If you listen to Democratic campaign ads in Colorado, Nevada, or Delaware, among other places, you will discover yet another perfidious plot by evil Republicans — they want to “privatize the VA.”
Which makes one respond, “This is a horrible thing because … why?”
I know that even the mention of privatizing certain functions of the VA causes heads to explode at VoteVets and IAVA, which means the idea must have some merit. Personally, I am open to the idea. Jonn, myself, and others frequently post horror stories about the VA healthcare system in addition to using VA benefits ourselves. Despite a 11 percent increase in demand as a result of the GWOT and 95 percent budget increase, wait times are actually getting longer, quality of care isn’t improving, and almost every veteran I know who is attending college has to battle with the GI Bill office over something every semester. At least trying a pilot program where certain health benefits are paid for using debit cards like the ones they use for Health Savings Account is worth a shot.
For those of you who use VA benefits, what are your thoughts about this?
Remember Eric Massa the VoteVets candidate who became a New York Congressman and eventually resigned in disgrace because he was accused of sexually harassing his male staff? Well, that brings us to Brian Lentz, another VoteVets candidate who is running for the seat in Pennsylvania recently vacated by yet another VoteVets candidate, Joe Sestak now running for Arlen Specter’s vacated Senate seat.
Well for months now Lentz has been denying that he had anything to do with getting a Tea Party candidate, Jim Schneller, on the ballot to make it a three-way race in his favor against Republican Pat Meehan. From The Hill;
“If somebody’s already made the decision to run, I didn’t think that ‘helping’ with the process of signature petitions was improper,” Lentz told told the Delaware County Daily Times editorial board in an interview.
Republicans have accused Democrats of helping set up Tea Party candidates as spoilers in several House and Senate races around the country. Democrats face a tough political environment this fall, when they are trying to maintain their congressional majorities against a GOP wave spurred in part by Tea Party groups.
Schneller – whose past political activity includes filing a lawsuit challenging President Obama’s citizenship – began his campaign for Congress long before Lentz volunteers circulated petitions on his behalf. Lentz pressed that point on Tuesday. “I did not encourage him to run for office,” the Democrat said. “He made that decision on his own.”
Yeah, I think an Army officer turned county prosecutor would know that it’s unethical to prop up a candidate against his own opponent even if it’s not against the law – I hope the voters in Pennsylvania CD-7 understand.
Vote Vets is running this ad against Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania to prop up his adversary, Joe Sestak, in the race for the Senate formerly occupied by Arlen Specter;
Sounds pretty bad, huh? Well, TSO sends this from FactCheck.org;
VoteVets.org Action Fund, a left-leaning veterans group, is up with an ad that claims Republican Pat Toomey supports letting Wall Street executives keep “every penny of their bonuses.” It’s true that he opposed a bill that would have imposed a 90 percent tax on bonuses for executives at bailed-out banks. But that’s not the same as letting executives keep “every penny,” since normal tax rates still apply.
Well, that and it was a 90% tax – I don’t think anyone should get taxed on money they got legally so that they can only get 10% of the payment. No one. What kind of precedent would that set? It was just thirty years ago that we got rid of 70% marginal tax rates. And they were already liable for 35% in income taxes anyway – that’s not attractive either. So the “every penny” BS is an attempt by VoteVets to mislead.
And like I said in October, where were they when Murtha was threatening to cut out existing bonuses?
Oh, I’m not particularly happy about seeing veterans complaining that they didn’t get a bonus for combat. Are we that mercenary now?
The few remaining readers, including the fired front page writers at VoteVets are doing the “cabbage patch” at VoteVets because we’ve almost ended the VFW PAC.
Right wing anger over VFW’s non-endorsement of degenerates who beat and torture detainees and fire 60 rounds into unarmed Iraqis and hang signs over their dead bodies has escalated to a level where the VFW national commander wants to dissolve the organization’s political arm all together:
t would have been nice to see this kind of outrage when VFW failed to endorse Tommy Sowers last month and instead endorsed an incumbent who repeatedly voted against Veterans funding.
Yeah, at the time, dicksmith complained that the VFW PAC didn’t endorse Sowers because the organization is partisan. So obviously the “smithy of dicks” didn’t look at the list of endorsees from the PAC or he would have seen that a majority of them were Democrats. Or maybe he ignored that simple and obvious fact in order to stay on message.
Police officer and fired VetsVoice front pager, Chris LeJeune, you remember the guy who threatened to pretend he has PTSD so he could beat my ass, couples with the smithy of dicks to claim that VoteVets has endorsed Republicans in the past. That might be true, but I can’t find one. And, of course, they are reticent about naming this lone ranger of Republicans among VoteVets’. And obviously, he wasn’t successful or they’d be shouting his name from rooftops.
Regardless, VoteVets is endorsing ten Democrats and no Republicans this election cycle, so they have no room to criticize the VFW PAC like they did a few weeks ago. And, oh, by the way, Swinging Richard, Allen West was just the impetus of firing the PAC, they lost their jobs because they endorsed people like Barbara Boxer, Harry Reid, Jim McDermott…you know, people who actually voted against the troops, not those manufactured votes you and Soltz are constantly yanking out of each others’ puckered asses.
Look, I’m not real comfortable with a Veterans organization endorsing non-Vets at all. If there is no Vet in the race or you don’t like the one in the race, just don’t endorse.
Now, someone smarter than me, please tell me what in the hell he means by this. I thought what he was saying was that if there was a group that was allegedly made up of veterans, something with a name like say “Vote Vets” that they shouldn’t be endorsing candidates who are not veterans. Anyone else read it that way?
The only reason I ask is that as Jonn pointed out earlier, they waited a full day before putting this out:
And now, they are touting their new ad blasting Blunt in his race against non-veteran Carnahan:
Mind you the charge is complete horseshit, but what would you expect from them?
I get Pennsylvania TV here in West Virginia so when I saw this ad last night, I was a little pissed that Sestak thinks so little of his constituents that he’d run this blatant lie to deceive PA seniors with his fear mongering;
First of all notice, all of the people in the ad are probably on Social Security – they wouldn’t be affected by new social security reform. They’re already receiving payments – which by the way, haven’t kept up with inflation since George Bush left office.
Under Mr. Toomey’s proposal, the government would guarantee the Social Security benefits of people currently at or approaching retirement age.
“Any change for those folks would be outrageous and unreasonable. Those people who have worked a lifetime paying into a system with a promised set of benefits need to get what they were promised,” Mr. Toomey said.
On The Issues, tells the truth about Toomey and his record on Social Security; He’s voted to lower taxes on Social Security (since Democrats raised taxes on Social Security in 1993 from 50% taxable payments to 80%). Toomey voted to create personal retirement accounts within Social Security which were completely voluntary.
I’m stunned and shocked that a Vote Vets candidate like Sestak would lie. Well, no I’m not…I expect it.
If I were to name one person in the Senate who did absolutely nothing to support the troops deployed in combat, it would be Harry Reid. He declared the “surge” a failure before it began. He spent two years trying to defund the wars and leave the troops in the field without resources – two entire years. During that time, he couldn’t pass a defense budget, yet found time to bring to the floor of the Senate time and again legislation that would prematurely end our involvement in the Near East.
The mission of VoteVets.org Political Action Committee is to elect Veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to public office; hold public officials accountable for their words and actions that impact America’s 21st century servicemembers; and fully support our men and women in uniform.
Yet, here’s the ad that VoteVets is running in Nevada for Reid, who somehow managed to avoid military service, and has managed to to avoid support for the troops in the field.
Titled “Highway,” the ad shows a young man hiking along the road, just as Harry Reid did once a week as he went back and forth to school. Narrated by Anthony Funches an Air Force veteran from Las Vegas, the ad chronicles how Harry Reid has always beat the odds, including his leadership to provide care and benefits to our nation’s veterans.
Are they talking about the same Harry Reid the rest of us know? In Pennsylvania, they’re supporting Patrick Murphy – their sole survivor of the 2008 cycle after their other goofus, Eric Masa screwed himself out of the House of Representatives – with this ad;
Yeah, I’m sure Mike Fitzpatrick is a bigger threat to veterans than Reid. Dick Smith promises more ads tomorrow – wanna bet it’s for Sestak?
We’ve been there to push through the new GI Bill, to push back against truly wasteful spending that could be used for the troops, and to support veterans who want to continue their service in public life, among many other things.
Yeah, since when. VoteVets and Soltz has been charging hard for the Clean Energy Bill (Cap and Trade) which has nothing to do with supporting the troops – name one thing they’ve done this year that didn’t have to do with Cap and Trade or getting Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell reversed.
He forgot to add one thing to that last sentence. It should read; “…to support veterans who want to continue their service in public life, as long as they’re Democrats“.
Look, I’m not real comfortable with a Veterans organization endorsing non-Vets at all. If there is no Vet in the race or you don’t like the one in the race, just don’t endorse.
So why are they throwing money at Harry Reid. He’s not a veteran, there’s not a veteran in his race? Why doesn’t dicksmith and Soltz just come out and be honest that the only requirement for their support is membership in the Democrat Party? Are they just that treacherous and unscrupulous?
My friends have weighed in on the VFW PAC issue, which I started last week. Mr Wolf from Blackfive has a post at Breitbart’s Big Peace and he’s still advocating that you to burn your VFW membership card. Well, I can’t do that – mine is aluminum. Yes, I’ve been a member that long – nearly twenty years as a Life Member.
That guy who calls himself Mothax, has a really well-written post up at The Burn Pit about the pitfalls of a VSO trying to remain non-partisan in a political environment. He approaches the subject from an historical perspective without dick-punching the VFW.
Me? I’m sticking it out for reform of the VFW PAC. I don’t know what their procedure is for endorsing a candidate, but obviously it’s wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. But, I don’t think that the answer is to disband a hundred-year-old organization. I’m also sure that organizations like VoteVets and IAVA are salivating at the thought of of the 2.1 million members of VFW, and their dues, in the wind.
And, admit it, all of those guys who wrote that THIS is the reason they won’t join the VFW now, were never going to join anyway. I’ve seen the power of blogs in relation to certain organizations, and I’m putting my money on the folks who stick rather than the folks who bail on the VFW.
Mr. Wolf says the VFW has kicked the can down the road by putting off for the next convention what they should be doing today. It’s only kicking the can down the road if that’s what we let them do. Mr. Wolf has a point, and I’ll admit that resigning my membership was my first reaction – but then I realized that it would probably do more damage than good.
It also worries me that some of the leftists have joined in the feeding frenzy.
But I’ll tell you what, as a twenty-year Life Member of the VFW, when a receptionist at the VFW PAC takes my name and number, and I’m like the VFW’s last ally on the internet…they’d better call me back. They’ve already called Bev Perlson back and she’s not even a member.