Dereliction of Duty - McCain's record on veterans' issues is shocking and awful.

[BridgeTheGap]

At a town hall meeting in Denver in early July, a Vietnam veteran asked presidential candidate Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) why he had opposed increasing healthcare for veterans whenever Congress had taken up the issue over the past six years. McCain virtually ignored the man's question, dissembling his opposition to an updated GI Bill for veterans. After the questioner challenged McCain's response, the senator reacted as he usually does when queried beyond his comfort level: He got visibly angry.

Because McCain is running for president almost solely on his biography as a war hero, he can't - and won't - allow the slightest doubt to linger about his dedication to soldiers both past and present. It didn't matter that the vet simply wanted to know how McCain - himself a former soldier and prisoner of war - could oppose important healthcare legislation for veterans. In fact, he didn't even ask McCain about the GI Bill that he opposed, which had been supported by a bipartisan group of 75 senators, including Republican veterans Chuck Hagel (Neb.) and John Warner (Va.).

Most notably, McCain also testily responded to his inquisitor that he had "received every award from every vets organization."

The problem is, not only is that assertion not true, but McCain's record on veterans' issues paints a picture of a man who has been willfully negligent when it comes to providing for his former brothers and sisters in arms.

http://www.truthout.org/article/john-mccains-dereliction-duty

[jimmil]

1. This is one thing I never understood about McCain...

How, as a veteran, can he oppose any bill that would help veterans in anything? There are vets that are liberal and conservative and one thing you can almost always count on is veterans doing their best to help other veterans. I don't care what political persuasion one is, military service binds us together and improving the living standards of former and active military personnel is a no brainer. How can McCain vote against improving the life of veterans who traditionally have been at the bottom of the barrel when it comes to benefits?

[Blaubart]

2. Why do people believe...

...that veterans should be given everything anyone proposes they be given?

First of all, I am a veteran. I served 11 years in the Army. I was paid fair wages for every day that I served and that is all I expected to be paid for my service. I also signed up for the GI Bill and since I invested $1,200 of my money into it, I also expect my country to honor that commitment. However, the benefits that they originally promised me, the benefits I would have been satisfied to receive, were increased several times since I signed on the dotted line almost 20 years ago. I am grateful for those increases, but I wouldn't hold it against anyone that voted against increasing my benefits since I signed a contract for the lesser amount.

How about this: I propose that every veteran be given $5,000 a month plus adjustments for inflation for the rest of their lives. Some might agree that is a fine proposal and would support it. Others might feel it is excessive and would not support it. But not supporting it is not equivalent to not supporting the troops but rather that you don't support my proposal.

Or, it could be that after I put forth my proposal, other people came along and added various other things to my proposal, like a $25 million bridge in Oregon, $16 million for a federal prison renovation and allowing bison hunts to continue around Yellowstone National Park.