GOP = Greed Over Patriotism. Cut miltry coverage, but taxcuts for wealthy

[protect freedom impeach bush now]

GOP = Greed Over Patriotism

David Podvin writes, "'My Republican opponent voted to cut medical benefits for our war heroes in order to give a tax cut to himself.' This should be the mantra of Democratic candidates in 2004. It should be vigilantly repeated until Republicans howl in protest. It should be endlessly repeated until conservatives wail about the class warfare of it all. It should be relentlessly repeated until every right wing pundit across America is foaming at the mouth -- even more than usual. And then it should be repeated again. What George W. Bush and company did was unpatriotic -- they sent young Americans off to fight for this country while stabbing them in the backs. Those soldiers who do not return in body bags will come home to a dangerous future of severely reduced medical care, courtesy of the flag waving phonies of the Grand Old Party. The Republicans must be made to pay for this act of treachery... It is the only moral thing to do."

http://makethemaccountable.com/podvin/more/030807_TheSilverBullet.htm

[jody]

1. Given the anger and hostility of many DU posters against the military

I assume they are also in favor of cutting the military budget and all benefits to veterans and retired military. :shrug:

[Divernan]

2. You mistake anger at Rumsfeld/Bush military policies

with your alleged "anger and hostility of many DU posters against the mlitary". Posters at DU have overwhelmingly supported following long established international law - i.e., no pre-emptive wars absent strong evidence of immediate mortal threat to our country/citizens. DU posters have repeatedly expressed rage and grief at each and every death of US mlitary man and woman - caused by the chickenhawk Bush policy wonks. DU ers have screamed and shouted against cuts to the VA program from the get go.

How do you define "anger and hostility" - give us some quotes
ON EDIT: Also, there's a big difference between opposing pork barrell military spending, i.e, star wars initiative, super stealth planes, and weapons systems where it's been shown the contractors have fudged the test results to hide serious shortcomings - and cutting benefits to active duty and retired military personnel.

[jody]

3. My statement is clear and if you want examples, look them up yourself.

As to AWOL and his chickenhawk friends, they evaded the draft of an unpopular and immoral war that was legal under the Constitution. I view their behavior with disgust. :puke:

The Iraq War is also an unpopular and immoral war that is legal under the Constitution. Many DU participants have said in their posts that they would leave the US rather than be drafted into our military. Is their expected behaviour any different than AWOL and the chickenhawks?

[Divernan]

4. Different? Absolutely

Leaving one's country to avoid being drafted into an immoral war is far more drastic, and damaging to one's whole future than faking a medical condition to get a deferment (Saxby Chamblis's "bad knees"), using Papa's pull to get into a Texas Air National Guard unit with the option of checking the "do not agree to go overseas" box, taking multiple deferments because he "had better things to do with his life", etc. etc. Not one of those chickenhawks served as a conscientious objector, or went to jail like Mohammed Ali.

You cannot see a significant, material difference between the two groups?
And you also did not respond to my point that there is a difference between opposing military policy or funding priorities and opposing support to active duty and/or retired military personnel.

[jody]

5. I ignored your question re policy/priorities and

support for active/retired personnel because it doesn't matter.

Either one supports the active military as used under our Constitution or one doesn't. If one doesn't agree with a particular war as in Vietnam and now Iraq, there are many ways of protesting under the Constitution.

Still if congress with its Constitutional authority approves a particular application of our military and uses its authority to draft citizens, then those citizens can either serve, evade, run, or go to jail. Unfortunately under our republican form of democracy, any citizen who shirks their duty may and probably should lose their rights as a citizen like a common criminal. The latter is my opinion shared by many others.

You are trying to rationalize one form of behavior re Iraq by ignoring the parallels with Vietnam. The bottom line is that anyone who would evade a draft today or run to avoid a draft is no different than AWOL and his chickenhawk friends. That opinion is held by many veterans and active duty military and don't ask for proof because it was gleaned from discussions with veterans and active military.

[Divernan]

6. I did not ignore parallels to Vietnam; I specifically pointed them out.

Your original post speculated DUers would support cutting all benefits to military and retired military. The only example you gave in support of that allegation was that some unspecified, unnamed DUers had said they would leave the country rather than be drafted to go to Iraq. I do not agree that you have made the case for your conclusion.

And now I'm headed out for the evening, so I guess we can only agree to disagree.