"UPDATED TESTIMONIALS: Former Admirals and Generals on Why They Support Hillary Clinton to be Our Next Commander-in-Chief"
More than thirty former admirals and generals, including two former Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and five retired officers at the four-star rank have endorsed Hillary Clinton to be our next Commander-in-Chief. Eighteen of these esteemed flag and general officers and other senior national security officials took part in a rare conference call with reporters earlier this month; eleven met in person with Senator Clinton last week in Washington for a private conversation about ending the war in Iraq and winning the war in Afghanistan; and to testify publicly for her leadership ability. In these testimonials below, these great Americans who have given so much to our country, say why they believe Senator Clinton is the best candidate of either party to be our next Commander-in-Chief.
Click here for audio of the testimonials. Transcripts are below.
General Wesley Clark
Click here for audio
General Henry Hugh Shelton
Click here for press release
Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral William Owens
Click here for audio
Lieutenant General Claudia Kennedy
Click here for audio
Lieutenant General Frederick Vollrath
Click here for audio
Major General Paul Eaton
Click here for audio
Major General Antonio M. Taguba
Click here for press release
Brigadier General John Watkins, Jr.
Click here for audio
Transcripts
General Wesley Clark
Click here for audio
"She has done her homework on national security and I know from my personal discussions with her and with many other friends that go in and brief her in her role in the Senate Armed Services Committee. She knows the facts, she knows the details, plus she has the big picture. She is a strategic thinker but she has the building blocks of the strategy in her personal knowledge. This is someone that when she is president our military is going to respect very highly, and when our Senior Officers brief her and meet with her they are going be very, very impressed by what she knows and the intelligence that she brings to these problems."
General Henry Hugh Shelton
Click here for press release
"I’ve been with Senator Clinton when she has been with our military men and women. I know from those experiences that she understands the demands and sacrifice of military life. I am confident she will always put the readiness and well being of our troops first. She is ready to be Commander-in-Chief."
Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral William Owens
Click here for audio "In this world that we face today, very complex as all of us know, I think experience will be really at a premium, especially at the level of the Commander-in-Chief. There’s no time to learn. The phone rings and you have to be ready. You have to ready with intuition, with experience and with skills. And this world will have the complexities that perhaps we’ve never before seen. I’ve been impressed with and admire Hillary Clinton for her work in the Senate. And we need people with great judgment. I think she brings the best of talent, intuition and experience to handle these unknown threats in the future."
Lieutenant General Claudia Kennedy
Click here for audio
"I support her because I trust her. I trust Hillary Clinton because of her judgment and her leadership. I have confidence that she is responsive to the needs of people. I believe that she understands leadership the way we do in the Army and that is that it’s about building connections and relationships and establishing guidance and leadership for others. I think she’ll rebuild relationships with other countries that have been suffering for the last seven or eight years; those relationships have really been strained beyond anything I would have anticipated. Another part of Hillary Clinton that I think is just tremendous is that she knows our reality. She is in touch with people, she listens to people. She decides what she believes about policy based on what’s right, she has integrity, and on what works, so she’s practical."
Lieutenant General Frederick E. Vollrath
Click here for audio
"I support Senator Clinton because I believe it’s time for change in our country, a new direction. And I know change carries with it risks. Senator Clinton is the candidate, in my opinion, with the proven experience that truly understands the risks and how to possibly cope with those risks to get the job done. We shouldn’t shirk from change because of the risks, but we absolutely have to have a leader with the proven experience. America, in the area of national defense, must be successful and Senator Clinton has that experience to create change, to understand the risk, and to get the job done."
Major General Paul D. Eaton
Click here for audio
"On a personal note, I have a Special Forces Captain son and a Sergeant Paratrooper both in Afghanistan. I find Senator Clinton the perfect choice to be their Commander-in-Chief and to display the loyalty to command our armed forces and to rebuild them after the conflicts in which we are engaged right now."
Major General Antonio M. Taguba
Click here for press release
"Senator Clinton’s unequivocal opposition to the use of torture under any circumstances, and her willingness to take a stand for what she believes in is exactly the sort of courage and moral strength that we need in our leaders. I know that, as President, Senator Clinton will hold America to the high moral standards that have made us a leader among nations."
Brigadier General John M. Watkins, Jr.
Click here for audio
"As I think about the challenges facing the nation and having been in uniform for almost thirty years, worked with a number of presidents to include the last four, I can’t think of a single person - those generals included - who is better qualified to walk into the Oval Office than Hillary Clinton. I don’t make that statement very lightly. She is more qualified, in my view, than her husband Bill was when he entered the office. It is no surprise to me that you would have as many flag officers who serve this country and Secretaries of the Army and Navy who have served this country who would come out and support Hillary."
The full list of admirals and generals who have endorsed Senator Clinton to be our next Commander-in-Chief follows:
1. General Wesley Clark
2. General John M. Shalikashvili
3. General Henry Hugh Shelton
4. General Johnnie E. Wilson
5. Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral William Owens
6. Lt. Gen. Joe Ballard
7. Lt. Gen. Robert Gard8. Lt. Gen. Claudia Kennedy
9. Lt. Gen. Donald Kerrick
10. Lt. Gen. Frederick E. Vollrath
11. Vice Admiral Donald C. Arthur
12. Vice Admiral Joseph A. Sestak, Jr.
13. Major General Roger R. Blunt
14. Major General George Buskirk, Jr.
15. Major General Edward L. Correa, Jr.
16. Major General Paul D. Eaton
17. Major General Paul D. Monroe, Jr.
18. Major General Antonio M. Taguba
19. Brigadier General John W. Douglass
20. Brigadier General Michael Dunn
21. Brigadier General Belisario Flores
22. Brigadier General Evelyn "Pat" Foote2
3. Brigadier General Keith H. Kerr
24. Brigadier General Virgil A. Richard
25. Brigadier General Preston Taylor
26. Brigadier General John M. Watkins, Jr.
27. Brigadier General Jack Yeager
28. Rear Admiral Connie Mariano
29. Rear Admiral Stuart F. Platt
30. Rear Admiral Alan M. Steinman
31. Rear Admiral David Stone
that's from hillary's campaign. and let me do another thing from hillary's campaign that i'm going to put up in full but focus on the ireland when you read it:
HUBdate: Florida and Michigan
Making News: Hillary's campaign manager today sent a letter to Sen. Obama's campaign manager. "It is vital that both of our campaigns come together to ensure that the delegations from Florida and Michigan be seated to reflect the will of the voters… We think there are two options: Either honor the results or hold new primary elections." Read more.
In Case You Missed It: "Obama campaign accuses Clinton of inflating [Northern Ireland] role," but the Irish Times quotes Sinn Féin president Gerry Adams, Nobel Peace Prize winner and former Social Democratic and Labour Party leader John Hume, and former U.S. Sen. George Mitchell praising Hillary's work in Northern Ireland.
Strong in Pennsylvania: A new SurveyUSA poll has Hillary up by 19 over Sen. Obama (55-36). In late February, a Rasmussen poll had Hillary up by 4 over Sen. Obama (46-42).
If You Watch One Thing Today: Hillary supported efforts to bring peace to Northern Ireland. Watch.
Previewing Today: Hillary addresses the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and attends the National Newspaper Publishers Association Presidential Forum in Washington, D.C. … President Bill Clinton hosts events in Erie and Johnstown, Pennsylvania… Chelsea meets with students at Wilkes University in Wilkes-Barre, Lebanon Valley College in Annville, and Point Park University in Pittsburgh.
Just Words: Still reeling from losses in Ohio, Texas, and Rhode Island, Sen. Obama continues to attack Hillary. Sen. Obama's campaign continues to make statements that contradict the facts about Hillary’s foreign policy experience and work in Northern Ireland, Kosovo, Bosnia, China, and Rwanda. Get the facts.
Recapping Yesterday: Hillary picked up delegates in Mississippi ... "Just as in Scranton, Clinton was met by a wildly enthusiastic crowd" in Harrisburg, "the GOP heart of Pennsylvania... [S]he was enthusiastically received by a crowd that included heavy representation from Lancaster County, the state's most conservative area." ... Hillary drew thousands of "standing, shouting, chanting supporters" in Philadelphia.
i wanted to highlight ireland for 2 reasons. 1st, my readers do include community members of the common ills and i know ireland is a big issue there. most of my regular readers are wonderful students in college, high school and a few in jr. high. some of those are also common ills community members. but i also have the community readers and i don't want an angry man or woman in ireland e-mailing to ask me why i ignored their country!
seriously, indymedia, panhandle media, ignored ireland in 2005 after their attempts to demonize irish catholics didn't take hold. remember when amy goodman did that? i do.
my 2nd reason is because i am so glad hillary is hitting back on this issue. barack obama has ridiculed her (and all married women - straight or gay) with his attacks on her accomplishments.
that's not surprising because bambi wouldn't even let his own wife go to a job interview by herself, he insisted upon going. he has no respect for women.
how did that go anyway?
interviewer: ms. obama?
barack: that's mrs. barack obama!
interviewer: uh, you are?
barack: barack obama rock star and professional narcissist.
interviewer: if you're attempting to apply for the job --
barack: i'm not applying.
interviewer: then why are you here?
barack: that is my wife! she is my property! she will do nothing without my say-so!
interviewer: dude, you are freaking me out. could you leave.
i mean what kind of a man has so little trust in his wife that he has to go to the job interview with her? it's so creepy. it's either he thinks she's stupid or he lived in fear of what she might repeat.
so i'm really glad that hillary's getting the truth out and not letting bambi's crap just stay out there.
and i really have to wonder what any married woman (gay or straight) or any woman planning to get married thinks? you know his crap is just like the crap amy goodman's 'buddy' melissa harris-lacewell pulled where married women were trashed over and over.
ok still have a teething baby so that's going to be it from me tonight. sorry. let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'
Wednesday, March 12, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces more deaths while denying reports of others, veterans healthcare is sometimes a Congressional concern and sometimes not, Matty Rothschild finger-points but could he explain where his magazine's African-American columnists are?, and more.
Starting with war resistance. Kenneth Theisen (OpEdNews) writes, "We need to oppose the recruitment of men and women into the military. We need to support resisters within the military who have realized what they are doing and now choose to resist the role of the U.S. military. This includes people such as Lt. Ehren Watada who refused to deploy to Iraq. Watada stated, 'Never did I imagine my president would lie to go to war, condone torture, spy on Americans . . ." He was the first officer to refuse to go to Iraq and he was court-martialed. Another resister is Camilo Mejia. In 2004 Sergeant Mejia was sentenced to one year in prison when he was court-martialed for refusing to assist the military in Iraq. Mejia said, 'I am only a regular person that got tired of being afraid to follow his own conscience. For far too long I allowed others to direct my actions even when I knew that they were wrong . . .' [. . .] James Circello, who joined the Army after September 11 2001, and was sent to Iraq in March 2003 described his experience there: 'We were told that we were giving these people Democracy. Unfortunately what I saw would best be described as martial law, or what we called "The Old West". Soldiers joked that "anything goes", which was true and still is . . . I never forgot what I did while in Iraq and what I saw happening: other kids turning into animals. Some as young as 17, brutalizing, bullying and humiliating individuals sometimes old enough to be their grandparents, and sometimes young enough to be their children. And it wasn't just the men on the receiving end, suffering through illegal and tiresome searches of their homes and vehicles, simply for being brown skinned, but the same methods were applied to women and children as well. No one was innocenct.' James Circello reached a point where he could no longer be part of this killing machine."
With just three examples, Theisen finds the common bond: courage. Each war resister has a unique story but what they share is the courage to say no more, no mas, enough. Some resistance includes self-checking out and moving to Canada. You can help US war resisters in that country -- help online as well. They were dealt a serious set-back when the Canadian Supreme Court refused to hear the appeals of Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey. Today, Canada's Parliament remaining the best hope for safe harbor war resisters have, you can make your voice heard by the Canadian parliament which has the ability to pass legislation to grant war resisters the right to remain in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use. That is the sort of thing that should receive attention but instead it's ignored. There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum. Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).
Meanwhile IVAW has a DC action this month:In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth. Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan. Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers. In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & AfghanistanMarch 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation. Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." IVAW's co-chair Adam Kokesh will, of course, be participating and he explains why at his site, "But out of a strong sense of duty, some of us are trying to put our experiences to use for a good cause. Some of us couldn't live with ourselves if weren't doing everything we could to bring our brothers and sisters home as soon as possible. The environment may be unking, but that is why I will be testifying to shooting at civilians as a result of changing Rules of Engagement, abuse of detainees, and desecration of Iraqi bodies. It won't be easy but it must be done. Some of the stories are things that are difficult to admit that I was a part of, but if one more veteran realizes that they are not alone because of my testimony it will be worth it." The hearings will be broadcast throughout at the Iraq Veterans Against the War home page an on KPFA March 14th and 16th with Aimee Allison (co-host of the station's The Morning Show and co-author with David Solnit of Army Of None) and Aaron Glantz hosting and the KPFA live stream will also be available at Glantz' War Comes Home.
Staying on the topic of veterans, Barbara Barrett (McClatchy Newspapers) reports on the Senate Committe on Veterans Affairs hearing yesterday and the reaction to Jackie McMichael's testimony quoting Senator Patty Murray declaring, "It's so overwhelming to listen to you. This is a reminder that we're still not where we need to be" and Senator Richard Burr declaring, "My assessment is the VA doesn't see the human face behind the patients they're treating." Jackie McMichael's opening statements can be found here and she discusses how her husband Michael was Lt. Michael McMichael, National Guard from 2003 to the start of 2005: "He walked off the plane. He smiled. He was a little skinny, but otherwise healthy looking. He looked happy. After the euphoria of Mike being home began to wear off, the changes in him were noticeable and dramatic." She discussed her husband's difficulty sleeping through the night, his requiring a cane to walk due to injuries from a bombing in Iraq, his migraines, hallucinations, poor memory and "hand and body tremors." He has PTSD and is unable to manage money and has difficulty with employment. From her opening statements:
None of these events happened to Mike alone. They happened to me, to my 6 year old son, my 4 year old son, Mike's mom and to my parents and my brothers. We were left to watch as Mike self destructed not knowing what to do to help him or ourselves. We had no clue what was wrong with him and he was, at time, completely uninterested in finding out himself. He said over and over again, "I know guys who lost limbs and they are OK."
[. . .]
There is a great need for "Whole Family" Education and resources. Educating the Vets on the importance of a Collaborative Rehabilitaion is critical. I believe many Vets see their transition as their issue alone. Mike was very resistant to me talking to his Doctors or telling me anything about what he was working on. This is understandable as I am very aware of HIPAA regulations and confidentiality. But I was losing my husband and I was seeing things I knew they could not have been aware of. I called his doctors and told them "You don't have to say anything about Mike, just listen to me. This is what I am seeing at home." All I wanted was to know what to look for, what to expect, what to do, how to help. [. . .]
I would have benefitted from earlier awareness of resources for both active duty and citizen soldier families. (Being the wife of a National Guard officer, I was not immersed in the military culture and at times was, again, lost). The Raleigh Vet Center's "8 Habits of Highly Effective Marriages" and couples counseling resources are examples of invaluable offerings we have gladly taken advantage of, but I want more. Education on PTSD, TBI, legal issues, coping skills, transitioning the family back to a 2 or single parent household, setting boundaries, relationship counseling, personal counseling and navigating the benefits labyrinth (on top of all the emotional and psychological concerns we have to deal with, the financial impact is a crushing blow. I can not express this enough). These are just a few topics with sustainable benefits to the Vet and the family. I'd like to see this information advertised. It may already exist, but how do families find out about them? Often the Vet must initiate first contact.
I'd like to see doors open to families even though their Vet may not be ready to cope emotionally with their injuries yet. This may require a re-education of our medical community on how to do this effectively without jeopardizing the regulations they must follow while still meeting the needs of the Veteran. I'd like to see the VA leverage the relationship and love we have for our wounded warriors to help us all heal and teach us how to be a family again.
Robert Verbeke spoke about his son Daniel Verbeke who was wounded December 5, 2005 in the Iraq War and how he did not receive the treatment he needed and all the struggles for the basics including after-care as well as modifications needed for the family home due to Daniel's condition:
My experiences with the treatment at the Richmond VAMC can be characterized as not good - not good at all. For the most part, the people who treated Dan were nice and caring people. What I learned immediately after leaving there, however, was they didn't know what they didn't know. That is, their skills, capabilities, resources, staffing, treatments, therapies and therapy techniques all fell extremely short of what we immediately experienced at the Bryn Mawr Rehabilitation Hospital. The Richmond VAMC was not accomplished in coma emergence and severe TBI and did not have the cutting-edge experience with a case as severe as Dan's.
The VA therapists and physicians had little or no experience with patients of the condition of Dan. The level of therapy and the techniques cannot be compared to the therapy Dan received while at the Bryn Mawr Rehab. The Bryn Mawr Rehab therapists are much higher skilled; they focused on stimulation constantly while performing therapy. The techniques in each of the disciplines of Physical, Occupational and Speech Therapy are far more advanced. Although the Speech and Physical Therapists at Richmond tried, they just did not have the expertise and they were very lacking in the techniques and resources that Dan received immediately upon transfer to Bryn Mawr Rehab. The Richmond Occupational Therapist is another story. Recovery from a TBI is about therapy and stimulation. While this therapist treated Dan she very rarely spoke to him, I continually witnessed sessions that would last longer than 45 minutes where she would not say more than a few words to him. When I commented on this, the VA reaction was to shift Dan's therapy sessions to a time when I could not be present. They didn't fix the problem -- they ignored it! I escalated the issue to the attending physician and but were no changes.
After we returned to Pennsylvania I learned that while at Richmond VAMC, Dan was mis-diagnosed on a medical condition that resulted in receiving medications that masked a very serious condition. He was ignored while in significant pain with the explanation that it was 'tone'. He was unable to get blood work done over a weekend to properly treat him following a seizure and we were told they could not have the results analyzed over the weekend as people were "off'". Private care hospitals across this country perform these routine tests 24x7 and within minutes. He had an open wound that penetrated all the way to the bone on his right foot the entire time at Richmond (4-5mo) where the condition worsened and was only treated by a nurse. Immediately after being placed in private care, he was treated by a doctor specializing in wound care and under his treatment the wound closed in one month. Dan was in pain the entire time at Richmond.
There was a report on the Sunday evening news (most likely CBS but it may have been local news and not national) about rah-rah, look what private healthcare can do for veterans! It was a load of crap. Robert Verbeke details the problems he had with the system getting care for his son. There are many wounded who do not have someone to advocate for them the way Daniel Verbeke did. That's why the answer isn't 'out-source the care!' The answer is training and workshops and futher training for those staffing the VA hospitals. Otherwise, you'll have some like Daniel Verbeke who will benefit because there is someone fighting for them but you'll have others left alone (the way the VA's 'answer' was to put Daniel in a psych ward where he'd be locked away -- that was the 'assisted-living' care they were going to provide him for the rest of his life).
Daniel Verbeke wasn't off on some pleasure cruise of choice. He was sent into an illegal war by the US government and there are many other men and women who have been sent to Iraq by the government and any injuries are injuries the US government needs to provide care for, the government more than owes the returning that.
Today the US House Armed Services Committee's Military Personnel Subcommittee met. Kind-of, sort-of. Many members didn't show for this hearing allegedly on "the Future of the Miliary Healthcare System." The subcommittee broke repeatedly for votes and the whole thing can be seen as an embarrassment and an insult.
Chief among them, the only medical doctor present as a witness, S. Ward Casscells (Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs) who is too damn old and too damn out of touch for his post as he demonstrated repeatedly but most famously when being asked about the future for veterans who are "medical retirees" by House Rep Niki Tsongas and replying with a condescending don't-worry-about-it response that included referring to those wounded for life as "lost sheep." It was a lousy speech attempting to pass for an aswer and Tsongas then moved on to researcher Ron Goetzel who proved that shame was all around by insisting that his interests really aren't about the military's wounded (including, apparently, the veteran Tsongas spoke of who required a cane to walk), what really, really interest him is the health damange in the military done by smoking, drinking, excessive eating, "the silent burden on the military that's not as apparent as someone who's injured in battle." If you didn't find both men's remarks insulting, you weren't paying attention.
Rep Nancy Boyda zoomed in on pharmacies and wondered why the US military was pushing online prescriptions? Boyda referred to the rural areas in her home state (Kansas) and the best answer she was given was that it was cheaper to have a big warehouse where medicines are pulled down and shipped off. The question she never asked but should have was what about the pharmicists interaction with the veteran? In a rural area especially there may not be a VA hospital and the pharmicist (who is trained) is one face-to-face resource. When that's removed and all that's left is ONE MORE toll free phone number, who's really being helped? It's an area Boyda should have gone to but didn't. In fairness to her, time was brief. But not so brief that Rep Walter Jones couldn't gas bag and waste everyone's time. For example, there may be a point to this: "When you have to borrow money from governments to keep your doors open it won't last long." No, it may not. But what does the US borrowing money from other governments have to do with veterans' care?
Jones went on to kvetch about US monies (aid) being sent to Switzerland in 2005. "Why are we sending money to a country with a surplus when we have a deficit?" he wanted to know. And it might be a question worth pursuing but is the subcommittee on military care really the place for his remarks? Then he tried to shift the blame for the problem stating, "But we're in the minority" meaning Republicans in the House and "can't do anything about it, maybe my colleagues can." Walter Jones, Republicans were in control of the House of Represenatives in 2005 and in 2006. The November 2006 elections meant that in January 2007 the 110th Congress would have a Democratically controlled House. Aid sent to Switzerland in 2005 -- if a problem -- was clearly a Republican problem because that was the party in control. Having never addressed the topic, Jones wrapped up by declaring, "Thanks for letting me preach for about five minutes." No one commented but, then, the only response to that is, "That was only five minutes? It felt sooooo much longer."
It was time for yet another break and this may have been when chair Susan Davis asked the witnesses to wait again and promised that, after they bot back, if there was a need to break again, they'd wouldn't ask them to stick around. But, please do stick around -- Davis stated -- and if you need help with a phone call or something, ask the staffers.
Carol Shea-Porter had the strongest section when the committee resumed. She wanted to know "how much of our costs are we shiftin on to other tax payers" when veterans have to leave the veterans health care system and/or the state. She explained about a veteran from her home state, New Hampshire, who had to travel out of state for treatment which meant finding childcare, meant her husband needing to travel with her, "everything involved is too much to ask, I think, for someone who has cancer." Which brings us back to the point about solutions. The veterans system needs to be upgraded. The answer isn't outsourcing, it's not counting on individual veterans to have a support system (family or friends) who will fight for treatement. The system is out of date and all doctors, nurses and therapists working in it need further training. Not because they're not smart or not trained but because there are 'state of the art' injuries among the wounded returning and advances going on in private medical care need to be part of the training and knowledge base within the veterans healthcare system. The system is being allowed to rot and it was never up-to-date to begin with. If it's not taken care of now, it most likely will not be for some time to come.
The House Appropriations Committee's "Hearing on Dept. of State FY 2009 Budget Request" heard from US Secretary of State Condi Rice today and it's worth noting for two reasons: 1) House Rep Barbara Lee and 2) CODEPINK. March 6th, when the Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte testifed before a subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, Lee pressed Negroponte on the issue of presidential signing statements (and the issue of permanent military bases in Iraq). Today she used her very brief time again explore presidential powers, asking Rice if she agreed with Satterfield that 2001 and 2002 Congressional votes (war on 'terror' and the Iraq vote) were to be seen as "an open-ended agreement" by the White House. Rice replied, "The president believes that he has the authority" to . . .? Pretty much everything if you carried Rice's 'logic' out. No one should bother but it needs to be noted that she's replaced her catch-phrase of "No one could have guessed" with a new one "Didn't hold it in my head. I'm sorry." After the hearing, Rice spoke with Lee and Rep Frank Wolf, among others, while CODEPINK chanted, "War Criminal!" and "Take her to the Hauge!" While they sang: "Lies, lies, lies, lies, It's all a bundle of lies. Lies, lies, lies, lies . . ." While they shouted, "Blood is on your hands, Condi! The blood is on your hands!" While they asked, "How do you sleep at night?" The shouted question actually got a big smile from Condi. Maybe she was thinking, "Okay, this one I know! Let me answer it, let me answer it!" As she began leaving, the shouts were "Don't fund war!" and "The blood is on her hands!"
Today more so than usual. But first, Ahmed Rasheed (Reuters) reports 9 women and 1 child were buried today in Najaf although, according to the US military, they must not be dead because the US military claims "no one died" from the US military attack on a bus -- Rasheed reports "Ghaida Mustafa Jassim, 4, was wrapped in a white piece of cloth and put in the same casket as her grandmother Amerca Sadoun, 65."
In some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that wounded five people, a Baghdad mortar attack that wounded three people, a Diyala Province mortar attack that wounded four people and an Abu Saida bombing that wounded two people. Reuters notes roadside bombings outside Samarra claimed the lives of 3 truck drivers.
Shootings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports an armed clash in Bazaiz Buhrz claimed the life of 1 "ten year girl . . . [who] was in a farm with her aunt when a bullet killed her" and a police officer shot dead in Salahuddin Province "by a guard of Baiji mayor based on tribal revenge." Reuters notes 2 people shot dead in Basra.
Corpses?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 corpses discovered in Baghdad, 1 in an orchard outside Baquba, 1 corpse discovered "between Kanan - Balad Ruz" and 2 corpses (husband and wife) brought to the Baquba morgue
Today the US military announced: "A U.S. Soldier was killed from injuries sustained from an improvised explosive device during a combat patrol near Ad Diwaniyah March 11. Additionally, two U.S. Soldiers were wounded in the explosion and transported to a Coalition forces medical facility for further evaluation and treatment." And they announced: "Three U.S. Soldiers were killed during an indirect fire attack southwest of Nasiriyah March 12. Two U.S. Soldiers were also wounded in this attack, along with one civilian." 3987 is the current number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war -- 13 away from the 4,000 mark.
Turning to US politics. "He makes pundits feel good about America -- particularly their own overwhelmingly white slice of elite America -- and his politics are moderate enough to avoid the type of crude caricature that other candidates might receive," explained Peter Hart (Extra!) of the press love for US Senator Barack Obama exactly one year ago. We'll come back to that article but continue with the topic. Katharine Q. Seelye and Julie Bosman (New York Times) report on Geraldine Ferraro's remarks to The Daily Breeze, "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman of any color, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept." Let's go back to Peter Hart's article where Hart cites many examples including:
*An October 27, 2006 Washington Post column by conservative Charles Krauthammer that states, "Like many Americans, I long to see an African-American ascend to the presidency. It would be an event of profound significance, a great milestone . . ."
* Conservative Roger Simon appearing on Meet The Press February 11, 2007 and declaring, "If America actually nominates him and then votes for him for president and elects him, this will be a sign that we are a good and decent country that has healed its racial wounds."
* A January 18, 2007 editorial in the Washington Post: "The excitement about Mr. Obama speaks in part to Americans' desire to believe, whether true or not, that this country has come to a point when it can rise above its ugly history of racism; and in part to the desire to believe that, if it could just overcome the divisions that foul modern politics, the nation could get unstuck on many fronts."
* February 20, 2006 article in Time magazine: "Unlike Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson, Obama is part of a new generation of black leaders who insist on being seen as more than representatives of their race."
*Chris Matthews delcaring January 21, 2007 of "a black candidate . . . I can't think of a better one [than Obama]. No history of Jim Crow, no history of anger, no history of slavery. All the bad stuff in our history ain't there with this guy."
* Hart notes that Black Agenda Report's Glen Ford commented on the mania on FAIR's CounterSpin in November of 2006, "He has given white people a kind of satisfaction -- that race no longer matters in America, and all the sins of the past can be washed away through the act of loving this man."
Ferraro's comments: "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman of any color, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept." Ferraro is commenting on the same thing Hart commented on (Hart's article is entitled "Obamamania"). The mania and the craze allowed for the build up we live with today. The press was writing their glossy profiles, as Hart notes, and not dealing with issues. That has continued to this day. The media got on board because he made them feel good about themselves. (Read Hart's article.) He did that because, as Kat noted last night, he promised 'post'-racial America -- his being elected would mean no more racial discrimination in America! Or, at least, that it could be ignored by ones who have spent the last decades ignoring it. And of course there are those on the White left like Dave Lindorff who wants to insist that Barack should be supported because he is, quote, "a black candidate who has risked jail by doing drugs". It's hard to imagine that Dave Lindorff would make a similar argument in favor of Robert Downey Jr. should Downey seek the presidency.
Ferraro's statement was noting the obvious and she wasn't the first to note it. Seelye and Bosman quote Ferraro on the psuedo-outrage the Obama campaign is trying to create, "Every time that campaign is upset about something, they call it racist. I will not be discriminated against because I'm white. If they think they're going to shut up Geraldine Ferraro with that kind of stuff, they don't know me." The Obama campaign has repeatedly played the race card and, no, it will not work on Ferraro. As Kat noted last night, the Bambi campaign was screaming for Gerry's head. It's not working out that way and for the reasons that Kat outlined. The Bambi campaign has already painted Bill Clinton (a super delegate) as racist and last night they thought they'd do the same with Ferraro. But Bambi needs the super delegates (as does Hillary Clinton) and there's been a slow growing disgust over what the campaign did to Bill Clinton. Last week Melissa Harris-Lacewell (who is part of the campaign though she rarely discloses that fact) went on The Charlie Rose Show to declare that there would be a Black-out on election day in November if Obama was not given the nomination. That didn't play well either.
The Bambi campaign's been very good about manufacturing outrage and, certainly, their astro-turf campaigns were once successful. (It is now five members of Congress whose staff have confirmed the 'spontaneous' outpouring of pressure did not originate from the member's district or the senator's state.) But they've gone to the well a little too often on the race card and it's not going to help them with super delegates -- in fact, the attempt to call Ferarro one has backfired on the campaign.
Hacks like Amy Goodman can dig around to 1984 for Ferraro today but, while we're mentioning Peter Hart's article, let's note this (and remember this ran in the 2007 March/April issue of Extra!): "A rare critical profile of Obama by Harper's Magazine's Ken Silverstein (11/06) noted his ties to various corporate -affiliated fundraisers, his opposition to calls for a withdrawal timetable from Iraq and his support for Joe Lieberman over Democratic Senate candidate Ned Lamont. Such assessments of Obama's record are rare, with even left-leaning commentators seemingly willing to dismiss any aspects of Obama's record that conflict with his progressive reputation." They were rare when Hart wrote, they remain rare today. But let's note Silverstein's November 2006 article, "After Pennsylvania Congressman John Murtha called for withdrawal from Iraq last fall, Obama rejected such a move in a speech before the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations, saying the United States needed 'to manage our exit in a responsible way -- with the hope of leaving a stable foundation for the future.' . . . Obama continues to reject any specific timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, even as public opposition to the war grows and as the military rationale for staying becomes less and less apparent." Now Goody-Hack Amy could have connected Silverstein's article with Samantha Power's revelation last week that Barack Obama's combat "troops withdrawn in 16 months of taking office" pledge wasn't really a pledge, a promise or anything binding. But Goody skipped out on that, now didn't she? Smut Merchant Matthew Rothschild could have written about that non-pledge but why bother when he can jerk off while expressing his hatred of Hillary yet again. Keep reaching in there, Matty, you're bound to find that tiny stump sooner or later.
Glen Ford, Bruce Dixon and Margaret Kimberly have addressed race seriously throughout the campaign. Matthew Rothschild? Not at all. In fact, you could easily call Matthew Rothschild a RACIST based on his actions. As CEO and editor of The Progressive, Rothschild is in charge of the magazine. Who does he chose to share that real estate with? An African-American can stop by with an article every now and then (not to often) but the regular columnists? Where's the African-American with a regular column? No where to be found. Molly Ivins (a regular columnist for the magazine) passed away in January 2007. Rothschil announces in this month's issue of The Progressive that he's just added not one but two new columnists. And who does he share the 'neighborhood' with? Two White men (Dave Zirin and Jim Hightower). Matty really wants Bambi in the White House, he just doesn't want to share his own real estate with African-Americans. The magazine has no African-American columnist. Matty adds two this month and they're both White (and male). He probably is bothered that Ferraro dared to mention race -- it makes it that much harder for people like himself to pretend how 'good' and 'wonderful' and 'noble' they are by occassionally printing an African-American freelance writer while REFUSING to put an African-American writer on staff. Maybe Matty frets that to do so would lower the property value of The Progressive?
If he gave a damn, he could have long ago added African-American voices but he's never done that and he's just added two new columnists -- both White males. In the voting booth, he may touch the button for Obama but that's about all he'll ever do apparently. Obama wipes away a lot of guilt for White 'liberals' as well as for White conservatives. I believe that's one of the points Ferraro was getting at. No wonder Matty Rothschild had a meltdown online. Again, he has the power to do more than vote, he has the power to hire or fire and maybe it's past time someone examine The Progressive's hiring practices under Rothschild? Since Zirin covers sports and since Andrea Lewis was already doing that for the magazine's syndicated efforts, maybe when he blogs again he can explain why Lewis -- who has put in her time and then some as a 'guest' -- wasn't invited into the club? (Andrea Lewis is African-American for any who don't know.)
Yesterday in Harrisburg, Hillary Clinton noted how many of the pretty words turned up to be empty, vacant promises and, specifically, the Iraq non-pledge by Obama: "Senator Obama promises to withdraw from Iraq within 16 months. But his top foreign policy adviser said he's not really going to rely on that plan. I guess that plan is just words, too." Though Matthew Rothschild and his ilk ignore the revelation about Barack's non-plan, not everyone's playing along. Last night, Mike noted Derrick Z. Jackson, Sasha Issenberg and Jack Kelly had written of the non-binding pledge that Samantha Power said doesn't exist if Obama makes it into the White House. As Jackson (Boston Globe) explained it, "In a BBC interview last week, Power, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author and Harvard University global affairs professor, said Obama's plan to remove combat troops from Iraq in his first 16 months was a 'best-case scenario.' She said Obama 'can't make a commitment, in whatever month we're in now, in March of 2008, about what circumstances are going to be like in January of 2009 . . . He will of course, not rely upon some plan that he's crafted as a presidential candidate or as a US senator. He will rely upon a plan, an operational plan that he pulls together in consultation with people who are on the ground to whom he doesn't have daily access now'."
Turning to another "I" country (because Irish and Irish-American community members are e-mailing on this topic), Ireland. Hillary Clinton will participate in the Irish American Presidential Forum and has stated, "I'm excited to participate in this important forum. I have worked on issues important to the Irish-American community for many years and look forward to discussing my plans as President. I want to thank John Dearie and the other organizers of this event for the invitation and enoucrage Senator Obama and Senator McCain to accept it as well. By doing so, voters will have an opportunity to examine our records and compare our plans to continue moving the peace process in Northern Ireland forward." Yesterday, the Hillary Clinton campaign noted:
And now today, Senator Obama is at it again, sending a false attack memo from his campaign making claims that are contradicted by the facts. Still reeling from its losses in Ohio and Texas, the Obama campaign has come out swinging, taking aim at Senator Clinton's considerable foreign policy experience with false claims and baseless attacks. After last week's defeats, the Obama campaign faced a choice: try to convince voters that Senator Obama is ready to take the 3am phone call in a positive way or try to tear down Senator Clinton's accomplishments. Considering that his foreign policy advisor, Susan Rice, cited Senator Obama's "legislation on ethics reform" when asked this morning about his foreign policy experience, it is clear that the Obama campaign is unable to make a positive case for its candidate's experience. They have chosen to attack and today's memo continues the pattern of statements contradicted by the facts. Given the credibility gap his campaign has developed over the last few weeks, these latest attacks today should not be believed. There is a reason that thirty former Generals and Admirals have endorsed Senator Clinton -- they know she is prepared to lead this nation as Commander in Chief with strength and experience on day one. Here are the facts about Hillary's experience.Northern Ireland: The Obama campaign claims George Mitchell, the person in charge of the investigation, supports their view that Hillary's claims about Northern Ireland are exaggerated. John Hume, who won the Nobel Prize for Peace for his work on Northern Ireland: ["]I can state from firsthand experience that she played a positive role for over a decade in helping to bring peace to Northern Ireland... Anyone criticizing her foreign policy involvement should look at her very active and positive approach to Northern Ireland and speak with the people of Northern Ireland who have the highest regard for her and are very grateful for her very active support for our peace process.["] George Mitchell, who is cited in the Obama memo as an authoritative source, told Katie Couric last night that Hillary played "a helpful and supportive role" in Northern Ireland that ended up making "a difference in the process." He described what Hillary has said about her role as "accurate." More on Hillary's work in Northern Ireland HERE.
Or you can read "veteran Irish journalist" Nuala O'Faolain (Women's Media Center): "What Hillary did to transform matters was turn up. She turned up. She turned up with hope and energy to a city which, when I moved there in 1998, was leaving one murdered Catholic a week just on my street, merely to keep the level of intimidation going. A city where women were almost all tribally opposed to each other. A city where there were very few meetings and if they were women's meetings they were jeered at or ignored. She came at least four times with President Clinton -- and twice on her own. It may sound small to people now that what she came for was a woman's conference on one occasion and a lecture on another, that she knew people's names and histories and took note of them -- and was no doubt sometimes lied to and misled and laughed at by women as well as men (outsiders often strike skeptical locals as simpleminded). But she kept turning up anyway. It was not small what she did. Not small at all. When the old guys obediently trot out their criticisms of what she did in Belfast, ask yourself: Who else did what she did? Who else gave what she did? Who else gave at all?"
Tomorrow (Thursday), March 13th, John R. MacArthur (Harper's publisher) will be taking part in an event at the Melville House (145 Plymouth St., Brooklyn, NY -- "Mass transit: take the F train to York Street) with Andre Schiffrin (A Political Education) and Michael Massing (Now They Tell Us: The American Press and Iraq). MacArther wrote Second Front: Censorship and Propaganda In the Gulf War.
