CONGRESSMAN SOUDER MEETS WITH LOCAL VETERANS ACTIVIST GROUP

Thursday night, Congressman Mark Souder met with our small, grass-roots group, Veterans for Better Health Care. Our group was born back in August 2004 in response to then VA Secretary Principi’s announcement that he would follow a recommendation to close our inpatient beds here at out local VA Hospital.

About 10-12 men gathered to figure out a strategy to defeat the recommendation. The group’s chosen name was “Veterans for Better Health Care.” Although I am not a veteran, that was not a criteria to join the group, so I joined in November 2004 and found myself participating each month and getting to know the veterans who were members. We did have one overriding requirement - no matter what our political persuasion, we wanted to maintain bipartisanship and avoid political affiliations. Our issue was saving the VA Hospital inpatient beds: an issue that we felt should not be subject to our own political ideologies.

Getting ready for our meeting with Congressman Souder

_____________________________________________________________________

I became our Director in October of 2005 and am still in that position. I am extremely proud and honored to be involved with this group and to be its director.

Some of our first efforts at getting the message out to the public included writing letters to the editor and handing out flyers containing our message. In April 2005, we organized a rally which was held at the World War II Victory Museum in Auburn, Indiana. The Kruses allowed us to hold the rally without charging us, which was greatly appreciated since we were a new group and had no means of financial support other than passing around a “donation can.”

The Rally was a success and drew about 150 people. We had a number of guest speakers who emphasized the need to maintain our inpatient beds, and a newly returned veteran who had been injured in Iraq also spoke. We began to become more active in area events. One of our members had an old car that he decorated with various slogans and items. He placed a mannequin on the roof of the car dressed as an injured veteran. “Oscar” as we affectionately called him, always drew comments and cheers when we took the car to parades.

The Frankes also were good to us and allowed us to hand out our flyers at hockey games in February 2006 and February 2007. That venue gave us access to thousands of individuals as they left the arena. Although we might only gain a member or two from those events, every person who joined our group was greatly appreciated. We also began to identify ourselves by wearing caps with our name and slogan “Save Our VA Hospital” and donning t-shirts with the same slogan. We wore these items when we participated in parades and events.

Our focus in all of our efforts was to keep the inpatient issue in front of the public and to put pressure on our representatives. Our particular focus, however, was to pressure Congressman Souder on the issue. Thursday night was the culmination of our efforts.

Congressman Souder’s office had contacted me about a month ago to arrange a meeting between our group and the Congressman. Frankly, I was quite surprised to receive the call, but I was also excited to think that we would have an opportunity to talk to the Congressman about the recent flap over the redacted VA Study done by Booz, Allen & Hamilton (BAH).

I had been a participant in that Study - first in a private morning meeting with about 10 other veterans’ representatives and later attending the public town hall meeting held at the Memorial Coliseum. That day’s activities - November 29, 2006 - had been arranged by local veterans’ groups and BAH. We were told that the report would be done in about six months, which would have been a due date of May 2007. May came and went with no report. The spring turned into summer and summer into fall and still no report.

The call also represented a shift in how the Congressman viewed our group. In our earlier days, we were not exactly the most welcome sight at parades and events where both the Congressman and our group appeared. When we appeared at town hall meetings or smaller local question and answer sessions, we triggered increased tension. But with this contact, we felt the Congressman truly recognized our dedication and efforts over the 3 1/2 years since our organization. He was seeking our continuing help to fight for our VA Hospital inpatient beds.

Congressman Souder at Thursday night’s meeting

___________________________________________________________________

The meeting went very well, and the Congressman spent about two hours talking to us in a small room at Post #82 - the location we chose because it was where our group began. The meeting started at 7:00 p.m., and, when I left at a little after 9:00, the Congressman was still talking to a few remaining individuals. Reports were shown on the local TV stations as well as provided in the local newspapers.

The bottom line to this is that our hospital inpatient beds are still not out of danger. The VA is doing a follow-up study on outpatient care and facilities. The delay may be beneficial, but we do not yet know that, so we cannot let down on our efforts. THE FIGHT IS NOT OVER.

As I drove home from the meeting, I kept thinking about my favorite Margaret Mead saying:

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”

We started as a small, grass-roots group with no funding.  But what we had was an overwhelming concern for our veterans - past, present, and future - and their care.  We put together a plan of action and kept fighting.  We still meet monthly, and we still make plans to participate in area events.  Now that the weather will be turning nicer, we will be able to get back out to parades and events.  We will not give up this fight, and we ask that you not give up either.

Congressman Souder’s office has scheduled a rally, and here are the particulars:

When: April 7, 2008 (Monday)

Where: World War II Victory Museum, Auburn, Indiana

Time: 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

Please help us once again have a successful rally in support of our VA Hospital. Do not take anything for granted. We have many veterans returning from the Middle East who will need our help and support, both in the hospital surrounding and in the community surrounding.

Please make plans to attend this rally and let the VA know we have not forgotten this battle, and we will not give up.

McCAIN - LOSS OF MEMORY OR LACK OF UNDERSTANDING?

John McCain made a huge gaffe while visiting in Jordan last week. McCain has based his campaign on his foreign knowledge expertise, but as this cute video shows, Joe Lieberman had to correct him. And, the correction was pretty obvious.

Boy, you would think that if you were going to talk to the cameras, you might want to make sure you had your information correct.  And from a presidential candidate to boot!

I am not sure which is worse - loss of memory or a lack of understanding.  Neither one is a good excuse for a man who touts his foreign policy experience and that he can best protect us from the terrorist threat.  Won’t be much protection if he can’t figure out which group is which.

THE CAYMANS - TAX SHELTER FOR TOP AMERICAN CONTRACTOR IN IRAQ

The nation’s top Iraq war contractor, and until last year, a Halliburton subsidiary, provides a shining example of how to avoid a fair share of its taxes and garner the benefits of political nepotism. Kellogg, Brown & Root (KBR) has avoided paying hundreds of millions of dollars in federal Medicare and Social Security taxes by hiring workers through shell companies based in the well-known tropical tax haven.

About half the 21,000 workers hired by KBR are American workers - workers who should fall under the requirement to pay into Medicare and Social Security along with the requisite contribution by the employer, KBR. The Defense Department has known since 2004 that KBR was avoiding taxes by declaring the American workers as employees of the shell companies. And the reason this is acceptable? The maneuvering offshore allowed the corporation to perform work more cheaply. The practice is unusual enough that only one other major contractor in Iraq does the same thing.

KBR is the largest contractor in Iraq with eight times the work of its nearest competitor. The corporation was the beneficiary of a no-bid, lopsided contract awarded in 2002 when the Bush, Chaney crowd decided to favor those with ties to Halliburton. KBR has an estimated $16 billion in contracts - a nice hefty bonus for being part of Chenay’s Halliburton circle. Although Congress has consistently attacked the practice used to avoid paying taxes, it has failed to act with any authority.

Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, a Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, recently has introduced legislation to close loopholes for companies registering overseas. Let’s hope it passes although I would almost bet that the legislation will not get far. Corporations seem to have a lot more pull in Congress than we average taxpayers do.

KBR not only avoids federal taxes but also avoids paying unemployment taxes in Texas, its location of registration. Since it doesn’t pay into the unemployment pool, it is not responsible for claims of unemployment compensation filed by workers who return to the United States after they complete their work in Iraq.

Photo Credit: KBR website

_____________________________________________________________________________

What a sweet deal, and many of the workers don’t even realize that they have been employed by a foreign company until they reach their destination in Iraq and are told by their foremen. And KBR’s competitors in Iraq have not gone to the same length to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. The likes of Bechtel, Parsons, Washington Group International, L-3 Communications, Perini, and Fluor - all corporations receiving contracts in Iraq - pay Social Security and Medicare taxes for their American Workers.

Over the past five years of the Iraqi occupation, KBR has avoided more than $500 million in tax liabilities. What an “in your face” assault on the average American taxpayer. While we struggle to pay ever-increasing tax burdens, the power of corporations in our “free-market” system once again proves that there is no free-market - that power is king and enough power buys a tax haven in a tropical paradise.

SOMETIMES YOU FEEL LIKE A NUT - BUT NOT IN THE WHITEHOUSE

John McCain makes no secret of the fact that he will keep us mired in the Middle East for decades to come if he assumes the office of the presidency.  While many have talked about the similarities between Vietnam and Iraq, one major difference exists - oil.  Anyone who thinks this foray into nation-building isn’t about oil hasn’t been paying attention to our history with the oil producing countries. 

With oil rising at an almost unbelievable rate, what better course to take than to occupy our own private oil fields in Iraq?  The Bush administration has built the world’s largest embassy in Iraq in order to maintain a presence for an undetermined number of years.  In addition, Bush and Maliki are in the process of negotiating the terms of an agreement which will keep U.S. forces entrenched in Iraq until …. freezes over.  

McCain will simply continue a misguided and disastrous course of action a la George Bush.  Should McCain be elected, Bush will no doubt be smiling broadly as he exits the White House in January 2009.  George Bush, along with his neo-con cohorts, manipulated an American crisis into an invasion of a country which had no connection to 9/11.  But John McCain has no intention of manipulating anything - he blatantly and arrogantly says he will keep us there.

Photo Credit: Getty Images

______________________________________________________________________________

We have had close to eight years of a president who is out of touch with reality and who has never let sanity and logic interfere with his quest to conquer Iraq.  The last thing that is needed is another tunnel-visioned president who sees Iraq and Afghanistan as nothing more than future American bases.

WHERE ARE OUR YOUNGINS? IS ACTIVISM TIED TO THE DRAFT?

Conscription is a system to provide manpower to be used in the armed forces. In the United States, conscription was introduced in the Union Army during the American Civil War. The 1863 Enrollment Act permitted draftees to hire paid substitutes to fight in their place. In the United States during more recent times, conscription has simply been called the “draft.”

During the Civil War and again during World War I the draft mechanism was dissolved at the end of hostilities. In 1940, prior to U.S. entry into World War II, the first peacetime draft in our nation’s history was enacted in response to increased world tension with the result that the system was able to fill wartime manpower needs smoothly and rapidly after the attack on Pearl Harbor.

At the end of the war, the draft law was allowed to expire, but it was reenacted less than two years later to maintain necessary military manpower levels as a result of the Cold War. From 1948 until 1973, during both peacetime and periods of conflict, men were drafted to fill vacancies in the armed forces which could not be filled through voluntary means.

Induction authority expired in 1973, but the Selective Service System remained in existence in a “standby” posture to support the all-volunteer force in case an emergency should make it necessary for Congress to authorize a resumption of inductions.

Vietnam War draft

Opposition to U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War began slowly and in small numbers in 1964 on various college campuses in the United States. This happened during a time of unprecedented student activism reinforced in numbers by the demographically significant baby boomers, but grew to include a wide and varied cross-section of Americans from all walks of life.

Much of the protest movement was fueled by a system of conscription that provided exemptions and deferments more easily claimed by middle and upper class registrants - and thus inducted disproportionate numbers of poor, working-class, and minority registrants. By the end of 1967, as U.S. troop casualties mounted and the war ground on with no end in sight, public opinion polls showed a majority of Americans were opposed to the war and wanted it to end. In 1967, the continued operation of a seemingly unfair draft system then calling as many as 40,000 men for induction each month fueled a burgeoning draft resistance movement.

But where is that resistance from the youth of today? An undeclared war is being waged in a foreign land, thousands of military personnel are being sent to fight, thousands are dying, and thousands more are being maimed for life.

Yet, the youth of today are strangely silent. Could it be that the primary reason so many college age and young people are not participating is because they do not have a “vested” interest in this war? The Selective Service is still in place for males, but the draft is not. But it is folly to ignore the authority to reinstate the draft at any given moment.

The sole purpose of the Selective Service is to keep track of the number of available young males in case the draft needs to be reinstated. And, as the youth of today sit back comfortably assuming that they are “safe” from forced service to this country, the reality is that our military is stretched thin by our ongoing and misguided efforts in Iraq.

Of course, you will see some younger protesters at the rallies and marches, but take a closer look as you drive by. When I stand on the sidewalk along the Clinton street side of our Courthouse, I look up and down the row of protesters, and I see older individuals - many in their 40s, 50s, 60s, and, yes, even in their 70s.

Many of us protesting and rallying are from the Vietnam War era - we remember those days, and we are willing to stand on sidewalks and street corners in blistering hot weather as well as zero degree temperatures to protest a war that is not only unjust but also one of the greatest blunders ever made by a president.

So our youth, for the most part, turn their heads away from the horrors of Iraq, comfortable in their false sense of security and the notion that they are safe from being snatched into service. They are not yet affected; they are not the ones fighting and dying in an unjust war.

But those thoughts are misguided; the Selective Service hovers in the background with the power to rip complacent bodies into forced military service. A vested interest in this war and any other wars may very well arise only when the individual has the most to lose - his or her own life. What a shame that it takes extrinsic motivation to force the youth to do something that should arise from intrinsic values - caring about their fellow human beings.

Photo Credit: Mike Keefe - InToon.com

 

EDWARDS IS OUT - NOW WHAT?

My choice for president is now out of the race. And, I am not happy with either remaining choice - Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. I am weary of Obama’s claim that he “has been against the war from day one.” Fine, but he wasn’t in office, so to say that he would have voted against the war is a moot point and shouldn’t even be considered. He wasn’t there, so he wasn’t faced with the same choice that others had to make. And besides, in one of his first speeches, he stated he wasn’t against war, he was just against this war. So, one has to wonder which wars - if any - in the future would he support?

Obama has also said repeatedly that while he would have voted against the war in 2002 based on what he knew at the time, he could not be sure that classified intelligence reports made available to senators wouldn’t have changed his mind. Thus, Obama himself acknowledges the possibility that he might have been convinced had he been in the Senate at that time.

Clinton, on the other hand, voted to give authorization to use military force against Iraq. Any attempt to explain her vote away by morphing her justification for her vote into “I thought the inspectors were going back in” is ludicrous. S.J. Res 46 is titled: A joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq. Now how can that be any clearer?

Both Obama and Clinton have voted in favor of bills which continue to support funding for the troops. However, in a switch, the May 2007 vote found both senators waiting until the last minute to vote “no” on the funding bill. Obama voted first, followed a few minutes later by Clinton. As far as I am concerned, neither one has shown much leadership on the issue of getting us “unstuck” from the quicksand of Iraq.

Photo Credit: Select 2008

__________________________________________________________________

Much as people make fun of Dennis Kucinich, he has consistently stood by his convictions from day one and not only voted against authorization to use military force but also voted against increased funding for the war.

So, I am in a quandary right now. Neither Clinton nor Obama has been consistent on Iraq and that is a tremendous disappointment to me. As the weeks go by, I will need to research more and more into the positions held by each. I may not make up my mind until I walk into the voting booth on May 5, 2008.

LINE DRAWN IN THE SAND - U.S NOT WELCOME TO FIGHT AL-QAIDA IN PAKISTAN

Pakistan’s beleaguered president, Pervez Musharraf, has made it clear that the U.S. is not welcome in the Pakastani tribal regions to continue the fight against Al-Qaida. Bush had been considering expanding the authority of the CIA and U.S. military to launch aggressive covert operations in tribal regions along the Pakistan-Afghan border which has long been considered a hiding place for Al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden. The regions are also home to Taliban militants planning attacks on coalition forces in Afghanistan.

Photo Credit: CNN

Musharraf said every tribe in Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) has its own armory, and they don’t like intrusions into their privacy at all. The FATA is an area encompassing about 10, 700 square miles where the Pakistan government controls only nominally by working through a combination of effective Political Agents and tribal elders.

The Tribes are governed by the Frontier Crimes Regulation introduced under the British Raj and are represented both in Pakistan’s lower house and in its upper house of parliament. Years of isolation coupled with high illiteracy rates, scarcity of water, no banking system, and little health care have left the area lagging behind socially and economically.

Photo Credit: Fata.gov

$736,000,000 BAGHDAD BEMEMOTH CALLED A “FIRE RISK”

The firefighting system in the massive $736 million embassy complex in Baghdad has potential safety problems that top U.S. officials dismissed with a “not to worry” attitude. In their rush to declare construction largely completed by the end of last year, officials ignored defects according to internal State Department documents, e-mails and interviews.

Some officials assert that in the push to complete the long-delayed project, potentially life-threatening problems have been left untouched. A State Department official who spoke anonymously because he feared retaliation said the problems are serious enough to get someone killed. The fire systems are the tip of the iceberg; no one has ever inspected the electrical system, the power plant and other parts of the embassy complex, which will house more than 1,000 people and is vulnerable to mortar attacks.

Other sources involved in the project, also requesting anonymity, insisted that disputes involve technical paperwork issues, largely because the contractor had never built an embassy and did not realize that under State Department rules it needed approval for substituting certain materials. Much of that work needs to be reexamined and checked, delaying the project even further. A Congressional Services Research report provides the breakdown in expenditures accumulating under the Bush administration.

But, heck, what’s a billion dollars more when Bush has already sunk close to 500 billion dollars trying to make Iraq safe for the largest U.S. embassy in the world. Looks like Bush is anticipating an unending presence in Iraq and the Middle East.

Yep, build it, and we will stay.

The unfinished embassy in Baghdad

Photo Credit: MSNBC

JOHN McCAIN - INSANITY AT ITS WORST

John McCain is really coming across as a war-monger. In a video caught, apparently, by a camera phone, he jokingly sings “Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Iran” to the tune of the old Beach Boys hit, “Barbara Ann.” Chuckling as he takes the microphone, he cheerfully converts the words of the Beach Boys’ hit to accommodate his future Middle East strategy.

How grown up, and just think, there are thousands of voters out there ready to throw their support behind him. If you want more war and more conflicts, then you want John McCain in the White House. Personally, I think he is insane. He may be a Vietnam veteran and hero, but he has certainly lost his grip on reality.

How can anyone who went through what he went through want to be a part of a continuing boondoggle in Iraq and then ramp it up to include Iran? And, if that isn’t convincing, he told a crowd in New Hampshire on January 4, 2008, that he is fine with staying in Iraq for 100 years.

So, all you McCainites out there, if you want war, war, war, and death, death, death, vote for John McCain; he doesn’t sound like he will let you down. Sort of reminds me of the Johnson - Goldwater contest back in 1964. The fear was that if Goldwater was elected, he would lead us into nuclear war. The famous ad below was one of the most effective ads ever in a campaign.

Either senility has surely set in or his advisers couldn’t get to him before he opened his mouth. If McCain gets elected, there will be no light at the end of the tunnel because he will never let a tunnel be built.

DEMOCRATS FOLD AGAIN

The Democrats - the Senate Democrats that is - caved again. The madness of funding for the Iraqi war continues as the Senate voted to provide $70 billion dollars in additional money to keep the war dragging on for a while longer. In rapid succession, the Senate cast two votes Tuesday night to approve the hybrid spending bill. By a 70-25 vote, the Senate approved the Iraq and Afghanistan war funds - without restrictions that Democrats had insisted on for weeks.

Democrats again failed to win votes to force removal of U.S. troops or set a non binding target to remove most troops by the end of next year. The defense policy bill, approved 90-3 by the Senate, also expanded the size of the U.S. Army and set conditions on the Bush administration’s plan to build a missile defense system in Europe. The Bill now goes to a conference committee to work out differences, then on to the President for signature. And he will sign it. After all, the criteria setting deadlines for removal of troops didn’t fly again.

In May, a $120 billion war spending bill was sent to the White House which abandoned the call for most U.S. troops to leave Iraq after an earlier veto by President Bush.  So far this calendar year, the President has been given $190 billion dollars to continue with his misguided policies in the Middle East.

To date the Iraq war has cost us almost $480 billion dollars -

• $275 million per day,
• $4,100 per household,
• Almost 4,000 U.S. soldiers killed,
• more than 60,000 wounded,
• 700,000 Iraqis killed, and
• 4 million refugees

GAO Accounting Report (2006) - The last two columns are estimates based on past spending but were calculated prior to the recent $120 billion dollar request.

And yet, no one has the guts to stop the insanity that George W. Bush began with his “shock and awe” in March 2003. What a shame, and what a travesty to the American and Iraqi people. We now have a war which appears to have no end and no chance of creating Bush’s fantasy dream of a democratized Middle East.