DISQUS

A. J. · 3 years ago

There are many veterans running for Congress...What is interesting is all but one of them who served in Iraq recently are Democrats.

Even when you put all the veterans together from Vietnam to the the Gulf War who are running this year, the Democrats still outnumber the Republicans.

When Congressman John Murtha spoke out last November, he was speaking for a silent majority within the military ranks. A war hawk like that, who was a Marine for 30 years, doesn't just stand up and say what he said for nothing.

David Nick · 3 years ago

And why does he say it A.J.? Care to speculate further?

A. J. · 3 years ago

Because he's talked to people who are telling him, 'please say something because we can't.' If you want to talk about supporting the troops, not many people know better than Congressman Murtha. But if you'd rather listen to 5-deferment Cheney, go ahead.

That report about the military being "stretched" that surfaced a few weeks ago is a Pentagon report. It's not some outside party.

--->Andrew Krepinevich, a retired Army officer who wrote the report under a Pentagon contract, concluded that the Army cannot sustain the pace of troop deployments to Iraq long enough to break the back of the insurgency. He also suggested that the Pentagon's decision, announced in December, to begin reducing the force in Iraq this year was driven in part by a realization that the Army was overextended.

A. J. · 3 years ago

source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/...

Michelle · 3 years ago

Thanks for the mention! Since we both blog elsewhere from time to time, we wanted to tailor the site to that same community. We will retain it post election as a non-profit and/or political blog. We were surprised to see your piece but wanted to add a correction, David is a PA liberal, transplanted here...:) Though being a Democrat in Texas is the hardest job in the US these days, he is very far from a conservative.

To add to the above statement regarding Murtha and recruiting issues...this was widely known within the service when they invasion of Iraq started...one of the reasons he opted to run in this slot when he returned. We both worked for the last guy in the race in 2004 and knew what would work and wouldn't work in advance.

Glad to see another Dave Matthews fan in the blogsphere...check out Blue October from the link in our virtual office!

Michelle
Campaign Director
www.followmetodc.com

Aaron · 3 years ago

Hey Michelle,

thanks for stopping by. And thanks for the correction. I admit I made an assumption conservative/liberal based on Congressional district without looking too closely at his views. They don't really affect me since I'm in Maryland. We'd probably disagree on politics, but at least we can agree on Dave Matthews Band! :-)

David Nick · 3 years ago

Wow Aaron, did you advertise or was it a "stumble"?

Kudos!

As for Murtha/Harris, we all know about the "No Armor/Poorly Equipped" military. We also know that their has been, and continues to be a recruitment problem. When in war, it's even more difficult to recruit because people realize that if they sign up during wartime, guess what?! You're going to war! So that tends to retard recruitment efforts.

Stating that, I am a cynic when it comes to the whole "Our military is broken" campaigns. First of all, no one running campaigns has ever said "I will fix what's broken in the Armed Forces" and followed through. No matter what the hype has been. Secondly, the Democrats time and time again have been against military and defense spending since Pre-Reagan times. That's a statistical fact.

So even if you have a military background, and you run on a campaign that "I'll fix it" AND you're a democrat, I'd be highly suspicious.

But that's just me.

Aaron · 3 years ago

Advertise what, David? :-) I don't advertise unless I'm paid to and that hasn't happened as far as I know. :-)

My feeling is we have the best trained and equipped military in the world and I'd challenge anyone to shoe evidence to the contrary. That said, the military could use some serious help in key areas of morale and yes, body armor... but discipline as well.

I wouldn't be so fast to pass judgement on Democrats and military assistance. I think thats a highly partisan stance. I may not agree with Democrats in the area of domestic issues but they may have a better plan when it comes to the military. Republicans have demonstrated that they don't so I'm willing to entertain a plan from Democrats. I'd like to know what the plan is rather than empty campaign promises in broad Kerryesque fashion:

*deep Massachusetts nobility voice*
I have a better plan for America...
*end deep Massachusetts nobility voice*

David Nick · 3 years ago

"I may not agree with Democrats in the area of domestic issues but they may have a better plan when it comes to the military. "

Sorry Aaron, I have never seen a Democrat plan on Military, Defense, unless it's in regards to cutting spending in lieu of other socialist programs. That's not partisan, that's the truth.

I will give you that as of late, Republicans consistently keep shooting themselves in the foot (No pun intended), but, most conservatives, be them Republicans or not are for Defense, Pro-Military, and want to see security in our own Borders.

I think I posted here a letter Norm Coleman sent to me in regards to his stance against border control, and he's a Republican.

So not everyone tows the party line in ideology.

I don't think I am being unfair with my characterization of Democrats. If they had a plan for better security/better defense I am all ears, but they've been far too focused on hating/blaming Bush to present a clear plan. To me, that's the same as having no plan.

Aaron · 3 years ago

No, I agree with your assessment of Democrats, David. I think my point is that neither party has a clue about defense and that both parties would rather spend money on things like 100+ government buildings named after Robert Byrd or a Ted Stevens "Bridge to Nowhere". When folks like Murtha come along that historically have a deep seated respect for the military and the military has a deep seated respect for him, taking notice of the plan of action (and Murtha had one!!) is something that we should do. Ignoring his plan based on "he's a Democrat and the Democrats don't have a clue" is silly and pointless and does nothing for the future of America - rather it does a lot for the future of America but not in a good way.

A. J. · 3 years ago

Thanks for mentioning that Aaron...It's not having a plan that's the problem, it's not being in power to put plans to action. Of course all Democrats can do is blame Bush for because Bush and the Republicans are in control!...They won't listen anyway. Republicans won in '94 using the same tactics.

As for military spending, it was Dick Cheney who proposed all kinds of cuts in military spending after the Soviet collapse and before the first Gulf War ( when he was sec. of defense)...In times of relative peace things change. It's not fair to compare another time to what is happening in the present.

Aaron · 3 years ago

To be fair and objective, AJ, the Democrats have a plan... the same one as the Republicans do. The presumptive 2008 Democratic Presidential candidate, Madame Hillary, wants to increase troops in Iraq and has thus far not offered any alternative to the war besides criticizing Bush. Hey, I can criticize Bush... maybe I can be the Democratic nominee???

Reality check. We have a one party system. And all the bickering is family stuff.

David Nick · 3 years ago

I'll agree with the One Party system Aaron. Amen to that LOL

I think Murtha was the pawn the Dems needed to stick it to Bush, one more time. I felt they used Murtha to push forth their Anti-Bush/Iraq campaign and Murtha didn't say no. That's the problem more than anything is the willingness to do whatever it takes to get camera time no matter the cost. And either fortunately, or unfortunately, people saw it for what it was.

P-r-o-p-a-g-a-n-d-a

Even if Murtha did have a plan. It would have been the same if a RINO like McCain said it.

As for the Rep/Dem power trip A.J. alluded too, it doesn't matter which party is in play: They both do it.

The bad result of our political system is that it makes things really hard when you want to push a candidate who doesn't really like either party. But if you want to win an election you have to sleep with the devil.

:(

Aaron · 3 years ago

Actually, I would disagree that Murtha was something planned by the Dems. Did you see how disoriented they were after his statements as they tried to figure out what to do about it?

A. J. · 3 years ago

I think it's obvious Murtha came out on his own...He's not the type to bow to any political pressure.

In terms of Hillary running for President, there is a growing number of Democrats who don't want her to run. If Hillary did get the nod I would probably vote for her, it's not that I dislike her - I just think there is too much hype. Remember, everyone thought Howard Dean was going to take it until John Kerry came up from near the bottom.

I'd rather see Mark Warner, or Russ Feingold run myself. In fact a Mark Warner/Evan Bayh ticket would seal Virginia and make Indiana/Ohio incredibly competative...That to me is the smartest Dem ticket out there right now.

I believe the fight in the 2008 primary is going to be on the Republican side - especially if John McCain runs. Many moderate Democrats would be fine with McCain as President, but the far rightwing conservatives would take immediate issue with him.