Bush shouldn't get military vote

From TEXAS A&M "The Batallion" (Yeah, I said TEXAS)

see http://tinyurl.com/2d98k

Bush shouldn't get military vote

Iraq war, refusal to attend soldiers' funerals should haunt him in 2004
election
By collins Ezeanyim
Published: Wednesday, February 4, 2004

By Tony Piedra


On May 1, 2003, the sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln were delayed
getting to port after a 10-month voyage because President George W.
Bush, who was scheduled to make a speech declaring the end of major
combat operations in Iraq on the aircraft carrier, was sleeping.
Unfortunately, this incident was only one in a disturbing pattern in
Bush's disregard for the needs of America's military. Although most
voting members of the military are expected to support the president in
his reelection bid this fall, the president has not earned their vote.

Twice, Bush has attempted to manufacture photo opportunities using the
military as a backdrop. The USS Lincoln incident, when the president
unnecessarily donned a flight suit and arrived via jet (even though the
carrier was in helicopter range), was the first. Later that year, Bush
was shown carrying a fake turkey while visiting troops in Baghdad
during Thanksgiving.

Preposterously, some soldiers who walked as much as 15 minutes to the
Bob Hope facility to see the president and get a Thanksgiving meal were
denied entrance for security reasons, according to a letter to the
editor in the military newspaper, The Stars and Stripes. Bush's visit
to Iraq was supposed to be a morale builder for the troops, but how can
turning soldiers away when they come to see you build morale?

Regrettably, Bush has made even worse decisions regarding the
uniformed men and women in Iraq. In one case, it has literally been a
life and death matter. When the war in Iraq was starting, only ground
combat troops were issued potentially life - saving Kevlar vests. Only
now is the Pentagon working to get these vests to all soldiers in Iraq,
nearly a year after the war began. As commander in chief, it was Bush's
responsibility to ensure that all of the troops in Iraq had these
vests, but he failed miserably.

Last summer, The San Francisco Chronicle reported that the Bush
administration approved a Pentagon plan to rollback an increase in
"imminent danger pay" from $225 to $150. A wave of negative publicity
ensued. This included a scathing editorial by The Army Times on June
30, 2003, titled, "Nothing but Lip Service," which stated, "President
Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress have missed no opportunity
to heap richly-deserved praise on the military. But talk is cheap - and
getting cheaper by the day, judging from the nickel-and-dime treatment
the troops are getting lately." It was only after receiving negative
media attention that Bush signed a bill that kept the combat pay raises
in place.

The Bush administration has also been malicious when it comes to
veterans' benefits. In 2003, Bush submitted a proposal to Congress that
slashed funding for a veteran's health care program by $1.8 billion.

Current Democratic presidential candidate and Vietnam veteran John
Kerry criticized this move, according to The San Antonio Express News.

But he wasn't the only one, as several veterans' groups also
criticized the cut. As if his policy decision concerning the military
wasn't bad enough, service members must suffer the indignity of knowing
Bush has not - and will not - attend any funerals of those killed in
Iraq. Some have argued the president can't show signs of weakness
during his campaign on terror and attending funerals with large amounts
of media coverage will only encourage more attacks by Iraqi insurgents.


But this reasoning is weak. It would be better if Bush attended
funerals and delivered the message that the United States will get the
job done in Iraq no matter what. Nonetheless, Bush is willing to send
Americans to die in an unnecessary war but is not willing to attend any
of their funerals.

This is a slap in the face to those willing to make the ultimate
sacrifice for their country.

Despite all this, Bush will most likely be supported by the majority
of military voters. The biggest reason why this is so is the stronghold
Republicans have over U.S. service members. The Army Times reports that
while only one-third of Americans identify with the GOP, a whopping 57
percent of service members surveyed by The Military Times consider
themselves Republican. And even though the military is increasingly
composed of women and minorities - groups traditionally loyal to the
Democratic Party - even they lean conservative, according to Salon.com.

Still, military members should seriously consider the actions Bush has
taken in his three years in office. Any honest appraisal will reveal
Bush doesn't deserve their valuable votes.

On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 2258 +0100, edo
wrote:

>From TEXAS A&M "The Batallion" (Yeah, I said TEXAS)
>
>see http://tinyurl.com/2d98k
>
>Bush shouldn't get military vote
>
>Iraq war, refusal to attend soldiers' funerals should haunt him in 2004
>election


Since when have presidents attend soldiers' funerals?

Did FDR?
Did Truman?
Did Nixon?
Did Reagan?

Get a grip, and stick to real issues; making up crap doesn't do it.

On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 2258 +0100, edo
wrote:

>From TEXAS A&M "The Batallion" (Yeah, I said TEXAS)
>
>see http://tinyurl.com/2d98k
>
>Bush shouldn't get military vote
>
>Iraq war, refusal to attend soldiers' funerals should haunt him in 2004
>election
>By collins Ezeanyim
> Published: Wednesday, February 4, 2004
SNIP SNIP
************************************************** *
Please be so kind as to document which Presidents have attended
funerals of veterans.
Please indicate the President and the year and the specifics.
Oh, by the way, did you mention how Senator H. Clinton showed so much
respect to her constituents as to attend even some of the funerals
there in the New York City environs???
Surely you have such little details...
---Mac

Mac wrote:
>
> On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 2258 +0100, edo
> wrote:
>
> >From TEXAS A&M "The Batallion" (Yeah, I said TEXAS)
> >
> >see http://tinyurl.com/2d98k
> >
> >Bush shouldn't get military vote
> >
> >Iraq war, refusal to attend soldiers' funerals should haunt him in 2004
> >election
> >By collins Ezeanyim
> > Published: Wednesday, February 4, 2004
> SNIP SNIP
> ************************************************** *
> Please be so kind as to document which Presidents have attended
> funerals of veterans.
> Please indicate the President and the year and the specifics.
> Oh, by the way, did you mention how Senator H. Clinton showed so much
> respect to her constituents as to attend even some of the funerals
> there in the New York City environs???
> Surely you have such little details...
> ---Mac

I have a photo of Bill Clinton reviewing his troops, a
People's Republic of Viet Nam honor guard -- does anybody
have photos of Bill Clinton fiddling with the pebbles on
Omaha Beach?

I recall that Bill Clinton was supposed to have staged a display
for the cameras, assembling a cross of pebbles in the sand.
I'd like to have a link to that photo.

Yes. That would have been a good way for a President to lead the
nation during World War II. Can't you just see the grainy old
B&W newsreels? - FDR in his wheelchair at dozens of graveside
services day after day - seemingly endless footage of FDR on a
train writing letters to 100,000 mothers and wives as he travels
to the next funerals.

"Mac" wrote in message
news:geq520thqq8kirhevai3pcvvt2got7lh2v@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 2258 +0100, edo
> wrote:
>
> >From TEXAS A&M "The Batallion" (Yeah, I said TEXAS)
> >
> >see http://tinyurl.com/2d98k
> >
> >Bush shouldn't get military vote
> >
> >Iraq war, refusal to attend soldiers' funerals should haunt him in 2004
> >election
> >By collins Ezeanyim
> > Published: Wednesday, February 4, 2004
> SNIP SNIP
> ************************************************** *
> Please be so kind as to document which Presidents have attended
> funerals of veterans.
> Please indicate the President and the year and the specifics.
> Oh, by the way, did you mention how Senator H. Clinton showed so much
> respect to her constituents as to attend even some of the funerals
> there in the New York City environs???
> Surely you have such little details...
> ---Mac

Abe Lincoln did, remember Gettysburgh? So did FDR, LBJ, Ronald Reagan and
Bill Clinton. Those are the ones that came up on the first Google hit. There
may be more.
Senator Clinton, whom I in general dislike, was not responsible for the
deaths of her constituents, as was our CICs.

Chas Hurst

On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 20:56:02 -0500, "Chas Hurst"
wrote:


>Abe Lincoln did, remember Gettysburgh?

No, I'm not that old. (G)

Actually, the Gettyburg occasion wasn't a soldier's funeral, it was a
dedication as I recall.

"Lee" wrote in message
newsu36205r9afrejbkbbtu3lmfu1g4j8tnd7@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 20:56:02 -0500, "Chas Hurst"
> wrote:
>
>
> >Abe Lincoln did, remember Gettysburgh?
>
> No, I'm not that old. (G)
>
> Actually, the Gettyburg occasion wasn't a soldier's funeral, it was a
> dedication as I recall.

I thought you weren't that old.
It could be construed as both a dedication and a memorial. No matter, the
Address is as fine a piece of oratory as was ever spoken.

"Chas Hurst" wrote in message
news:uMudndCcs6FZhb7dRVn-vA@comcast.com...
>
> "Lee" wrote in message
> newsu36205r9afrejbkbbtu3lmfu1g4j8tnd7@4ax.com...
> > On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 20:56:02 -0500, "Chas Hurst"
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > >Abe Lincoln did, remember Gettysburgh?
> >
> > No, I'm not that old. (G)
> >
> > Actually, the Gettyburg occasion wasn't a soldier's funeral, it was a
> > dedication as I recall.
>
> I thought you weren't that old.
> It could be construed as both a dedication and a memorial. No matter, the
> Address is as fine a piece of oratory as was ever spoken.

I just tested myself, and discovered that the ancient grey cells still can
summon those words verbatim. Now that is astonishing, for a man who cannot
remember what he had for dinner last night.

I wonder if there isn't something to be said for rote learning, even in this
enlightened age.

ted


>
>

"Ted Gittinger" wrote in message
news:wCMUb.6667$Ig5.1159@fe2.texas.rr.com...
>
> "Chas Hurst" wrote in message
> news:uMudndCcs6FZhb7dRVn-vA@comcast.com...
> >
> > "Lee" wrote in message
> > newsu36205r9afrejbkbbtu3lmfu1g4j8tnd7@4ax.com...
> > > On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 20:56:02 -0500, "Chas Hurst"
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > >Abe Lincoln did, remember Gettysburgh?
> > >
> > > No, I'm not that old. (G)
> > >
> > > Actually, the Gettyburg occasion wasn't a soldier's funeral, it was a
> > > dedication as I recall.
> >
> > I thought you weren't that old.
> > It could be construed as both a dedication and a memorial. No matter,
the
> > Address is as fine a piece of oratory as was ever spoken.
>
> I just tested myself, and discovered that the ancient grey cells still can
> summon those words verbatim. Now that is astonishing, for a man who
cannot
> remember what he had for dinner last night.
>
> I wonder if there isn't something to be said for rote learning, even in
this
> enlightened age.

Lessee, from memory:

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth upon this continent
a new nation, conveived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all
men are created equal. Now we are engaged in at great civil war, testing
whether that nation or any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long
endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to
dedicate a portion of that field as a final resting place for those who here
gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and
proper that we should do this. But in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate, we
cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this groud. The brave men, living and
dead who struggled here have consecrated it far above our poor power to add
or detract. The world will little note nor long remember what we say here,
but it can never forget what they did here.

Blah blah blah, forget forget forget...

....and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall
not perish from the earth.

Not bad, since I'm reciting from memory my own performance in front of an
eighth-grade English class.

Bows, (sort of)
Rita

Brava. Multissima brava, Signora.

ted
who wondered where you'd gone to


"Rita" wrote in message
news:c011t0$kpe$0@pita.alt.net...
>
> "Ted Gittinger" wrote in message
> news:wCMUb.6667$Ig5.1159@fe2.texas.rr.com...
> >
> > "Chas Hurst" wrote in message
> > news:uMudndCcs6FZhb7dRVn-vA@comcast.com...
> > >
> > > "Lee" wrote in message
> > > newsu36205r9afrejbkbbtu3lmfu1g4j8tnd7@4ax.com...
> > > > On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 20:56:02 -0500, "Chas Hurst"
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >Abe Lincoln did, remember Gettysburgh?
> > > >
> > > > No, I'm not that old. (G)
> > > >
> > > > Actually, the Gettyburg occasion wasn't a soldier's funeral, it was
a
> > > > dedication as I recall.
> > >
> > > I thought you weren't that old.
> > > It could be construed as both a dedication and a memorial. No matter,
> the
> > > Address is as fine a piece of oratory as was ever spoken.
> >
> > I just tested myself, and discovered that the ancient grey cells still
can
> > summon those words verbatim. Now that is astonishing, for a man who
> cannot
> > remember what he had for dinner last night.
> >
> > I wonder if there isn't something to be said for rote learning, even in
> this
> > enlightened age.
>
> Lessee, from memory:
>
> Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth upon this
continent
> a new nation, conveived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that
all
> men are created equal. Now we are engaged in at great civil war, testing
> whether that nation or any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long
> endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to
> dedicate a portion of that field as a final resting place for those who
here
> gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and
> proper that we should do this. But in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate,
we
> cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this groud. The brave men, living and
> dead who struggled here have consecrated it far above our poor power to
add
> or detract. The world will little note nor long remember what we say here,
> but it can never forget what they did here.
>
> Blah blah blah, forget forget forget...
>
> ...and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall
> not perish from the earth.
>
> Not bad, since I'm reciting from memory my own performance in front of an
> eighth-grade English class.
>
> Bows, (sort of)
> Rita
>
>
>