to end the war in Iraq and bring our troops home, Senator Biden was quick to highlight this distinction at a campaign stop in Cedar Rapids today. “Clinton, Edwards and Obama say they cannot commit to bring our troops home until 2013. How can they say that, when they and the rest of the candidates ripped the skin off my back in May, when I was the only Senator running to vote to fund the troops?” Biden asked 150 people gathered at the 238 Teamsters’ Union.
“I voted to give our troops all the protection they needed. How can the three leading candidates, one of whom took out advertising in Iowa saying we need to vote “no,” say they’re going to keep troops there until 2013, yet they’re not going to fund them?” Biden asked. “Folks, that’s what I mean when I say we need to start telling the American people the truth. They’re telling you what you want to hear: End the war. But they are acknowledging they can’t end the war with any plan they have.”Related reading: John Carlson’s column, “Biden Takes a Hit by Funding Vehicle That Saved Iowans” (Des Moines Register)
Originally posted on "Iowa Independent"
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Iowa Veterans Want More Than Lip Service from Presidential Hopefuls
For the veterans attending the Veterans’ Caucus Presidential Extravaganza earlier this month, the fighting didn’t end with their military service. Instead, they faced a new battleground upon discharge: their government.
“We want to be sure that those who served in harm’s way aren’t left behind on the battlefield,” said Democratic presidential candidate Chris Dodd (see pic), a U.S. se
nator from Connecticut. “The old line in basic training is you don’t leave a buddy on the battlefield. The battlefield doesn’t end when you return from the theater of conflict; the battlefield for our 24 million veterans is going on here today.”
The event was intended to raise money for veterans and provide Democratic presidential candidates a forum to share their platforms for vets. Dodd was the only presidential candidate who spoke at the event; other candidates sent high-level representatives. The Aug. 13 forum was supposed to be nonpartisan, but Dodd quickly established a partisan tone, which the rest of the speakers emulated in a blistering critique of the Bush administration’s neglect of veterans.
“I’ve spent four different occasions on the Senate floor just to get body armor for those serving in Iraq, only to be defeated every single time by the Republicans, who could not come up with the votes to support the body armor or compensate the families and communities who purchased body armor for their loved ones in Iraq and Afghanistan,” said Dodd, a National Guard veteran. “The Don Rumsfeld line, ‘You don’t get the Army you deserve, you get the Army you got,’ reflects this administration’s attitude toward our young people, which they placed in difficult situations without even the most basic protection. This is deeply disturbing to me, and when I hear comments about how much they care and compare this with the actions of this administration, these words ring hollow.”
A number of veterans at the forum said they have grown tired of politicians paying lip service without ever producing results. They also feel the media have neglected their concerns. Joe Stutler, an Army veteran from Cedar Rapids, said he was looking for two things: honor and respect. “All the benefits in the world are available and possible, but not until Americans realize that without veterans, there is no America. Somebody has to defend us; we’re called and we go. There should be some honor and respect in that,” Stutler said in response to former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack’s solicitation for veteran concerns. Vilsack was speaking on behalf of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.
“If Americans began honoring and respecting that service, there would be no talk of a draft, because people would be fighting to get in instead of clamoring around in an RV around the green zone in Iowa thinking that’s a patriotic duty,” Stutler added, before setting his sights on the media or in this case, the absence of the media. “I don’t see a room full of media here, but I saw it for labor, GLBT and minorities. Where’s the respect from Americans for veterans?” 
“I’m sorry there isn’t any media here, but there’s going to be a lot of money put behind that ad,” Vilsack said. “Every person in Iowa is going to be asking: What do you mean our veterans are invisible? And this will give you an opening to talk to your friends and neighbors.” While no members from the major media covered the presidential extravaganza, Clinton’s new ad was introduced at a press conference hosted by Vilsack, which merited not one or two, but three, articles in the Des Moines Register.
The forum’s speakers tailored their speeches to address veterans’ feelings of governmental neglect once they’ve fufilled their contracted serv
ice obligations. Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden (see pic), who spoke on behalf of his father, Sen. Joe Biden, had this to say: “All of you veterans went over to war and served without talking about what you did and what medals you won. You came home and went about your business.” The younger Biden is a captain in the Delaware National Guard, which is scheduled to deploy to Iraq sometime next year. “But what you haven’t done is you haven’t forgotten. You’ve kept the covenant. Whether you were drafted or volunteered, it doesn’t matter; you did what your country asked for you.
“The first thing my father would do as president is honor the covenant you made, so you’re not caught like so many Korean and Vietnam veterans in between the greatest generation and this Iraqi war generation,” Biden said. “We cannot forget the people in the middle, and must honor all veterans of foreign wars.”
Speaking on behalf of candidate John Edwards, Major Gen. Youngman reiterated Edwards’ campaign platform of honoring "our sacred contract" with veterans. “Edwards believes we need to fully fund the VA, and the reason this isn’t happening is because of the annual dance that goes on in Washington,” Youngman said. “Bush sends over a VA budget that everyone knows is far from adequate, then we hear some speeches on the congressional floors, and then Congress adds a few amendments, then they turn around and send out campaign mailers saying they’re fighting for veterans in Washington.
“John Edwards understand there’s more to patriotism than waving a flag and sending somebody else’s children to war. He understands there’s more to taking care of our veterans than getting together with veterans for a photo opportunity,” Youngman said. “The mindset that has been in place since this war started is that a soldier expense has been treated as a labor expense, and it’s something we try to reduce. That kind of mindset says it’s OK for the secretary of Defense to send out letters of condolences to families, who just had the devastating loss of a loved one, signed by a signature machine.”
The presidential forum reached the emotional apex when New Mexico Gov. Richardson’s representative, Rick Bolanos (see pic), took the stage and shared his thoughts on his Vietnam War experiences and the Swift Boat Veterans, who disputed 2004 presidential candidate John Kerry's heroics in Vietnam. Along with his three brothers, Bolanos stepped up and volunteered to serve in Vietnam. They were the only four brothers in America serving simultaneously in Vietnam.
“When I saw people wearing purple heart band-aids, I thought to myself, that’s really cruel,” Bolanos said, before retelling a Vietnam War story. “While serving in Vietnam, my brother
and I saw a young Marine fall down as he cupped his hand to his throat. When his hands fell down, we saw blood spurt from his neck. He fell and bled to death right in front of our eyes. When we asked the medic what happened, he told us that a small piece of shrapnel had severed his artery. What would this administration and the Swift Boat Veterans have said had he survived? Would they have denigrated his service if had come back and run for president of the United States?”
With his hands and voice trembling with emotion, Bolanos continued his story. “And what would this administration and the Swift Boat Veterans have said to my best friend, Mack, who I held in my arms as he looked up and said, ‘Rick, don’t let me die.’ For that one instant I wanted to exchange my life for his, and I was angry at my God for the first time, because I didn’t have enough hands to cover all the wounds he had to stop the bleeding.
“I ask you as a veteran, what would the administration and the Swift Boat Veterans have said had Mack come back and run for the president of the United States? This administration and these people do not have the right to pit one veteran against another. They don’t have the right to denigrate a veterans’ service, because not one of them -- not Karl Rove, not President Bush, not Dick Cheney -- ever answered their country’s call.”
“We want to be sure that those who served in harm’s way aren’t left behind on the battlefield,” said Democratic presidential candidate Chris Dodd (see pic), a U.S. se
nator from Connecticut. “The old line in basic training is you don’t leave a buddy on the battlefield. The battlefield doesn’t end when you return from the theater of conflict; the battlefield for our 24 million veterans is going on here today.”The event was intended to raise money for veterans and provide Democratic presidential candidates a forum to share their platforms for vets. Dodd was the only presidential candidate who spoke at the event; other candidates sent high-level representatives. The Aug. 13 forum was supposed to be nonpartisan, but Dodd quickly established a partisan tone, which the rest of the speakers emulated in a blistering critique of the Bush administration’s neglect of veterans.
“I’ve spent four different occasions on the Senate floor just to get body armor for those serving in Iraq, only to be defeated every single time by the Republicans, who could not come up with the votes to support the body armor or compensate the families and communities who purchased body armor for their loved ones in Iraq and Afghanistan,” said Dodd, a National Guard veteran. “The Don Rumsfeld line, ‘You don’t get the Army you deserve, you get the Army you got,’ reflects this administration’s attitude toward our young people, which they placed in difficult situations without even the most basic protection. This is deeply disturbing to me, and when I hear comments about how much they care and compare this with the actions of this administration, these words ring hollow.”
A number of veterans at the forum said they have grown tired of politicians paying lip service without ever producing results. They also feel the media have neglected their concerns. Joe Stutler, an Army veteran from Cedar Rapids, said he was looking for two things: honor and respect. “All the benefits in the world are available and possible, but not until Americans realize that without veterans, there is no America. Somebody has to defend us; we’re called and we go. There should be some honor and respect in that,” Stutler said in response to former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack’s solicitation for veteran concerns. Vilsack was speaking on behalf of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.
“If Americans began honoring and respecting that service, there would be no talk of a draft, because people would be fighting to get in instead of clamoring around in an RV around the green zone in Iowa thinking that’s a patriotic duty,” Stutler added, before setting his sights on the media or in this case, the absence of the media. “I don’t see a room full of media here, but I saw it for labor, GLBT and minorities. Where’s the respect from Americans for veterans?”
Using this as his cue, Vilsack talked about Clinton’s new television ad about society’s “invisible” people, which had been released in Iowa earlier that day. “In essence, you are invisible, and one of the groups Clinton mentions in her new television ad is veterans. She really never believed that we would get to a point in this country where veterans are invisible, but that’s where we are at,” Vilsack said.
“I’m sorry there isn’t any media here, but there’s going to be a lot of money put behind that ad,” Vilsack said. “Every person in Iowa is going to be asking: What do you mean our veterans are invisible? And this will give you an opening to talk to your friends and neighbors.” While no members from the major media covered the presidential extravaganza, Clinton’s new ad was introduced at a press conference hosted by Vilsack, which merited not one or two, but three, articles in the Des Moines Register.The forum’s speakers tailored their speeches to address veterans’ feelings of governmental neglect once they’ve fufilled their contracted serv
ice obligations. Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden (see pic), who spoke on behalf of his father, Sen. Joe Biden, had this to say: “All of you veterans went over to war and served without talking about what you did and what medals you won. You came home and went about your business.” The younger Biden is a captain in the Delaware National Guard, which is scheduled to deploy to Iraq sometime next year. “But what you haven’t done is you haven’t forgotten. You’ve kept the covenant. Whether you were drafted or volunteered, it doesn’t matter; you did what your country asked for you.“The first thing my father would do as president is honor the covenant you made, so you’re not caught like so many Korean and Vietnam veterans in between the greatest generation and this Iraqi war generation,” Biden said. “We cannot forget the people in the middle, and must honor all veterans of foreign wars.”
Speaking on behalf of candidate John Edwards, Major Gen. Youngman reiterated Edwards’ campaign platform of honoring "our sacred contract" with veterans. “Edwards believes we need to fully fund the VA, and the reason this isn’t happening is because of the annual dance that goes on in Washington,” Youngman said. “Bush sends over a VA budget that everyone knows is far from adequate, then we hear some speeches on the congressional floors, and then Congress adds a few amendments, then they turn around and send out campaign mailers saying they’re fighting for veterans in Washington.
“John Edwards understand there’s more to patriotism than waving a flag and sending somebody else’s children to war. He understands there’s more to taking care of our veterans than getting together with veterans for a photo opportunity,” Youngman said. “The mindset that has been in place since this war started is that a soldier expense has been treated as a labor expense, and it’s something we try to reduce. That kind of mindset says it’s OK for the secretary of Defense to send out letters of condolences to families, who just had the devastating loss of a loved one, signed by a signature machine.”
The presidential forum reached the emotional apex when New Mexico Gov. Richardson’s representative, Rick Bolanos (see pic), took the stage and shared his thoughts on his Vietnam War experiences and the Swift Boat Veterans, who disputed 2004 presidential candidate John Kerry's heroics in Vietnam. Along with his three brothers, Bolanos stepped up and volunteered to serve in Vietnam. They were the only four brothers in America serving simultaneously in Vietnam.
“When I saw people wearing purple heart band-aids, I thought to myself, that’s really cruel,” Bolanos said, before retelling a Vietnam War story. “While serving in Vietnam, my brother
and I saw a young Marine fall down as he cupped his hand to his throat. When his hands fell down, we saw blood spurt from his neck. He fell and bled to death right in front of our eyes. When we asked the medic what happened, he told us that a small piece of shrapnel had severed his artery. What would this administration and the Swift Boat Veterans have said had he survived? Would they have denigrated his service if had come back and run for president of the United States?”With his hands and voice trembling with emotion, Bolanos continued his story. “And what would this administration and the Swift Boat Veterans have said to my best friend, Mack, who I held in my arms as he looked up and said, ‘Rick, don’t let me die.’ For that one instant I wanted to exchange my life for his, and I was angry at my God for the first time, because I didn’t have enough hands to cover all the wounds he had to stop the bleeding.
“I ask you as a veteran, what would the administration and the Swift Boat Veterans have said had Mack come back and run for the president of the United States? This administration and these people do not have the right to pit one veteran against another. They don’t have the right to denigrate a veterans’ service, because not one of them -- not Karl Rove, not President Bush, not Dick Cheney -- ever answered their country’s call.”
Sunday, July 29, 2007
The Iowa Front: Military & Veterans’ Weekly Roundup
Veterans/Political Fronts
“Democrats Endeavor to Show Strength on Defense”: The Democratic presidential candidates have been tapping into Iowa veteran’s unease about the policies under President Bush’s administration, while a number of veterans have switched their allegiances to the Democrat Party. The GOP has traditionally garnered the vet vote, but they can no longer take this bloc of voters for granted. Ray Bagg, a Vietnam veteran from Des Moines, who considered himself to be a Republican when he first returned home from Vietnam, said the notion that advocates of a change in strategy in Iraq are weak on defense is "b.s.” "I'm getting to the point where I want to be rebellious," said Bagg, 61. "I'm just angry." (Des Moines Register)
“Clinton v. Obama, Veterans Version”: This week, the "Commission on Care of America's Wounded Warriors" issued recommendations for improving treatment for veterans who return injured from the front. Clinton's proposal would amend the Family and Medical Leave Act -- one of the first major bills of her husband's presidency -- to allow up to six months leave for eligible relatives of service members with combat-related injuries. Meanwhile, Obama passed around his own pitch, providing a full year of job protection, and, as an email from Obama's Senate office points out, "unlike FMLA, which only covers spouses, parents, and children, the Military
Family Job Protection Act covers siblings who are caring for recovering service members." (Washington Post Blog)
“Richardson Begins Airing ‘Heroes’ Ads in Iowa”: Touting his record as New Mexico's governor and commander-in-chief, Gov. Bill Richardson released his latest television ad in Iowa. The ad, "Heroes," highlights Richardson's support for veterans and how he led the national effort to raise the death benefits for the families of fallen soldiers. During campaign stops in Iowa, Richardson said he would give all veterans a "Heroes Health Card" that would allow them to receive health care wherever they need it. Currently, veterans are required to access their health benefits at designated veterans' hospitals, which creates an accessibility burden for those veterans who don't live near them. (Iowa Independent)
Military/Political Front
“Politicians Line Up Behind Friends and Families to Salute Return of Iowa’s 133rd Infantry”: Having completed the longest combat posting that any Iowa unit has served since World War II, the 640 National Guard soldiers of the 1st Battalion, 133rd Infantry returned Wednesday to Iowa. After spending nearly two years on active duty, 17 months of which were in Iraq, the Ironman Battalion's soldiers were greeted by an estimated 8,000 people at Riverfront Stadium in Waterloo. Meanwhile, Iowa's political delegation offered their gratitude by honoring the 133rd from the nation's capital. (Iowa Independent)
“Democrats Endeavor to Show Strength on Defense”: The Democratic presidential candidates have been tapping into Iowa veteran’s unease about the policies under President Bush’s administration, while a number of veterans have switched their allegiances to the Democrat Party. The GOP has traditionally garnered the vet vote, but they can no longer take this bloc of voters for granted. Ray Bagg, a Vietnam veteran from Des Moines, who considered himself to be a Republican when he first returned home from Vietnam, said the notion that advocates of a change in strategy in Iraq are weak on defense is "b.s.” "I'm getting to the point where I want to be rebellious," said Bagg, 61. "I'm just angry." (Des Moines Register)
“Clinton v. Obama, Veterans Version”: This week, the "Commission on Care of America's Wounded Warriors" issued recommendations for improving treatment for veterans who return injured from the front. Clinton's proposal would amend the Family and Medical Leave Act -- one of the first major bills of her husband's presidency -- to allow up to six months leave for eligible relatives of service members with combat-related injuries. Meanwhile, Obama passed around his own pitch, providing a full year of job protection, and, as an email from Obama's Senate office points out, "unlike FMLA, which only covers spouses, parents, and children, the Military
Family Job Protection Act covers siblings who are caring for recovering service members." (Washington Post Blog)
“Richardson Begins Airing ‘Heroes’ Ads in Iowa”: Touting his record as New Mexico's governor and commander-in-chief, Gov. Bill Richardson released his latest television ad in Iowa. The ad, "Heroes," highlights Richardson's support for veterans and how he led the national effort to raise the death benefits for the families of fallen soldiers. During campaign stops in Iowa, Richardson said he would give all veterans a "Heroes Health Card" that would allow them to receive health care wherever they need it. Currently, veterans are required to access their health benefits at designated veterans' hospitals, which creates an accessibility burden for those veterans who don't live near them. (Iowa Independent)
Military/Political Front
“Politicians Line Up Behind Friends and Families to Salute Return of Iowa’s 133rd Infantry”: Having completed the longest combat posting that any Iowa unit has served since World War II, the 640 National Guard soldiers of the 1st Battalion, 133rd Infantry returned Wednesday to Iowa. After spending nearly two years on active duty, 17 months of which were in Iraq, the Ironman Battalion's soldiers were greeted by an estimated 8,000 people at Riverfront Stadium in Waterloo. Meanwhile, Iowa's political delegation offered their gratitude by honoring the 133rd from the nation's capital. (Iowa Independent)
Sunday, July 22, 2007
The Iowa Front: Military & Veterans’ Weekly Roundup
Veterans/Political Fronts
“Three-Star General Promotes Obama as Next Commander in Chief”: Sen. Barack Obama may not have been in Iowa on Wednesday, but his presence was felt during his campaign's "Commander in Chief" Tour. "Obama has not served in the military but it was clear, when I watched him bond with our soldiers stationed in Africa, that Obama loves the military," retired Air Force Gen. Scott Gration told a crowd gathered at the Solon Public Library. "Barack understands how valuable our soldiers are and the sacrifices they're making for our country. He understands that this is a force that cannot be squandered and must be used at the right time to preserve our interests. That's why Obama should be our next commander in chief." (Iowa Independent)
“Clinton Campaign Announces the Names of 316 Iowa Military Veteran Supporters”: Iowans for Hillary today announced the names of 316 Iowans who have served our nation in the armed services and are supporting Hillary Clinton. "In the Senate, Hillary fought to secure funding for veterans’ hospitals, to reduce prescription drug prices for veterans, and provide: additional support for disabled veterans,” said Sgt. Major Dean Cox USA (Ret.). “I know that she will continue to stand up for us when she is in the White House." (Clinton Press Release)
Military Front
“Books: 'Sisters' Face the Fire in Iraq”: Right now, women make up about 10 percent of the American troops serving in the Iraq and Afghanistan. In her new book, “Band of Sisters,” Drake University graduate Kirsten Homsted explores the role and experiences of women in warfare. "I really wanted to be the first to show women in combat and how that issue was unfolding on the battlefield," she said. Homsted’s book profiles few Iowa women who served in these wars. (Des Moines Register)
“Soldiers of 133rd Begin Arriving Home”: After 22 months of service the soldiers of the First Battalion, 133rd Infantry are coming home. Originally slated to return in April, the 133rd, based out of Northeast Iowa and containing soldiers from all over the state had its tour extended in January. “If you look at the entire time, it’s fairly remarkable,” said Lt. Col. Greg Hapgood of the National Guard. "I think if you look at this…one of the longest serving National Guard units on active duty in the global war on terror. These folks have really distinguished themselves.” (Press-Citizen)
Read other articles regarding the 133rd’s return: WCF Courier, The Messenger, and the Sioux City Journal.
“Three-Star General Promotes Obama as Next Commander in Chief”: Sen. Barack Obama may not have been in Iowa on Wednesday, but his presence was felt during his campaign's "Commander in Chief" Tour. "Obama has not served in the military but it was clear, when I watched him bond with our soldiers stationed in Africa, that Obama loves the military," retired Air Force Gen. Scott Gration told a crowd gathered at the Solon Public Library. "Barack understands how valuable our soldiers are and the sacrifices they're making for our country. He understands that this is a force that cannot be squandered and must be used at the right time to preserve our interests. That's why Obama should be our next commander in chief." (Iowa Independent)
“Clinton Campaign Announces the Names of 316 Iowa Military Veteran Supporters”: Iowans for Hillary today announced the names of 316 Iowans who have served our nation in the armed services and are supporting Hillary Clinton. "In the Senate, Hillary fought to secure funding for veterans’ hospitals, to reduce prescription drug prices for veterans, and provide: additional support for disabled veterans,” said Sgt. Major Dean Cox USA (Ret.). “I know that she will continue to stand up for us when she is in the White House." (Clinton Press Release)
Military Front
“Books: 'Sisters' Face the Fire in Iraq”: Right now, women make up about 10 percent of the American troops serving in the Iraq and Afghanistan. In her new book, “Band of Sisters,” Drake University graduate Kirsten Homsted explores the role and experiences of women in warfare. "I really wanted to be the first to show women in combat and how that issue was unfolding on the battlefield," she said. Homsted’s book profiles few Iowa women who served in these wars. (Des Moines Register)
“Soldiers of 133rd Begin Arriving Home”: After 22 months of service the soldiers of the First Battalion, 133rd Infantry are coming home. Originally slated to return in April, the 133rd, based out of Northeast Iowa and containing soldiers from all over the state had its tour extended in January. “If you look at the entire time, it’s fairly remarkable,” said Lt. Col. Greg Hapgood of the National Guard. "I think if you look at this…one of the longest serving National Guard units on active duty in the global war on terror. These folks have really distinguished themselves.” (Press-Citizen)
Read other articles regarding the 133rd’s return: WCF Courier, The Messenger, and the Sioux City Journal.
Sunday, July 15, 2007
The Iowa Front: Military & Veterans’ Weekly Roundup
Veterans/Political Fronts
“Don’t ‘Fire” Draws Veteran’s Ire”: Jim Kantaris, a Korean veteran, was more than a little perturbed when he found out his VFW post wouldn’t be able to fire off their guns during a 4th of July parade in Mason City due to the security measures made to accommodate the Clintons. "There's too much political stuff," Kantaris, quartermaster of Post 733, told the Mason City Globe Gazette. "They're making us change 50 years of tradition because of two people. And one of them is a draft-dodger who turned the White House into a whorehouse." Kantaris later apologized for his comments, but the breaking of a 50-year tradition still did not resonate well with fellow VFW members. Read more of Jim Carlson’s article in the Des Moines Register.
“Obama Aims to Quell Defense Doubts”: Sen. Barack Obama kicks of his “Commander in Chief” tour this week in Iowa. A group of military veterans who served in Iraq, including some from Iowa, will campaign in the state this week in support of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. They will be joined by Retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Scott Gration as they cross the state. For more information about the tour and schedule of events, go to the Des Moines Register.
“Golf Program Will Help Vets”: Injured and disabled veterans soon will get the opportunity to develop their swing on the area's newest golf course.Thanks to a new partnership between the Blue Top Ridge at Riverside golf course, the Iowa PGA and the VA Iowa City Health Care System, the Iowa Veterans for Golf four-part program is intended to improve the mental, social, physical and emotional well-being for veterans served by the medical center. (The Press-Citizen)
“Grassley Announces $7.6 Million for Veterans Cemetery in Van Meter”: Sen. Chuck Grassley today announced that the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs has awarded a $7.6 million grant to create a new State Veterans Cemetery in Van Meter. The new cemetery will be called the Iowa Veterans Cemetery and is the first State Veterans Cemetery in Iowa. Nearly 70,000 veterans and their families live within the service area of this Dallas County Cemetery.
Military Front
“Two Return, One Goes Back: Second Tour of Iraq Separates Pair with Similar Backgrounds”: chronicles two members of the Iowa National Guard’s 833rd Engineer Company, which is scheduled to redeploy to Iraq later this month. Mark McLaughlin and Jason Beatty had become the best of friends while serving in Iraq, but they’ll be separated during this upcoming tour of duty, because Beatty has been diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Read more about their relationship and struggles in Mark Kilen’s Des Moines Register article.
“Republicans Defeat Troop Readiness Amendment”: A measure that would improve military readiness and require periods of down time for National Guard and reservists returning from Iraq and Afghanistan before redeploying them was defeated Wednesday by a Senate Republican filibuster. At the very minimum, the proposed down-time requirements would be equal to the time of served during previous deployment. Currently, there are no mandated restrictions set by the Department of Defense.
The amendment, S. AMDT. 2012, was introduced by Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., as part of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, which is currently being debated in both chambers of Congress. The vote was 56-41 to end debate on Webb's amendment, with 60 votes needed to move to a full up-or-down vote on the Senate floor.
After the filibuster succeeded, Webb, a Vietnam War veteran, shared his disappointment on the Senate floor with Republican colleagues: "Today the Republicans decided to filibuster an amendment that goes straight to the well-being of our troops. I deeply regret this move. I would remind my colleagues on the Republican side of the aisle that the American people are watching us today. They expect us to take the sort of positive action that might stabilize the operational environment in which are troops are being sent again and again."
“Don’t ‘Fire” Draws Veteran’s Ire”: Jim Kantaris, a Korean veteran, was more than a little perturbed when he found out his VFW post wouldn’t be able to fire off their guns during a 4th of July parade in Mason City due to the security measures made to accommodate the Clintons. "There's too much political stuff," Kantaris, quartermaster of Post 733, told the Mason City Globe Gazette. "They're making us change 50 years of tradition because of two people. And one of them is a draft-dodger who turned the White House into a whorehouse." Kantaris later apologized for his comments, but the breaking of a 50-year tradition still did not resonate well with fellow VFW members. Read more of Jim Carlson’s article in the Des Moines Register.
“Obama Aims to Quell Defense Doubts”: Sen. Barack Obama kicks of his “Commander in Chief” tour this week in Iowa. A group of military veterans who served in Iraq, including some from Iowa, will campaign in the state this week in support of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. They will be joined by Retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Scott Gration as they cross the state. For more information about the tour and schedule of events, go to the Des Moines Register.
“Golf Program Will Help Vets”: Injured and disabled veterans soon will get the opportunity to develop their swing on the area's newest golf course.Thanks to a new partnership between the Blue Top Ridge at Riverside golf course, the Iowa PGA and the VA Iowa City Health Care System, the Iowa Veterans for Golf four-part program is intended to improve the mental, social, physical and emotional well-being for veterans served by the medical center. (The Press-Citizen)
“Grassley Announces $7.6 Million for Veterans Cemetery in Van Meter”: Sen. Chuck Grassley today announced that the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs has awarded a $7.6 million grant to create a new State Veterans Cemetery in Van Meter. The new cemetery will be called the Iowa Veterans Cemetery and is the first State Veterans Cemetery in Iowa. Nearly 70,000 veterans and their families live within the service area of this Dallas County Cemetery.
Military Front
“Two Return, One Goes Back: Second Tour of Iraq Separates Pair with Similar Backgrounds”: chronicles two members of the Iowa National Guard’s 833rd Engineer Company, which is scheduled to redeploy to Iraq later this month. Mark McLaughlin and Jason Beatty had become the best of friends while serving in Iraq, but they’ll be separated during this upcoming tour of duty, because Beatty has been diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Read more about their relationship and struggles in Mark Kilen’s Des Moines Register article.
“Republicans Defeat Troop Readiness Amendment”: A measure that would improve military readiness and require periods of down time for National Guard and reservists returning from Iraq and Afghanistan before redeploying them was defeated Wednesday by a Senate Republican filibuster. At the very minimum, the proposed down-time requirements would be equal to the time of served during previous deployment. Currently, there are no mandated restrictions set by the Department of Defense.
The amendment, S. AMDT. 2012, was introduced by Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., as part of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, which is currently being debated in both chambers of Congress. The vote was 56-41 to end debate on Webb's amendment, with 60 votes needed to move to a full up-or-down vote on the Senate floor.
After the filibuster succeeded, Webb, a Vietnam War veteran, shared his disappointment on the Senate floor with Republican colleagues: "Today the Republicans decided to filibuster an amendment that goes straight to the well-being of our troops. I deeply regret this move. I would remind my colleagues on the Republican side of the aisle that the American people are watching us today. They expect us to take the sort of positive action that might stabilize the operational environment in which are troops are being sent again and again."
Monday, June 11, 2007
No Exit: The Plight of Veterans’ Health Care
The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional to how they perceive how the veterans of earlier wars were treated and appreciated by their nation. --George Washington
For presidential hopefuls, Memorial Day serves as an opportunity to participate in memorial services and subsequent photo opportunities, while paying tribute to America’s fallen soldiers. This year was no exception, especially in Iowa, as politicians offered their support of the troops currently serving overseas. Now that the post-Memorial Day political dust has fallen, the question facing American voters is to what extent politicians support our troops, in particular, those veteran soldiers returning from the theaters of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, where over 1.5 million Americans have served thus far.
Among these returning veterans, VA hospitals have seen a surge in health-related issues, both physical and psychological, that have far outpaced the funding provided by the federal government. Consequently, one of the biggest struggles between the Bush administration and veterans has been the fight over veterans’ health care policy. In 2006, Congress had to enact emergency legislation on two occasions to help supplement the VA’s budget by $1.4 billion to help bridge the funding gap. And it appears the 2007 budget is destined to fall short as well. In a study, “The Independent Budget,” coauthored by the DAV, AMVETS, the Paralyzed Veterans of America, and the VFW concluded that:
While stumping for veterans in Iowa, Sen. Barack Obama, who voted against the Iraq war supplemental funding bill, faced critics, who charged him with not supporting the troops. Obama responded that the best way to demonstrate support for troops is putting programs in place to support them. "When our veterans come home we want to do more than slap a yellow sticker on the back of an SUV,'' Obama said. “We want to honor their service with health care if they get hurt and support for their families.'' Obama noted in his speech to Iowa veternans that there is no comprehensive plan to prepare for a soldier's return and one-third of the troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan are suffering from traumatic brain injury, post-traumatic stress disorder and other psychological problems.
Obama’s Democrat rivals, John Edwards and Sen. Hillary Clinton, also stumped for veterans in Iowa last weekend and addressed the need to focus more attention on veterans’ health care. All three of these candidates have addressed veterans’ health care issues on their campaign websites:
Barack Obama: “Honoring Our Veterans”
John Edwards: “Sacred Contract with Our Military and Veterans Community”
Hillary Clinton: “Fulfilling Our Promises to Veterans”
After perusing the rest of the Democratic candidates’ web sites, the only other candidate to specifically address veterans’ health care is Dennis Kucinich.
Of the GOP presidential hopefuls, the only candidate to address veteran’s health care issues on his website is John McCain ( “Commitment to America’s Service Members: Past and Present”), the only veteran among all the candidates running for president. Most of the GOP candidates have taken an aggressive, hawk stance on the war in Iraq thus far, however, only one of them is openly addressing the inevitable consequences of this stance, at least not on their campaign websites. Ironically, it’s these very same candidates who have attacked the Democrat hopefuls for not supporting the troops.
The Bush administration has drawn fire from both sides for not having an “exit strategy” before going to Iraq, and now, four years later, our wounded troops returning from the theaters of war are seeing that the same holds true on the this end as well.
For presidential hopefuls, Memorial Day serves as an opportunity to participate in memorial services and subsequent photo opportunities, while paying tribute to America’s fallen soldiers. This year was no exception, especially in Iowa, as politicians offered their support of the troops currently serving overseas. Now that the post-Memorial Day political dust has fallen, the question facing American voters is to what extent politicians support our troops, in particular, those veteran soldiers returning from the theaters of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, where over 1.5 million Americans have served thus far.
Among these returning veterans, VA hospitals have seen a surge in health-related issues, both physical and psychological, that have far outpaced the funding provided by the federal government. Consequently, one of the biggest struggles between the Bush administration and veterans has been the fight over veterans’ health care policy. In 2006, Congress had to enact emergency legislation on two occasions to help supplement the VA’s budget by $1.4 billion to help bridge the funding gap. And it appears the 2007 budget is destined to fall short as well. In a study, “The Independent Budget,” coauthored by the DAV, AMVETS, the Paralyzed Veterans of America, and the VFW concluded that:
Congress will need to appropriate $26 billion for veterans’ medical needs just to maintain current service levels. The Administration’s budget for FY 2007 seeks $24.7 billion in appropriations for veterans’ medical services, which falls $1.3 billion short of the IB’s recommendation. The President’s FY 2007 medical care budget slightly increases the mental health services capacity; however, it continues the hiring freeze of all other direct health care providers at a time when an influx of new veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will place substantial new demands upon a system already struggling to meet its mission. This budget proposal estimates that only 109,191 veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars will seek treatment in 2007. This reflects a decrease of 1,375 below the number of these new war veterans the VA estimates it will treat in 2006.This years’ budget for veterans’ health care expenses is optimistic and assumes fewer vets will seek treatment, which puts VA medical facilities in a financial quagmire. While the presidential hopefuls preach platitudes of support for the troops and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, voters need to weigh how vigilante they are in supporting the effects these wars are having on the welfare of out troops and their families.
While stumping for veterans in Iowa, Sen. Barack Obama, who voted against the Iraq war supplemental funding bill, faced critics, who charged him with not supporting the troops. Obama responded that the best way to demonstrate support for troops is putting programs in place to support them. "When our veterans come home we want to do more than slap a yellow sticker on the back of an SUV,'' Obama said. “We want to honor their service with health care if they get hurt and support for their families.'' Obama noted in his speech to Iowa veternans that there is no comprehensive plan to prepare for a soldier's return and one-third of the troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan are suffering from traumatic brain injury, post-traumatic stress disorder and other psychological problems.
Obama’s Democrat rivals, John Edwards and Sen. Hillary Clinton, also stumped for veterans in Iowa last weekend and addressed the need to focus more attention on veterans’ health care. All three of these candidates have addressed veterans’ health care issues on their campaign websites:
Barack Obama: “Honoring Our Veterans”
John Edwards: “Sacred Contract with Our Military and Veterans Community”
Hillary Clinton: “Fulfilling Our Promises to Veterans”
After perusing the rest of the Democratic candidates’ web sites, the only other candidate to specifically address veterans’ health care is Dennis Kucinich.
Of the GOP presidential hopefuls, the only candidate to address veteran’s health care issues on his website is John McCain ( “Commitment to America’s Service Members: Past and Present”), the only veteran among all the candidates running for president. Most of the GOP candidates have taken an aggressive, hawk stance on the war in Iraq thus far, however, only one of them is openly addressing the inevitable consequences of this stance, at least not on their campaign websites. Ironically, it’s these very same candidates who have attacked the Democrat hopefuls for not supporting the troops.
The Bush administration has drawn fire from both sides for not having an “exit strategy” before going to Iraq, and now, four years later, our wounded troops returning from the theaters of war are seeing that the same holds true on the this end as well.
Democratic Presidential Hopefuls Stump for Vets in Iowa
Two of the Democratic presidential hopefuls, John Edwards and Sen. Hillary Clinton, descended upon Iowa over Memorial Day weekend, crossing the state and pitching their support for Veterans. Although Sen. Joe Biden’s presence registered on Iowa’s political radar, in lieu of addressing veterans’ issues, he spent most of his time on the stump defending his support of the Iraq War supplemental funding bill. On the Republican side, there were no sightings of presidential hopefuls stumping for veterans in Iowa.
John Edwards’s campaign has become ubiquitous in Iowa and this weekend was no exception. Edwards unveiled his “Sacred Contract with Our Military and Veterans Community” and made this the focal point of his most recent Iowa tour:
“I believe in a sacred contract between our country and America’s veterans and military families. We must stand by those who stand by us. When our service men and women sacrifice so much to defend our freedom and secure peace around the world, we have a moral obligation to take care of them and their families.”
In a press release, Edwards provided an overview of the three cornerstones of his end of the contract, focusing on guaranteeing quality health care for veterans, supporting military families, and providing education and economic opportunities for civilian life.
While stumping for veterans in Oelwien, Edwards told a crowd at the Dancing Lion, “"We have a sacred responsibility to the men and women in Iraq. Every troop should be evaluated when they return to see what they want to do and make sure they can do it.”
One thing missing from Edwards’s stump speeches in Iowa, at least explicitly, was his “Support the Troops./Stop the War” campaign, which was scheduled to officially launch Memorial Day Weekend. The campaign’s intent was to reclaim patriotism by making the distinction between supporting the troops, while simultaneously criticizing the Iraq War and calling for its end, an act of patriotism. A large part of the reason Edwards may have stepped back from his call for Americans to “get vocal” and “get active” in opposing the Iraq War on Memorial Day is the criticisms targeted at his campaign on behalf of veterans groups:
Paul Morin, national commander of the American Legion, posted an open letter of the group’s website blasting Edwards for what Morin says is an inappropriate political calculation that “blatantly violated the sanctity of this most special day…Revolting is a kind word for it,” Morin wrote. “It’s as inappropriate as a political bumper sticker on an Arlington headstone.”
For some veterans, Memorial Day is considered sacred and should not be politicized, whether explicitly or implicitly. This holds true for Joe Davis, spokesman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW), who said his group is also planning to pen an open letter denouncing Edwards’s call to protest:
“Memorial Day is a solemn occasion to remember the service and sacrifice of more than 1 million American servicemen and -women who gave their lives to create our nation, to save our union, and to help free the world from tyranny. It is not a time to call people to protest the war under the guise of supporting the troops.”
Other veterans and their family members, however, said they support what Edwards is suggesting, saying the best way to honor the troops is to protest the war.
Ironically, Hillary took the stump in Iowa to defend her decision to vote ‘no’ on the Iraq War supplemental spending bill. Either way she votes, Hillary appears to be ensnared in a “catch-22” campaign quagmire. When not defending her vote, Hillary argued for increased spending on veterans’ health care, in particular soldiers suffering from severe head and brain trauma caused by roadside bombs:
"Many of them were coming back with a new problem, called traumatic brain injury. It could be up to 10 percent of all those who have been deployed."
After last week’s campaign memo leak suggesting the notion of bypassing Iowa in during the Democratic caucuses, Hillary reassured Iowans she’s still “In to Win”:
"I'm going to spend so much time in Iowa I'm going to be able to caucus for myself.”
John Edwards’s campaign has become ubiquitous in Iowa and this weekend was no exception. Edwards unveiled his “Sacred Contract with Our Military and Veterans Community” and made this the focal point of his most recent Iowa tour:
“I believe in a sacred contract between our country and America’s veterans and military families. We must stand by those who stand by us. When our service men and women sacrifice so much to defend our freedom and secure peace around the world, we have a moral obligation to take care of them and their families.”
In a press release, Edwards provided an overview of the three cornerstones of his end of the contract, focusing on guaranteeing quality health care for veterans, supporting military families, and providing education and economic opportunities for civilian life.
While stumping for veterans in Oelwien, Edwards told a crowd at the Dancing Lion, “"We have a sacred responsibility to the men and women in Iraq. Every troop should be evaluated when they return to see what they want to do and make sure they can do it.”
One thing missing from Edwards’s stump speeches in Iowa, at least explicitly, was his “Support the Troops./Stop the War” campaign, which was scheduled to officially launch Memorial Day Weekend. The campaign’s intent was to reclaim patriotism by making the distinction between supporting the troops, while simultaneously criticizing the Iraq War and calling for its end, an act of patriotism. A large part of the reason Edwards may have stepped back from his call for Americans to “get vocal” and “get active” in opposing the Iraq War on Memorial Day is the criticisms targeted at his campaign on behalf of veterans groups:
Paul Morin, national commander of the American Legion, posted an open letter of the group’s website blasting Edwards for what Morin says is an inappropriate political calculation that “blatantly violated the sanctity of this most special day…Revolting is a kind word for it,” Morin wrote. “It’s as inappropriate as a political bumper sticker on an Arlington headstone.”
For some veterans, Memorial Day is considered sacred and should not be politicized, whether explicitly or implicitly. This holds true for Joe Davis, spokesman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW), who said his group is also planning to pen an open letter denouncing Edwards’s call to protest:
“Memorial Day is a solemn occasion to remember the service and sacrifice of more than 1 million American servicemen and -women who gave their lives to create our nation, to save our union, and to help free the world from tyranny. It is not a time to call people to protest the war under the guise of supporting the troops.”
Other veterans and their family members, however, said they support what Edwards is suggesting, saying the best way to honor the troops is to protest the war.
Ironically, Hillary took the stump in Iowa to defend her decision to vote ‘no’ on the Iraq War supplemental spending bill. Either way she votes, Hillary appears to be ensnared in a “catch-22” campaign quagmire. When not defending her vote, Hillary argued for increased spending on veterans’ health care, in particular soldiers suffering from severe head and brain trauma caused by roadside bombs:
"Many of them were coming back with a new problem, called traumatic brain injury. It could be up to 10 percent of all those who have been deployed."
After last week’s campaign memo leak suggesting the notion of bypassing Iowa in during the Democratic caucuses, Hillary reassured Iowans she’s still “In to Win”:
"I'm going to spend so much time in Iowa I'm going to be able to caucus for myself.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
