Think Progress picked up on this astonishing graphic put together by Rachel Maddow showing just how anti-veteran Republicans really are:
, commenting:
According to an analysis by the nonpartisan Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America Action Fund, Republicans in Congress have dramatically failed to support our troops after they come home. IAVA's 2010 Veteran Report Card, based on the key veterans' legislation that came to a vote during the 111th Congress, exposed a sharp partisan divide on the level of support for Iraq and Afghanistan veterans, as MSNBC's Rachel Maddow tabulated yesterday. Of the 94 elected officials that earned an A or A+ rating from IAVA, 91 were Democrats. Of the 154 officials who received a D or F, 142 were Republicans.
And going on to say:
Maddow also noted that U.S. Senate candidates Sharron Angle (R-NV) and Ken Buck (R-CO) have called for the privatization of the Veterans Affairs hospital system, even though it provides the best quality of care in America, as our veterans deserve.
But Maddow also pointed out how quickly these two retreated when attacked for their views, as you can see in the clip:
And this raises a very important point: It's not liberalism per se that Democrats are running away from, or failing to stand up and fight for. It's anything at all that Democrats have traditionally stood for. It's even things that Republicans have stood for. It's rationality, it's facts, it's honoring our commitment to those who serve, it's pretty much everything that used to be considered 100% American. Indeed, if you wanted to show that it's Republicans who are bad Americans, who can't be trusted on defense, this is the issue that you would shout from the rooftops, 24-7.
This has nothing to do with "the left", in any traditional sense. This is just about common sense and common decency. Are you for them? Or against them?
You can add veterans to the growing list of constituencies that Obama is starting to lose. It's a familiar pattern: while he's trying his darnedest to please the military-industrial complex elite--who will never really support him--he's neglecting the veterans who placed hope in him that he would significantly change the Bush policies that were seen as substantially damaging the military, particularly those in the ranks. Also familiar is that it goes far beyond "politically necessary" trade-offs, as suicides continue to mount, and critics emerge citing "unforced errors" and communications cut-offs, while the Administration issues a self-promoting "list of accomplishments" to try to convince veterans not to believe their own lying eyes. Salon reports:
Veterans for Obama? Some now have doubts
Leading military vets who joined the 2008 campaign now complain about White House "deafness" and inaction By Mark Benjamin
Relations between the Obama administration and some elements of the military veterans community, a constituency the Obama campaign carefully cultivated for the 2008 election, have grown distant and, in some cases, icy. Some veterans advocates describe a tangible sense of disenchantment, even among some of Obama's staunchest veteran supporters who actively campaigned on his behalf as part of "Veterans for Obama."
The flagging support among veterans results from a combination of unforced errors by the White House in basic constituency relations, coupled with rising frustration that the Obama administration is not aggressive enough in tackling wartime crises that continue to escalate, like suicides in the military. The damage is serious enough that it threatens to lurk as a political liability for Obama in 2012, since disgruntled surrogates might refuse to help the next time around.
"Suicides are skyrocketing, people are being deployed to war with PTSD, people are being denied their healthcare benefits, and the Obama administration is allowing the Department of Defense to punish people who are suffering from PTSD rather than giving them the medical care they deserve," said Steve Robinson, a retired Army Ranger and longtime veterans advocate who has worked for a number of veterans' organizations. Robinson closely advised then-Sen. Obama on veterans policy and was prominently featured in a video tribute to Obama made by the campaign that played at the Democrats' 2008 convention in Denver. "I am confident that he believes in this generation and that he is actually putting into practice what he believes," Robinson said about Obama, from a huge TV screen at the convention. The Democratic nominee fought for vets, he added, "by stepping out, by speaking up, by legislating, by holding government accountable to take care of this generation when they send them to war."
Now, Robinson says he can't get his e-mails returned. "There is a deafness in the White House," Robinson said. "Let's forget about the idea that you might want to do the right thing and keep your campaign promises. It is politically stupid."
Yes, folks, it's time to face facts: The Obama Administration is politically stupid. Everyone else ran a stupidier campaign than Obama did, so he won the election. But when it comes to governing, not so much. Everywhere you look, the evidence is strikingly similar. Like Robinson said, "Let's forget about the idea that you might want to do the right thing and keep your campaign promises. It is politically stupid."
And Robinson is not alone. The problem is as widespread as it is familiar:
Concerns about the handling of veterans' issues and the veterans' constituency seem relatively widespread. E-mail traffic among numerous former members of Veterans for Obama -- shown to Salon confidentially to provide a view of the scope of the irritation -- portray frustration about the White House and Pentagon's ignoring former members of Veterans for Obama and freezing them out of key policy positions in government. The e-mails also include speculation that the bumbling of relations by the White House might bite back at Obama in 2012.
Medal of Honor recipient Paul Bucha agreed that the administration has filled some vital spots at the Pentagon with politically safe appointees, rather than more aggressive agents of change. "There are things they could be doing better," he said. "There are not a lot of military types around the White House people." Bucha suggested that even a 15-minute speech by Obama to Vietnam Veterans of America -- no president has ever addressed this group -- might be a good start.
So, don't feel bad, hippies. It's not just you, Shirley Sherrod, the unions and Nobel Prize-winning economists. They punch veterans, too.
The only difference: They punch hippies in the spotlight. They punch veterans in the shadows.
All too often, discussions about so-called green job creation are placed in the future tense -- something we predict or hope will happen, but is still considered to be in the realm of the hypothetical. Many people don't know anyone who has a green job, are unable to imagine what one would look like, or who would be creating them. This keeps the concept of green jobs fuzzy and abstract for too many -- not the kind of thing you'd base an economic recovery on. The opponents of clean energy have seized on this, claiming that the whole concept of green jobs is a fantasy that could cost jobs in the established fossil fuel industry that we see all around us.
But for many lucky Americans, green jobs are not wishful thinking -- they are a welcome reality RIGHT NOW, giving laid-off workers well-paying jobs so they can keep their homes, revitalize their struggling communities, and do something positive for the entire country by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and decreasing our dependence on foreign oil. NRDC's new videos, "Clean Energy Jobs For A Strong USA" and "Clean Energy Patriots", introduce you to these green collar workers and let them tell their stories in their own words. At the same time, they lay out a roadmap for how America, with its traditions of innovation and tackling the biggest challenges, can put generations of Americans to work by creating and maintaining a clean, efficient, sustainable energy infrastructure -- a project as needed, ambitious and economy-stimulating as the construction of America's interstate highway system that began over 50 years ago.
"Clean Energy Jobs For A Strong USA" does an excellent job of demystifying the concept of a green collar worker. They aren't farmers digging in organic compost or scientists in spacesuits -- they're welders, steelworkers, electricians and autoworkers, many of whom saw once-reliable Midwest factory jobs evaporate as the Great Recession ravaged the country. Despite no previous experience in clean tech, these workers found that their skills were easily transferable to clean tech industries. After all, windmills and solar panels are simply generators that need to be manufactured, installed, maintained and connected to the energy grid by skilled workers, and a factory that makes energy-efficient windows is still a window factory.
One thing that's notable about the workers interviewed in "Clean Energy Jobs For A Strong USA" is their pragmatism and noted lack of idealism. This is not to say that they aren't optimistic -- they want the rest of the nation to have the same kind of second chance that the clean tech industry has brought to their families and communities. But they don't want that because they are true believers in something unseen -- they want it because they've experienced it firsthand and live it every day as they work at their clean tech job and return to a home they can now afford to own. One could say that wanting to leave a better planet for your children than the one you were given is idealistic, but if so, it's an idealism that every person on the planet should have.
At the same time, the executives and spokespeople for the clean tech companies hiring these workers are simply looking at the reality of where the market is heading, where a once-exotic CFL is now simply a lightbulb and "alternative" energy will soon be the norm. Blake Jones, the CEO of Namaste Solar, reveals that he used to work for Halliburton until he understood the consequences of being dependant on oil from unfriendly or unstable nations. Chuck Swoboda, CEO of LED manufacturer CREE Inc., used to work for Ford until he realized that so much energy was being spent protecting the SUV business Ford had that they were failing to make the cars that would drive profits in the future. The two things corporations prize the most are profits and predictability -- if you don't know what the future of your industry holds, it's risky to try to profit from it. Clean tech companies know that clean energy makes profits, but without clean energy legislation that allows them to be competitive with markets in other countries that enjoy government support, future profits, venture capital, entrepreneurs and the innovation they breed, those profits will be made by companies overseas.
In "Clean Energy Patriots", we learn the multiple ways that clean tech strengthens the nation and its security. To start, service in America's highly mechanized, technologically advanced military turns out to be excellent training for jobs in the clean tech industry, providing great jobs for returning veterans eager to start working and put down roots. Soldiers building bases in Iraq can build solar farms in Nevada, and a technician who worked on submarine electronics can troubleshoot the electronics of a smart power grid. Many of the men and women in the video served in Iraq, where they experienced the consequences of our dependence on foreign oil firsthand and how American oil dollars fund those fighting against us. By working in clean tech, these former soldiers are able to continue serving their country by making America energy independent -- no bullets or overseas deployments required.
"Clean Energy Jobs For A Strong USA" and "Clean Energy Patriots" are videos you should dare elected officials and green job skeptics to watch. Even if you ignore the reality of climate change, the benefits of clean energy to America's economy and national security are overwhelming, and the honesty and excitement of the videos' participants hits you in a way that actors or the most polished PR firms couldn't match. For those who can't imagine a thriving economy based on clean energy, efficiency and energy independence, these videos provide a glimpse into a safer, more sustainable future for America. Or, more accurately, they let you spend time with the men and women who are already living there and want the rest of the nation to join them.
The bungled radiation treatment of close to a hundred veterans with prostate cancer over a six-year period at Philadelphia's Veterans Affairs Medical Center falls far short of the government's promise to veterans. Ninety-two of the 116 veterans who received a kind of radiation treatment for prostate cancer there got inadequate or misdirected doses, which may have damaged adjacent tissues and organs, such as the bladder, peritoneum, and rectum. In many cases, the victims did not know they had received substandard treatment until months or even years later.
If this had been a consumer product, we would be talking about a breakdown in quality control. That is essentially what happened here.
All of the safeguards of quality care were missing. There was no peer review, no government or agency oversight, and not even a definition of what constituted a reportable "medical event" - which might have alerted authorities to the problems sooner. The bottom line is that problems with the procedure, known as permanent implant prostate brachytherapy, went undetected for more than six years.
It is worth noting that while Arlen Specter complains about the lack of government oversight on this matter, he was chairman of the Senate Veteran's Affairs committee at the time when this problem developed. Although, granted, that might add credence to Specter's claim that there was a lack of oversight.
Yesterday in Norfolk, Va., union veterans held the first event of what will be a nationwide campaign for the Employee Free Choice Act, uniting union and nonunion veterans from across the country in support of the freedom to form unions and bargain.
In a dozen states, VoteVets.org, Veterans and Military Families for Progress (VMFP), Veterans' Alliance for Security and Democracy (VETPAC) and the AFL-CIO Union Veterans Council are teaming up to host military veterans, family members and union members for rallies, roundtable discussions and mobilization events. More than 2 million union members-14 percent of all union members-are veterans and, along with national veterans' groups, they're ready to mobilize for a level playing field in the workplace and the freedom to bargain for the economic opportunity they deserve.
Today is the sixth anniversary of the start of our most recent war in Iraq. News reports marking the occasion will no doubt note that combat deaths are now lower than at earlier stages in this war -- a silver lining to a still very dark cloud. No matter how quickly our troops leave Iraq, the war will not soon leave those who are serving -- and have served -- in it. A epidemic of psychological trauma is ripping through our military's ranks, and we're probably still years away from seeing the last of our troops withdrawn from Iraq.
Bill O'Reilly's attack on homeless veterans was arguably one of the nastiest, most noxious news stories FOX News spewed during the Presidential election cycle, which is saying a lot. In January 2008, O'Reilly went after John Edwards for calling attention to the 200,000 homeless veterans sleeping under bridges and on the streets. It was a figure substantiated by the Department of Veterans Affairs and the National Alliance to End Homelessness, but O'Reilly didn't let a little thing like the facts prevent him from saying there weren't homeless vets out there. When O'Reilly eventually back-tracked, it was only so far as to state that if there were homeless vets, there weren't many of them. What's more, he said their homelessness was due to their own addictions and mental illnesses, not our economy.
Brave New Films and groups like Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America immediately fought back. We released FOX Attacks "Non-Existent" Veterans" along with a petition demanding O'Reilly apologize to homeless vets, which over 17,000 people signed. Of course, when homeless vets attempted to deliver the petition to the FOX building in New York, they were denied entrance and ambushed by an O'Reilly camera crew--one of FOX's favorite faux journalistic practices.
Flash forward to last night, when O'Reilly continued to blame everything from homeless vets to Rush Limbaugh's incendiary comments on the "Far-Left Smear Machine," as he likes to call us. O'Reilly even used a handy little Far-Left Smear Chart to illustrate exactly how the machine works.
In today's New York Times, an editorial hits one of my pet issues and peeves: how collectively as a country and a society, we let down our veterans, every single day.
We insist on their sacrificed, and praise their service, so don't equal their service with funding, support and help.
After the Vietnam War, the situation was similar to what it is now, in the respect that, a generation of veterans found themselves embroiled in a battle for benefits and care against a bureaucracy ill-suited for the task. Back then, The Vietnam Vet Survival Guide, was a best-selling book and great asset to those men and women.
When I returned from Vietnam, I spent a year at Kingsbridge Veterans Administration hospital in the Bronx, learning how to live life as a paraplegic confined to a wheelchair. Life magazine called the conditions in my ward a "medical slum." My closest friend found the despair, coupled with indifference from the hospital and the Veterans Administration, too much to bear. He committed suicide. So did several other vets I knew.
The campaign schedule has been pretty intense over the last week and will continue to be so until the BIG day on Tuesday, November 4th. I want to congratulate everyone for putting so much effort into this year's election, not just for an individual campaign, but for the entire Democratic ticket. I've seen people in every community throughout the 5th district working to make sure the message is getting out.
I want to remind everyone it is important that we finish strong. Don't take anything for granted, ignore the polls and work like the polls show our candidates 5 points down. Remember, while all indications show Barack Obama will be our next president, if we believe the polls, Al Gore would be concluding his second term or we would be working to re-elect President John Kerry right now.
What a difference a cycle makes. Already, we are seeing more and more great pieces written about the impact of new media on the election. It is far greater than is apparent in just the massive online fundraising numbers that Barack Obama is posting from online donors.
As Peter Daou aptly pointed out, the netroots carried forth when many traditional sources of power were silenced.
The other day Arianna brought up the fact that the Republicans are running from an old playbook, one where the traditional media takes any charge, say whether a candidate actually earned his purple hearts, and carries it forward donkey-esque as the 'other side of the story.' While this ignores a basic relationship, the opposite of the truth is a lie not another truth, it's how politics used to work (and still does partially.)
This is a substantive debate on the issues, with the moderator (Brunswick News reporter Jess Davis) sitting between the two candidates and pitching real questions.
Jack seems peeved to have to be on the same forum as some upstart; sound like certain other debates? Bill was the keynote speaker at the Valdosta Obama office opening.
Bill Gillespie wants to get us out of Iraq by handing over to the Iraqis, preferably within 18 months. Jack Kingston wants any timetable to be decided by the general in Baghdad.
Jack Kingston promotes himself as a champion of renewable energy (although local students don't agree) but then gets off on offshore drilling.
We recently wrote about the Department of Veterans Affairs decision to open its facilities to voter registration drives after months of urging by voting rights groups and elected officials. This week, however, "VA voter suppression continues," as AlterNet's Steven Rosenfeld wrote Tuesday, with voter registration efforts being blocked in California and the VA general counsel criticizing the pending Veterans Voting Support Act (S. 3308), which would bolster federal protection of voter registration opportunities for all wounded veterans. With just three weeks left to register voters in most states, advocates say now is the time to support voter registration efforts in VA facilities and, most importantly, it needs to be explicitly protected from now on through federal law.
Election experts have already worried that the surge of newly registered voters may cause unintentional chaos through long lines and ballot shortages on Election Day. Now there is increased concern that intentional chaos may be caused by partisan forces using something that millions of Americans access every day - the Internet. Although deceiving and disenfranchising voters through political dirty tricks is a staple partisan strategy to influence election results, the Internet may be making it easier and more effective than ever to spread misinformation, according to CNN reporter, Stephanie Busari.
STATE BLOGS
