Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock


Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict


Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links


Regional News


News Publications

The Veteran Vote
Posted by: McQ on Tuesday, April 10, 2007

I'm not so sure that the Dems are that concerned with it, but if statements from the VFW and American Legion are any indication, they shouldn't waste much time worrying about currying those votes. That is if they continue to push the present bill calling for withdrawal timelines.

George Lisicki, the senior vice commander-in-chief of the VFW:
“The funding package contained artificial troop withdrawal deadlines that would ultimately break the morale of our troops in the field and directly jeopardize their safety,” said Lisicki, who ascends to national commander in August and was here today to host a meeting of future leaders from the VFW’s 54 departments.

“I am calling on all the members of the United States Senate and House of Representatives to, for now, reserve further debate and provide the funds needed by our troops to prosecute the Global War on Terror,” he said, noting that Iraq was clearly the centerpiece of that war on terrorism, and that the House and the Senate funding packages were also loaded with extraneous spending not related to the war on terrorism.

“This isn’t a Democrat or Republican issue. It’s about American men and women tasked with fighting a war, and who are now being told their effort and sacrifice doesn’t matter because a date on the calendar will send them home whether they’ve finished the job or not,” he said.
But of course it has become a Democrat and Republican issue and as is obvious, the VFW knows which side is pushing which agenda. To put it bluntly, the VFW backs the President and the Republicans position on this.

Paul Morin, National Commander of the American Legion:
However, even more disturbing is the fact this proposed legislation contains specific provisions that attempt to direct the conduct of military operations in Iraq, a task The American Legion unalterably believes rests with the Commander in Chief and the military leadership.

“This is an attempt to implement a congressional strategy by imposing timelines for the withdrawal of military personnel from combat zones through a “slow bleed” process by eventually reducing military funding,” Morin said. “Rather than the President's and General Petraeus's reinforcement policy that is making progress in securing Baghdad.”

The American Legion is supportive of many of the other provisions contained in the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Health, and Iraq Accountability Act, but we strongly believe the President’s initial request is not the vehicle for these provisions, especially the specific language that sets congressional deadlines and mandatory troops movements. The other emergency funding recommendations to the FY 2007 budget should be openly addressed in a subsequent appropriations package in a timely manner.

“The men and women of the armed forces in the theater of operation are dependent on this emergency funding to sustain and achieve their military missions,” Morin explained. “Members of Congress should not be armchair generals.”

“Recognizing our history as a Nation, The American Legion supports the Commander in Chief, the commanders on the front lines, and the men and women serving in harms' way," Morin said. "We entrust Congress to do the right thing in supporting our military men and women who are fighting to protect our values and way of life.
As with the VFW, the American Legion supports the President and Republican's position on the bill. No withdrawal timelines, not pork, and git 'r done.

Add that to the "16-star letter" from the military chief's of each of the services and the letter sent by Republican members of the House and Senate, and you have a bit of negative pressure building on Congressional Democrats. It'll be interesting to see how they finally react after enjoying their spring break, while the Army begins planning on which critical, but non-warfighting functions to begin shorting monetarily in order to shift those funds to supporting the troops in the field.

UPDATE: Congress members, such as Ron Hodes (D-NH) are also getting an earful from their constituents, if this is any example:
When Gerry Duncan of Nashua asked Hodes whether the bill would have passed if the non-war items weren't included, Hodes hesitated and said, "I don't know."

"I'm done," declared an angered Duncan, whose husband, Col. Richard Duncan, chief of staff of the New Hampshire Army National Guard, was injured in Afghanistan. She then walked out.

Sue Peterson of Weare, whose son Alex is a member of the 3643rd Security Force in the Army National Guard now in Iraq, said mixing money for the war with farm and other products was a disservice to the troops.

"I am so outraged and I'm trying to be calm listening to everybody," she said. But lumping everything into one bill was to "compare Alex and all the other soldiers to milk, peanuts, fish and spinach."

Family members frequently interrupted Hodes, first asking a question, then interrupting while he tried to deliver an answer.

"I haven't gotten to finish a single sentence yet," he said more than 15 minutes into the meeting.
Don't believe me about the anger? Watch this:

And Hodes is right about one thing, there is nothing he can say to Blue and Gold Star mothers, or the majority of the families with members in the military which will change their perspective on this bill. And politically, that's not a good position to be in.
Return to Main Blog Page

Previous Comments to this Post 

if your sentence is going to end with political BS, you don’t need to finish it.
Written By: josh b
URL: http://
I hope the Dems ejoy their two years as the majority...

They sure won’t get to keep it if they keep this crap up...
Written By: Scott
URL: http://
The Dems are never concerned with trying to get votes from veterans. In 2000, they did everything they could to stop military votes from even counting. (In many cases they succeeded, making the miltary the only segment of the population that had a significant numbers of voters disenfranchised in Florida.) But appearing like they are courting the votes of veterans is critical to getting votes from the large segment of the population that is sympathetic to servicemembers, but is not closely tied to the military. If it becomes obvious to the average civilian that they don’t care about the troops (their own political power over troop welfare), Scott’s prediction is a slam dunk.
Written By: Ted
URL: http://
I should be a politico-type on FOX News... I love hate-mail, and love calling this sorta stuff...

Anyone able to get me a job there? ;)
Written By: Scott
URL: http://
Great video.

Let’s start a drive to run a qualified veteran against any member of the House or Senate who votes for this "surrender" supplemental appropriation. Offer to contribute, collect money, talk to your neighbors, man the phones, stuff envelopes, do anything to see that their current term will be their last. Heckle them at every public appearance. clog their email system and snail mail boxes.

Make one thing clear - Vote for this slow bleed strategy and we will take no prisoners.
Written By: Arch
URL: http://
I’m not so sure that the Dems are that concerned with it, but if statements from the VFW and American Legion are any indication, they shouldn’t waste much time worrying about currying those votes.
I was thinking the same thing about Jewish votes. As you recall, Henry Waxman was along for the ride with Pelosi’s harebrained trip to Syria. My impression is that Waxman’s political base is in the Jewish community , and those voters harbor few illusions about Syria or Assad. I was thinking that his e-mail box must be full of "WTF?" messages right now.

In general, the Dems risk making the same mistake that they made at the end of the Vietnam war: They are seeing signs of the public’s fatigue with the war, and interpreting them as confirmation that the noisy McGovernites are speaking for the silent majority.

It seems more likely that the silent majority wishes that the US had never got involved in the war, and wants some assurance that we are looking for a way out, but hardly shares the same views on national security and foreign policy as the McGovernites. As the Dems associate their party with its McGovernite base by pursuing ideas like the slow bleed, and by attempting to hijack the executive’s foreign policy role in order to legitimize Assad, people are silently coming to the realization that the Dems are not ready for prime time yet.

After Vietnam, the Dems spent a whole generation in the political wilderess trying to regain the country’s trust on national security, and they may have to spend another generation in the woodshed after Iraq, especially if Iraq manages to pull itself together.
Written By: Aldo
URL: http://

The Shrub was on fuego today. En. Fuego.
Written By: Cassandra
The Democratic Party has nothing but scorn for the military. At the start of the Clinton administration a General opened the door for a female Clinton staffer. He said “Good Morning” she replied, “We don’t talk to the military.”

If the Democrats had their way our military would follow the British path to extinction. They could then use the money to buy votes through massive welfare projects, assuring them control in perpetuity. Democracies can only last until the populace realizes they can vote themselves bread and circuses. The Democratic Party has become the party of bread and circuses.
Written By: James E. Fish
I follow Ted, but I have to go even farther with the argrument. We have to constantly pound the point that it’s no longer just the "military" that the dems (in reality, anybody who votes in the afirmative for this bill, or takes the action along the democratic party line here) don’t care about. They’re actively not caring about the support of the military, i.e. the families and the citizens employed by the military.

Every time the discussion comes up about this issue the point must be made that they are willing to put thousands of civilian workers out of jobs, and put the health of veterans, active servants, and their families in jeopardy by forcing the military to reapropriate funding. This, along with all the military aspects that McQ has talked about often lately that will possibly even shut down, is a prime reason why democrats (as Thomas Sowell puts it) are DANGEROUS in office.

This manifestation of the believes of the party will keep democrats from ever holding offices for as many consecutive terms as they did in the past.
Written By: Ike
URL: http://
Please ignore the Cassandra post. This person seeks to impersnate a fellow military spouse (I’m one as well). This person’s address does not match up against Cassandra’s address on her Villainous Company blog. I find it tragic that in the pursuit of ultimate power, liberal trolls and their democrat enablers will stop at nothing to sabotage not only a war but this country. Nice try, troll.
Written By: emjem24
URL: http://
Please ignore the Cassandra post. This person seeks to impersnate a fellow military spouse (I’m one as well). This person’s address does not match up against Cassandra’s address on her Villainous Company blog. I find it tragic that in the pursuit of ultimate power, liberal trolls and their democrat enablers will stop at nothing to sabotage not only a war but this country. Nice try, troll.
Actually "this person’s" IP address does match up with Cassandra from VC’s. All she was saying was "Bush was on fire today". Not sure how you interpret that as trolling. I certainly didn’t.
Written By: McQ

Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Vicious Capitalism


Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks