Progress Now Action

Agendas within agendas seems to be the theme of the current administration... first we're going to invade and get rid of Saddam Hussain... then we're going to eliminate Al Kaida from Iraq... where it wasn't, then we're going to bring Democracy to the Middle East, as if Israel wasn't enough... Now America is going to convert the heathen Arab while catalyzing Armageddon. When did we become so arrogant as to think we dictate to God when the end will arrive? Ask you local fundamentalist Army, I'm sure they have a pamphlet for it. Article quoted below courtesy of VVAWnet:

"US Military's Middle East Crusade for Christ
by Robert Weitzel

"They are proselytizing not on behalf of the Constitution of the United States . . . but rather on behalf of some sort of fanatical view of end times. And they are using our army to affect that." -Former Ambassador Joseph Wilson

Last August the watchdog group Military Religious Freedom Foundation foiled a Pentagon plan that would have allowed the shipment of "freedom packages" to soldiers and Marines in Iraq. The parcels were put together by the fundamentalist Christian ministry, Straight Up, and contained Bibles, proselytizing tracts in English and Arabic, and the apocalyptic "Left Behind" computer game, in which Christian Tribulation forces convert or kill infidels-nonbelievers, Muslims and Jews.

On May 1 the Senate approved the promotion of Brigadier General Robert L. Caslen Jr. to Major General. Currently the commandant of cadets at West Point, he will become the commander of the 25th Infantry Division. He is also president of the stridently fundamentalist Officer's Christian Fellowship, whose vision is a "spiritually transformed military, with ambassadors for Christ in uniform, empowered by the Holy Spirit."

General Caslen was promoted despite the Defense Department's recommended disciplinary action against him and several other senior military leaders because they had "improperly endorsed and participated with a nonfederal entity while in uniform" by participating in a promotional video for the Campus Crusade For Christ's Christian Embassy, an evangelical organization that ministers to Beltway politicians and sponsors weekly Bible studies at the Pentagon.

According to the DoD Inspector General's report, one of the generals involved "asserted that Christian Embassy was treated as an instrumentality of the Pentagon Chaplain's office for over 25 years, and had effectively become a 'quasi federal entity.'" Arguably, he believed his participation in the video was in the line of duty.

Considering both the Pentagon's evangelical proclivity and a 2006 Pew survey which found that of the major religious groups in America, evangelicals have the most negative views of Islam and Muslims, the U.S. sniper who was recently caught using the Quran for target practice in the Baghdad neighborhood of Radhwaniya might be excused for thinking the book was a legitimate target upon which to perfect his craft . . . excused for thinking he was acting in the line duty.

And is it any wonder that with evangelicals and fundamentalists at the very top of the military's officer corps -- to say nothing of their Commander in Chief -- that an enlisted Marine was passing out Christian "witnessing coins" inscribed in Arabic at a checkpoint in Fallujah? One side of the coin asked, "Where will you spend eternity?" An evangelical favorite, John 3:16, was on the flip side.

Sheik Adul-Rahman al-Zubaie, a tribal leader in Fallujah who was outraged by the Marine's proselytizing said, "This event did not happen by chance, but it was planned and done intentionally."

While the Marine's proselytizing is not the official policy of the predominately Christian force occupying the predominately Islamic Iraq, it was done "in the line of duty" with a wink and a nod from his chain of command. Think Abu Ghraib!

>From Fort Jackson, the Army's largest basic training facility, where trainees are encouraged to attend Campus Crusade's weekly "God's Basic Training" programs, to the U.S. Air Force Academy where students are pressured to attend the Crusade's weekly "cru" (short for crusade) Bible study, American military personnel are, as Campus Crusade's Scot Blom gloats, "government paid missionaries" when they complete their training.

As the demands of fighting a perpetual war against "radical Islam" begins to strain both the military's resources and the country's resolve, the Pentagon has begun outsourcing larger chunks of the war to private contractors. Predictably, our "government paid missionaries" have become more expensive and much less controllable or accountable.

The Bush administration's favorite contractor, Blackwater, is the most powerful private army in the world. It commands thousands of mercenaries in Iraq and Afghanistan, has over a billion dollars in government contracts, and enjoys complete immunity from prosecution for its theater of operations' conduct.

Blackwater's founder, Erik Prince, a staunchly conservative Catholic, has also served on the board of directors of Christian Freedom International, a crusading missionary organization operating in the overwhelmingly Islamic countries of Sudan, Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq. Prince envisions an evangelical "end time" role for his warriors: "Everybody carries guns, just like Jeremiah rebuilding the temple in Israel -- a sword in one hand and a trowel in the other."

No one in the last decade has contributed more to end time, apocalyptic evangelism than John Hagee, a televangelist seen by millions of viewers weekly and pastor of the 19,000-member Cornerstone Church. Hagee preaches that in order to bring about the Second Coming of Christ and the Rapture of true believers, Islam first has to be destroyed.

In a 2006 interview with National Public Radio's Terry Gross, Hagee told her, "Those who live by the Quran have a scriptural mandate to kill Christians and Jews." He went on to claim that there are 200 million Muslims waiting for the chance to attack Israel and the United States. From his pulpit, Hagee makes it clear to his congregation and the radio and television audience what they can expect from American Muslims if such an attack ever took place: "While American Muslims live in America, 82 percent are not loyal to America and are not willing to fight and defend America."

In his book, "Jerusalem Countdown - A Warning to the World," Hagee warns that the war between Islam and the West "is a war that Islam cannot and must not win."

John Hagee is not just a mad evangelizing prophet. He is the mad evangelizing prophet who is courted by a war president, a hawkish presidential candidate and members of Congress from both parties. His Islamophobic bilge has trickled down from Capital Hill, through the labyrinthine corridors of the Pentagon, and into the chamber of a sniper's rifle and the hand of a Marine guarding a checkpoint in Fallujah.

Officers in the military are expected to lead by example. Enlisted personnel are expected to follow that example. If the recent incidents at Radhwaniya and Fallujah are not just the acts of renegades, then the chain of command seems to be working the way it was designed."


Here's the link: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/06/09/9510/

This article comes via VVAWnet distributor John Zutz this evening. Somehow, 'Oh, come off it,' just isn't going to be sufficient in the face of these incredible technicalities that are surfacing this early in the election year. The article follows:


"At a quiet 1999 ceremony in MaComb County, Michigan, a plainspoken former Texas governor delivered a patriotic speech to commemorate Veterans' Day.

But none of the eight veterans interviewed by The New York Times after the ceremony promised George W. Bush their vote.

A new report Thursday reveals that Secretary of Veterans Affairs James Peake told two Democratic senators his department will not help injured veterans register to vote before the 2008 election.

"VA remains opposed to becoming a voter registration agency pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act, as this designation would divert substantial resources from our primary mission," Peake said in
an April 8th letter to Sens. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) and John Kerry (D-MA) acquired by Steven Rosenfeld at Alternet.

Peake refers to a 1993 law that allows government departments to engage in voter registration efforts, Rosenfeld says.

What this means is that many injured veterans still in VA hospitals who can't find means to register outside of their facilities will effectively lose their right to vote. Wounded veterans who have moved
must re-register at their "new addresses" or file for absentee ballots in order to participate in the presidential and other elections.

Peake defends the decision by saying that a court recently ruled the VA's limits on "partisan political activities" "does not on its face violate [veterans'] First Amendment' rights," Rosenfeld notes, without articulating how registering veterans is a partisan activity.

Peake added, "VA shares your commitment to assisting veterans in exercising their Constitutional right to vote."

The court ruling he's appears to be referring to is Patrick Griffin v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs, in which a Federal Circuit of Appeals court upheld the VA's rules governing the conduct of those who practice "free speech" -- or protest -- in government graveyards.

Among other things, the VA prohibits "partisan activities, i.e., those involving commentary or actions in support of, or in opposition to, or attempting to influence, any current policy of the Government of the United States, or any private group, association, or enterprise."

Sens. Kerry and Feinstein fired off a letter in reply.

"The Department of Veterans Affairs should provide voter materials to veterans," Feinstein wrote, according to Rosenfeld's report. "I believe the cost of providing these voter materials is minimal. It's
a small price to pay for the sacrifice these men and women have made in fighting for our nation's freedom. I am disappointed."

"You'd think that when so many people give speeches about keeping faith with our veterans, the least the government would do is protect their right to vote, after they volunteered to go thousands of miles
from home to fight and give that right to others," Kerry said. "And yet we've seen the government itself block veterans from registering to vote in VA facilities, without any legal basis or rational
explanation."

Link: http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Veterans_Department_not_keen_on_veterans_0410.html

In skimming through the news over the net tonight, MSN carried an article from Newsweek on actual legislative records. Damn... who ever thought voters might really want to know what legislation each Democratic candidate actually sponsored and became law?

Link is here: http://www.newsweek.com/id/129976

The article left it up to the reader to research the specifics of the legislation, but it did give issue topics and where each candidates priorities were in specific bills.

It made for very interesting reading because how a legislator votes is always more important than what is said in electioneering rhetoric.

You really have to wonder if anyone is at home in Washington, D.C. any more and who, if anyone is earning their salary.

They say disasters come in threes, well sometimes those 'three' diasters are not mutually exclusive. Take for example the deficit created in part by the never ending war which is creating a credit crunch.

Information Clearinghouse says it so much better than I in their article 'How Lethally Stupid Can One Country Be?' up on the net this morning.

Link: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19596.htm

Can we make it to the election?

Got this email this morning from the VVAW news net, and thought it might be important to those of you who would rather not have your children fighting the oil industry's wars for them. It doesn't seem like a lot, but its a lot more official than standing on a street corner with signs and facing the possibility of illegal assembly charges. It read:

"The District of Columbia Public Schools, apparently responding to multiple requests by city residents and recent experiences in neighboring jurisdictions, has taken the extraordinary step of banning the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) test from all public schools in Washington, DC.

In a letter dated February 29, 2008, Sara Wilson, of the Critical Response Team of the Office of the Chancellor wrote to DC activist John Judge, "After speaking with Kimberly Hood-Berry, the Deputy Chief for Academic Support Services and the Head Counselor, Merita Carter, they have decided to look for an alternative career exploration test to be used in place of ASVAB. While they are searching for the best alternative, counselors will be informed not to use ASVAB."

Last week, officials from neighboring Prince George's County, Maryland were outraged when they discovered the military had not informed school officials of their option to withhold private information, including social security numbers and ASVAB test results, from military recruiters. Federal regulations require the military to inform school districts of their right to withhold test information from recruiters.

The ASVAB is administered to 605,000 public school children every year. Although internal military documents identify the ASVAB as a recruiting device, it is marketed in schools as a "career exploration program".

This development has the potential to bring down the ASVAB across the country. That's how angry school officials are becoming.

This form, provided by military representatives to Prince George's County, MD School Officials, omits Option 8:


http://dc.indymedia.org/media/anti-warwar/display/35882/index.php

School officials in Montgomery, Maryland were also unaware of the option to withhold test results from military recruiting services. When they learned of Option 8 two years ago, Montgomery officials changed their policy by requiring parental permission to take the test and selecting Option 8 in schools across the sprawling district.

See USMEPCOM Regulation 601.4 Personnel Procurement Student Testing Program 25 July, 2005, pages 12 & 13 for an explanation of the various options available to public school systems:

http://www.mepcom.army.mil/publications/pdf/regs/r-0601-004.pdf

Have you contacted your school system about the ASVAB release option they select? Have you downloaded the form that has ignited this firestorm of controversy and do you understand its volatile contents? This is not a spectator sport. We have school officials in one, and possibly two major districts, who are making calls to fellow administrators across the country, to warn them about the military's deceptive practices. We can kill this insidious recruiting tool if you would make a call or send an email to your superintendent.
- Pat Elder
Bethesda, MD

While perusing the 'Around Colorado' section of this webpage this morning I noticed an article in Colorado Pols regarding the endorsement of a local candidate for Congress by a veterans group I was not familiar with. I actually clicked on the link and read the post and the related 19 comments and was surprised to learn that as an active vet with the VVAW, life time member of the DAV, a 100 percent disabled Vietnam Vet there were two veterans organizations out there with the same initials I'd never even heard of. Not surprising... even in the 'Band of Brothers' some brothers are more equal than others when in comes to their own 'country club' organizations. It seems one of these organizations endorsed a candidate who creditials as a veteran doesn't exist.

It has been my experience that vet's organizations endorse candidates who are veterans themselves, for better or for worse, so imagine my surprise when I went to the endorsed candidate's website to find the statement that both his parents were war protestors...not usually a glowing remark that brings out the VFW, American Legion, of Disabled Veterans of America in force to support someone. The point here is that candidates endorsed by organizations who are not widely known, exclusive, or have a broad and active membership base take a chance on shooting themselves in the foot with their constituency, particularly if, as in the case of the 'Swift Boat Veterans' the foundations of the organization could be viewed self-serving and open to exploitation by opponents in the heat of an election. Some of us are interested in this kind of politics... some of us are REALLY turned off by it.

The wire service this morning is carrying the story that perpetual losing independent Ralph Nader has thrown his hat... or Corvair in the ring for a third go. I wholeheartedly endorse the concept of a multiplicity of parties... but please give us something other than a candidate that can be exploited as a spoiler by one or the other of the two major parties, and has no platform other than opposing what the other parties stand for... which so far isn't much anyhow. Bring back Ross Perot, hell bring back Sam Walton... at least we know where he stood... cheap Chinese products that put Americans out of work and sent jobs over the borders to increase profits. Why can't Nader find a viable candidate to support that a pluralcy could get behind and offer real change rather than running his own tired ass again? Couldn't the money wasted on another losing campaign be better spent on a viable alternative?

Link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080224/ap_on_el_pr/nader

Got my first taste last night... after twelve years living in Colorado, one of the candidates actually called my home and told us everything we needed to know about how... and where to be, what to do and when. After twelve years living in Colorado. I guess if you hang around long enough...

Now I would have thought I was derelict in my duty, or maybe just lazy... until they announced in their group precinct meeting that they were used to only seeing about fifteen people... our precinct alone had sixty-six people show up.

Of course, you had the usual grousing about waiting in the cold... because the lines were long and check in was slow... but as I pointed out to a couple of people in line, they only had two years to prepare for this.

And you could really tell where people's priorities were... most of us left after we selected our candidate for president... partially because the process of reading the rules took so long, and partially because with my back and the missus ankle, the two hours we stood and the distance back to our car in the cold was a bit much for both of us at our age.

You could also pick out the 'business as usual' Democrats from the 'we got to do something about this crap' people. The newbies, as I referred to the folks attending for the first time, many not much younger than yours truly, voted four to one for our candidate... and you could see the BAS Dems expressions sinking, when the second vote showed that the straw poll uncommitteds went with the majority.

I was very pleased that the young people in the room far from being intimidated were very vocal in the support of the their candidates and ISSUES. Maybe there's hope for this country yet.

Today's Veteran's for Common Sense email newsletter was headed by the following article.

"Veterans have no legal right to specific types of medical care, the Bush administration argues in a lawsuit accusing the government of illegally denying mental health treatment to some troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. The arguments, filed Wednesday in federal court in San Francisco, strike at the heart of a lawsuit filed on behalf of veterans that claims the health care system for returning troops provides little recourse when the government rejects their medical claims."

In addition, VCS also said the administration is attempting to limit Mental Health Care to returning Iraq and Afghanistan vets to five years. So serving your country really doesn't mean much anymore. When you look at the potential for injury or death, exposure to chemical and biological agents, and lack of liability on the part of the government, might as well stay home and work for Walmart... let them contract their wars out with Blackwater and Soldier of Fortune help wanted ads. I'd like to see the ribbon magnets for cars...'Support Our Mercenaries.'

My wife, of all people, sends me articles from truthout.org about how the war impacts individual soldiers and marines for whatever reason... maybe she enjoys watching me have flashbacks or telling my doctor to increase my meds.

As for supporting our troops, our kitchen table no longer exists because it is filled with packages for marine units in places I never heard of in Iraq and Afghanistan... half our Christmas cards came from officers and platoon leaders thanking us for their care packages, my old biker magazines, and kibble for the guard dogs. Great. We don't mind helping out. That doesn't mean we endorse weapons of mass stupidity... like say, POLITICIANS or there unmoving position on war.

But a story of another suicide or unnecessary death is all it takes to kick in my memories of working in a wartime military combat support hospital. The sound of helicopters, particular the old huey's used by the National Guard still is enough to throw me into a panic attack for days.

So, I hope some frigging Democrat reads this and starts talking about how they are going to keep these kids... thirty years my junior from ending up like me or this young marine in this story link:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/020208Z.shtml

It was sent to me by a Republican friend... yes, I know Republicans... some of them are even relatives. But I can't stop laughing over this, whoever wrote really understands my dilemma with both parties:

>>>"A cowboy named Bud was overseeing his herd in a remote mountainous pasture in Colorado when suddenly a brand-new BMW advanced out of a dust cloud towards him.

The driver, a young man in a Brioni suit, Gucci shoes, RayBan sunglasses and YSL tie, leans out the window and asks the cowboy, "If I tell you exactly how many cows and calves you have in your herd, Will you give me a calf?"

Bud looks at the man, then looks at his peacefully grazing herd and calmly answers; "Sure, Why not?"

The man parks his car, whips out his Dell notebook computer, connects it to his Cingular RAZR V3 cell phone, and surfs to a NASA page on the Internet, where he calls up a GPS satellite to get an exact fix on his location which he then feeds to another NASA satellite that scans the area in an ultra-high-resolution photo.

The young man then opens the digital photo in Adobe Photoshop and exports it to an image processing facility in Hamburg, Germany

Within seconds, he receives an email on his Palm Pilot that the image has been processed and the data is stored. He then accesses a MS-SQL database through an ODBC connected Excel spreadsheet, after a few minutes, receives a response.

Finally, he prints out a full-color, 150-page report on his hi-tech, miniaturized HP LaserJet printer and finally turns to the cowboy and says, "You have exactly 1,586 cows and calves."

"That's right. Well, I guess you can take one of my calves," says Bud.

He watches the young man select one of the animals and looks on amused as the young man stuffs it into the trunk of his car.

Then the Bud says to the young man, "Hey, if I can tell you exactly what your business is, will you give me back my calf?"

The young man thinks about it for a second and then says, "Okay, why not?"

"You're a Congressman", says Bud.

"Wow! That's correct," says the man, "but how did you guess that?"

"No guessing required," answered the cowboy. "You showed up here even though nobody invited you; you want to get paid for an answer I already knew, to a question I never asked. You tried to show me how much smarter than me you are; and you don't know a thing about cows...this is a herd of sheep. Now give me back my dog.">>>

After reading this, my first question was how many taxpayer dollars the congressman spent to count the 'cows?'

936 strikes and the administration is out. Now they are asking the Iraqi government for broad powers to conduct combat operations, and for immunity from prosecution for soldiers and private contractors involved in military actions. This request is anticipating exhaustion of UN support, if any, and anticipation of long term occupation...that is to say, beyond the demise of the current administration... so where's the news in all this? It seems that giving private contractors immunity is tantamount to 'Wild West tactics' and 'Cowboy diplomacy' on the streets of Bagdad. No more Mei Li's or Abu Grabes. Boy! That will make the next administration and America really popular with Middle Eastern nations! True impearialism in action.

Here's your link from the NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/25/world/middleeast/25military.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

Getting away from news clips, quotes, quips and bytes, its refreshing to see that the young people (and others) at Campus Progress have their eyes firmly on what is going to matter after the "2008 Mr. or Mrs. President Beauty Pageant" is concluded in November. One post over there points out that the last two presidencies... I believe they are referring to Clinton and Bush did nothing to move forward with peace initiatives in the Middle East, specifically Israel/Palestine until the end of their lame duck administrations. Fascinating. Another post that caught my eye was citing the fact that in the last debates, the candidates were asked the same number of questions about global warming as were asked about UFO's, that number being three. One of the commentators had me LMAO pointing out that the same people who don't believe in global warming do believe in alien abductions. It appears some of us still prefer substance to spin

Hell, they been doing everything else wrong, why not try this too? Thanks to John Zutz and VVAW:

>I was appointed to the local Draft Board the other day. Just in time
> for this.
> John
>
> Legislation > 2007-2008 (110th Congress)
> H.R. 393: Universal National Service Act of 2007
> To require all persons in the United States between the ages of 18
> and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the
> uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the
> national defense and homeland security, to authorize the induction of
> persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength
> requirements of the uniformed services, to amend the Internal Revenue
> Code of 1986 to make permanent the favorable treatment afforded
> combat pay under the earned income tax credit, and for other
purposes.

Forty years ago, the Democratic Party was faced with the specter of losing the Presidency after eight years. The Democrats only hope was a handful of candidates that had spent the primaries talking about issues rather than personalities. Because of those candidates and the urgency of those issues, the entire election turned on issues and not personalities.

Unfortunately, during the primaries the leading Democratic candidate, a young man who captured everyone's imagination with his charisma, charm, and determination was shot in a kitchen in California after winning that state's primary. The other candidate, the Senator from Minnesota suddenly looked like he might end up being the standard bearer for ending the war and civil rights, particularly voting rights in the south. Unfortunately, the Senator's heart wasn't in the campaign and he never captured the imagination of the Democratic party the way his dead colleague had.

While the Democratic convention was in the process of naming Hubert Humphrey as it's candidate, there was rioting in the streets of Chicago quelled by a mayor, a Democrat who tried to control and orchestrate the convention without regard to the tempest of emotion in America in 1968. The situation was out of control. It truly was Nero fiddling while Rome burned. The party abandoned the issues for a status quo candidate.

Who picked up the standard… who became the candidate with progressive ideas, and led the Republican party to eight years in the White House? Richard Nixon picked up the causes that the progressive Democrats had dropped, ending the war and civil rights, and campaigned on those issues. Of course, everyone had forgotten this was the man that sat beside Joe McCarthy on his witch hunt for Communists, no one remembered that eight years earlier, Nixon was inarticulate and unable to gain enough support as Vice President to one of the most heroic figures to emerge from the second world war… even Eisenhower's magic couldn't save Nixon from himself in 1960.

Forty years later what have we learned? Many of our basic rights have been taken away or reduced in order to 'protect our rights.' Freedom of assembly and freedom of speech have become inconveniences that must be controlled or fenced in to prevent public affairs nightmares for piss poor politicians. Freedom of the press has been manipulated to the point that Hearst's yellow journalism of the 20's and 30's pales in comparison, opinion and hearsay now pass as fact as news organizations and talk show hosts manufacture revelations about politicians, trend setters and people outside the status quo. The 'Moral Majority' of the late Jerry Falwell has become a formidable political machine in search of a new standard bearer if they can get away from some of their leaders sexual orientation and conduct issues, which seem to only be problems for them.

All the elements are still here in 2008, an unpopular war, disenfranchised voters in the south, and with a progressive young black man as a candidate there is now a verbal battle being fought over whose best represents civil rights in the coming election as a personality issue… duh!

What else can the party do to self destruct between now and the November election? Apparently no one inside the beltway realizes we are at war, new jobs at Walmart and McDonald's cannot sustain economic growth, housing starts coupled with mortgage foreclosures do not represent an upward trend in personal wealth, and voting machines that record anything other than what the voter actually entered are so ridiculously stupid that it's expected of politicians to do dumb crap like that and think they can get away with it. Of course they don't want you to get a hard copy…you think they want you to have proof of election fraud?

Me… I haven't got a clue as to who will win in November. It's after November I'm worried about… I have no idea what any of these people want to do for and with our country or what the hell they stand for, tears don't cut it unless they are for men and women losing their lives, children without enough to eat or unable to get an education, citizens languishing in jail because habeus corpus no longer exists. I do know that several of these candidates, including Democrats voted for funding to continue the war in exchange for pork barreling concessions in their own districts… lives for highways, guns or butter.

Think what you will, attack me if you like, but it's in the paper, on television and the internet everyday. What does your crystal ball tell you? I hear people saying these candidates and politicians are not responsible for society's ills… well, damn it, they sure the hell pass the laws that are, and if they can't take responsibility for the quality of their work, then they are responsible by proxy.

...against all enemies foreign and domestic. Sound familiar? It's part of the oath of office all persons entering into service of the United States are required to take. Taking this oath for persons entering the military has life or death implications. One assumes that when you take on this responsibility that the government will live up to its responsibility and provide proper and prompt compensation if you lose you life, use of your body or parts there of, and will take care of your family in your absence or incapacitation... just as any employer responsible under OWCP regulations would be. But the federal government is self-insured, which basically means not insured. Those of us injured during our military service, widows, dependents are at the whim of political appropriations for our livelyhood, thus I received this letter from IAVA (Iraq Afganistan Veterans Assoc.) yesterday.

"Dear Richard,

Great news. We just learned that the President is planning to approve an additional $3.7 billion in funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs. We're expecting him to make it official sometime tomorrow.

Until now, no one knew whether the President was going to approve this critical funding. Previously, he had said he would support getting the money to the VA. But with the deadline just days away, time was running out. So last Thursday, along with nine other leading veterans organizations, IAVA signed a letter to the President urging him to approve the funding. You can read it here.

We've been following this issue since December, and many of you helped us keep the pressure on by writing letters to the editors of your local newspapers. A lot of you put time and effort into this, and I'd say $3.7 billion is a great result to show for your work.

This money doesn't represent irresponsible spending - it's funding that is desperately needed to battle a backlog of 600,000 VA claims, and to pay for research into medical conditions like Traumatic Brian Injury.

So to all of you who supported these efforts by contributing over the past several months, or by writing letters over the past few days - thank you. Once again, we have shown that committed Americans really can make a difference for our country's newest generation of veterans.

Sincerely,"

Etc. Etc.

In simple English this means that hundreds of thousands of veterans have yet to receive benefits that are suppose to make them 'whole' after having completed their service to this nation, and that a guy that was AWOL from his guard unit during wartime has the ability to withhold those funds is a national tragedy.

Who knows what political movations make some one do this? Is he trying to control a large block of votes by holding a financial gun to their heads. Maybe.

Is it ethical? Do you want 600,000 plus voters to vote their pocketbooks in the future because their income depends on voting 'the right way?' Or do you want them to vote their conscience because its a guaranteed right?

We as a nation have to step up to the plate and take responsibility for the liability that is created when this nation goes to war and realize that liability does not stop when the guns are silenced because our dead and wounded did not stop there service when things got dangerous. This process of compensating veterans needs to be removed from politics. These veterans gave and continue to give everything asked of them, can we say the same?

According to an article in today's Washington Post, a survey has found that Iraqi casualties from the current conflict actually appear to have been 151,000 so far, down from a previous estimate of as many a 601,000. The article goes on to say that 9 out of 10 of those casualties were the direct result of engagement of hostile forces...etc. etc. If the information in the survey is accurate, then collateral damage from the oil driven/profiteering war would only be about twenty percent atrocious as previously believed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/09/AR2008010902793....

So the Democrats have once again caved in to the administration for procedural reasons and pork barrelling and voted to fund the war. Does anyone on Capitol Hill even consider the bleeding of our economy in tax dollars, much less human life this war represents? Obviously the party's leadership are making their opinions based on the administration's assessment and Fox News' presentation of how we are doing, because they are not paying attention to the polls. If you haven't lost a family member in this never ending conflict, God bless you. If you have then you can understand why after losing two members of our family, and a third one on his way to his first tour, we find the parties continued support, covert or overt, and lack of political backbone disgusting.

CNN's latest opinion poll shows 68 percent of Americans oppose the war... 31 percent support it with one percent unsure.

CBS News/New York Times poll from December 5-9th shows that 69 percent of Americans disapprove of the way George Bush is handling the war... with 26 percent approving and 5 percent unsure.

USA Today/Gallup Poll for Nov 30-Dec. 2 shows that 57 percent of Americans feel that the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq... 41 percent said we did not make a mistake and 2 percent were unsure.

Pew Research Center for the People & the Press survey conducted for Nov. 20-26, 2007 said 54 percent of Americans felt we should bring home the troops as soon as possible... 41 percent said we should stay until Iraq is stabilized and 5 percent were unsure.

NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll on Nov. 1-5, 2007 in half their sample, 68 percent did not approve of the president's handling of the situation in Iraq ... while 27 percent approved and 5 percent were unsure.

ABC News/Washington Post Poll Oct. 29-Nov. 1 stated that 63 percent of Americans felt that the cost/benefit of the war in Iraq was not worth it to the United States... 35 percent felt it was worth it and 2 percent were unsure.

But the results I found to be most telling of the current feelings of Americans is the CBS News Poll from September 14-16 where pollsters asked "Do you approve or disapprove of the way Democrats in Congress are handling the situation with Iraq?" 57 percent of those polled disapproved, 31 percent said they approved and 2 percent were unsure.

The party went into the midterm election with not a lot to offer voters in the way of substance, and won the seats they need in Congress based on poor leadership and scandle among the opposition. They fulfilled that commitment, but there hasn't been a change in the direction... there's still a war, the economy is no better, the mortgage crisis, immigration... all substantive issues seem to be on hold for a popularity contest. Where's the meat?

Here's the link if you want to see the polls.

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

In an article from McClatchy Newspapers, the Democrats will not risk possibly offending some voters by taking action against Bush and Cheney. Quoted by Ward Reilly, the article states:

"There are both policy and political reasons that Democratic leaders are
risking the anger of their base.

One is that some don't see an impeachable offense in what Bush has
done, what the Constitution calls "high crimes and misdemeanors." They
might find such evidence in any of the many congressional investigations, but they haven't yet.

Another is that they fear a political backlash from voters similar to
the one that punished Republicans after they impeached Bill Clinton. One factoron the side of the pro-impeachment crowd: Clinton was much more popular than Bush.

The third is that they're eager to keep Bush and Cheney around as
punching bags for Democratic candidates in the 2008 campaign."

This confirms my personal suspicions I alluded to in my earlier post today about the two parties... cut from the same political cloth... looking out for their interests, not ours. Sorry, no link for this one, you have to go to VVAW.net yourself.