McCain receives failing grades from veterans organizations

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Senator John McCain should not take for granted that veterans will support him in November.  His legislative record shows that he has not been a champion for military families and veterans.

Last week, McCain was one of only three senators to miss a vote on a defense appropriation bill that included the Webb-Hagel "G.I. Bill" amendment which provides enhanced education benefits.  Had McCain bothered to show up to vote, he would have voted against the Webb-Hagel G.I. Bill which was opposed by the Pentagon on the grounds it was "too expensive" and may encourage service members not to reenlist. President Bush has threatened to veto the bill. 

The Senate approved the bill by a veto proof margin of 75-22 (25 Republicans joined every Democrat in voting for the bill).  McCain said he supported a watered-down alternative version of the bill.

In opposing the bill, McCain went against virtually every veterans organization, from the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the American Legion to the more partisan VoteVets.org.  Senate Passes $165 Billion Measure to Pay for Wars – washingtonpost.com

Former Secretary of the Navy and retiring Senator John Warner (R-VA), a co-sponsor of the bill, was quoted as saying "I have spent many days in the United States Senate, and I don’t know of any days I will cherish more than this one."

During Senate debate on the bill, Senator Barack Obama commented that:

"I respect Senator John McCain’s service to our country.  He is one of those heroes of which I speak.  But I can’t understand why he would line up behind the president in opposition to this G.I. Bill. I can’t believe why he believes it is too generous to our veterans.  I could not disagree with him and the president more on this issue.  There are many issues that lend themselves to partisan posturing, but giving our veterans the chance to go to college should not be one of them."

McCain, who has written that his nickname was "McNasty" when he was in school because of his quick temper and tendency to be a schoolyard bully, demonstrated that he has not matured with his advanced age.  Rather than answer Obama’s rhetorical question, he quickly fired back – from his more important campaign fund raising event in California – with a vitriolic ad hominem attack press release:

"It is typical, but no less offensive that Senator Obama uses the Senate floor to take cheap shots at an opponent and easy advantage of an issue he has less than zero understanding of.  Let me say first in response to Senator Obama, running for President is different than serving as President. The office comes with responsibilities so serious that the occupant can’t always take the politically easy route without hurting the country he is sworn to defend.  Unlike Senator Obama, my admiration, respect and deep gratitude for America’s veterans is something more than a convenient campaign pledge.

* * *

I take a backseat to no one in my affection, respect and devotion to veterans. And I will not accept from Senator Obama, who did not feel it was his responsibility to serve our country in uniform, any lectures on my regard for those who did.

* * *

Perhaps, if Senator Obama would take the time and trouble to understand this issue he would learn to debate an honest disagreement respectfully. But, as he always does, he prefers impugning the motives of his opponent, and exploiting a thoughtful difference of opinion to advance his own ambitions."

Obama later responded to McCain’s ad hominem attack:

"I am proud to stand with Senator Webb and a bipartisan coalition to give our veterans the support and opportunity they deserve. It’s disappointing that Senator McCain and his campaign used this issue to launch yet another lengthy personal, political attack instead of debating an honest policy difference. He should know that this is not about John McCain or Barack Obama — it’s about giving our veterans a real chance to afford four years of college without harming retention. Senator Webb’s bipartisan bill will do this, and the bill that John McCain supports would not. These endless diatribes and schoolyard taunts from the McCain campaign do nothing to advance the debate about what matters to the American people."

McCain’s ad hominem attack exposes a disturbing feature of his character.  Whenever his self-righteous sense of honor or integrity or ethics is questioned (if only in his own mind) he responds out of anger, to which many of his Senate colleagues can attest.  He falls back on his comfortable tendency to be a schoolyard bully.  And whenever his actions are challenged, McCain will pull out his ordeal as a POW like a talisman to ward off any critical or uncomfortable questions that he does not want to answer.  It is meant to intimidate anyone who would challenge him into acquiescence or silence.  McCain has become far too comfortable with the sycophant news media who fawn over him and who never ask him the critical or uncomfortable question. 

As National Review columnist Thomas Sowell noted earlier this year in his opinion "McCain’s Crooked Talk," Thomas Sowell on John McCain & 2008 on National Review Online:

"When confronted with any of his misdeeds, Senator McCain tends to fall back on his record as a war hero in Vietnam.

* * *

Being a war hero is not a lifetime get-out-of-jail-free card. And becoming president of the United States is not a matter of rewarding an individual for past services.

The presidency is a heavy responsibility for the future of the nation, including generations yet unborn. Character and integrity are major qualifications.

The passing years and a friendly media have allowed Senator McCain’s shortcomings in the character and integrity department to fade into the background."

McCain has not been the champion of military families and veterans that his self-righteous tirade would have you believe.

Time magazine posed the question last week: “Does McCain Have a Vets Problem?” focusing on the Webb-Hagel G.I. Bill vote.  Time reported:

“This isn’t about anything partisan; we are firmly supporting the bill that does right by the veterans, does right by the troops, and that is not McCain’s bill,” said Ramona Joyce, a spokeswoman for the American Legion. “It could do McCain damage with veteran voters if this issue drags out.” […]

This is not the first time McCain, who has a proud history of opposing what he views as excessive government spending, has found himself at odds with his fellow veterans on legislation. He’s voted for veterans funding bills only 30% of the time, according to a scorecard of roll-call votes put out by the nonpartisan Disabled Americans for America. Under the same system Obama has a 90% rating — though, of course, he has spent a much shorter time in Washington. “Senator McCain clearly needs to be recognized for his military service and in some respects that will play to his advantage, but when it actually comes to delivering health care and benefits during war, Senator McCain’s going to have some explaining to do,” said Paul Sullivan, director of the nonpartisan Veterans for Common Sense.

The New York Times explained Editorial – Mr. Bush and the G.I. Bill – Editorial – NYTimes.com that:

"Mr. Bush — and, to his great discredit, Senator John McCain — have argued against a better G.I. Bill, for the worst reasons. They would prefer that college benefits for service members remain just mediocre enough that people in uniform are more likely to stay put.

They have seized on a prediction by the Congressional Budget Office that new, better benefits would decrease re-enlistments by 16 percent, which sounds ominous if you are trying — as Mr. Bush and Mr. McCain are — to defend a never-ending war at a time when extended tours of duty have sapped morale and strained recruiting to the breaking point.

Their reasoning is flawed since the C.B.O. has also predicted that the bill would offset the re-enlistment decline by increasing new recruits — by 16 percent. The chance of a real shot at a college education turns out to be as strong a lure as ever. This is good news for our punishingly overburdened volunteer army, which needs all the smart, ambitious strivers it can get."

Not being a champion for veterans’ causes is not something new for McCain.  Think Progress reports that McCain has received failing grades from several veterans organizations Think Progress » McCain: ‘I Received The Highest Award From Literally Every Veterans Organization In America’

"The recognition McCain has received from veterans groups is not “high awards” but failing grades:

— Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America gave McCain a grade of D for his record of voting against veterans. (By contrast, Obama got a B+.)

– Disabled Veterans of America noted McCain’s dismal 20 percent voting record on veterans’ issues. (Obama had an 80 percent.) [109th Congress]

– In a list of “Key Votes,” Vietnam Veterans of America (VVA) notes McCain “Voted Against Us” 15 times and “Voted For Us” only 8. (Obama voted for VVA 12 times, and against only once.)

McCain frequently cites his own experience as a POW in Vietnam as the ultimate evidence of his dedication to his fellow veterans. Unfortunately, his record belies his rhetoric."

McCain is just another in a long line of Republicans who do not hesitate to write a blank check for the military-industrial-congressional complex and for wars, both overt and covert, that meet their grand design for American empire.  But when the men and women who proudly serve their country return home from service, many of them shattered in mind and body and in need of long-term assistance and care, suddenly they are a burden who have become "too expensive."  Many volunteered on the promise of education benefits in return for their service.  This nation has an obligation to honor its long-term commitments to our service men and women, regardless of the cost. 

Senator McCain has not previously called upon a military service litmus test for the presidency.  It is disingenuous that he does so now.  McCain has consistently defended the Neoconservative architects of Bush’s "preemption doctrine" and occupation of Iraq, almost all of whom are "chickenhawks" who have no military service (several of whom are now serving as advisers to his campaign).  It is rank hypocrisy for McCain to criticize Senator Obama for not having served in the military (during the all volunteer era) when one considers the Neoconservative chickenhawks serving as advisers in his own campaign.