About Us
Mission Statement
Rules of Conduct
 
Name:
Pswd:
Remember Me
Register
 

Ask a Vet - Election Day!
Author: TriSec    Date: 11/02/2010 10:27:35

Good Morning. Did you vote yet?

Today is our 2,785th day in Iraq, and our 3,313th day in Afghanistan.

We'll start this morning as we always do, with the latest casualty figures from our ongoing wars, courtesy of antiwar.com:

American Deaths
Since war began (3/19/03): 4427
Since "Mission Accomplished" (5/1/03): 4288
Since Handover (6/29/04): 3568
Since Obama Inauguration (1/20/09): 199
Since Operation New Dawn: 9

Other Coalition Troops - Iraq: 318
US Military Deaths - Afghanistan: 1,353
Other Military Deaths - Afghanistan: 821
Contractor Employee Deaths - Iraq: 1,487
Journalists - Iraq : 348
Academics Killed - Iraq: 448

"Cost of War" seems to be down at this hour. Suffice to say that it's still climbing at $10,000 every 3 seconds.



It is election day. While we worry about what the consequences might be across this land, a certain group of citizens is almost certain to face bigger challenges and receive less support in a Republican-dominated Congress. We've already seen what 8 years of neglect can do to our armed forces. They are bracing themselves for the GOP to "take them back".


...A Republican Congress won’t be able to send more U.S. troops into Afghanistan, or pull them out any quicker.

But, if Republicans control at least one chamber, they will be able to hold hearings on those kinds of troop moves, giving them a stronger public forum to second-guess President Barack Obama’s war strategy.

One Republican Capitol Hill staffer said GOP lawmakers are planning a series of hearings on Afghanistan leading up to Obama’s promised drawdown next July — sessions that would take a closer look at whether such a move could jeopardize troops’ safety and mission.

Republicans have questioned whether the withdrawal target is based more on political considerations than sound strategy, and repeated hearings on the issue could reinforce that assertion....

...Just a few months ago, Democrats appeared poised to repeal the controversial 17-year-old ban on openly gay troops. Now, it could be years before the law faces a serious repeal threat in the legislature.

In May, the House, largely along party lines, approved language repealing the law. A similar push failed in the Senate in September, although Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has promised to revisit the issue in this year’s lame-duck session.

Gay rights groups are hopeful that means that the law can still be repealed before the next Congress is seated.

“The good news is that there is still a path to get this done this year,” Alexander Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United, said in a video message released last week. “It’s a narrow path, it’s a delicate path. But don’t let anyone tell you that the path does not exist, because it certainly does.”

Alexander said persuasive action must come first from Reid and then from Obama, but he also urged action from moderate Republicans senators such as Susan Collins of Maine and Richard Lugar of Indiana.

But Senate Republicans, who successfully scuttled the repeal once, will have little reason to revisit the issue if they see their numbers improve on election night....

...“If Republicans take over the House, I’m certainly less worried about major defense spending cuts,” said Mackenzie Eaglen, research fellow for national security studies at the conservative Heritage Foundation. “We’ll still see efforts to reign in wasteful spending, but they’ll want to reinvest some of those savings back into other defense programs.”

House Republicans have pushed in recent years to tie the Pentagon budget to a percentage of America’s gross domestic product, to ensure national security funding keeps pace with the country’s other spending priorities. On the other hand, “nobody is sure where the tea party candidates will be on defense,” said Daniel Wirls, author of several books on the politics of defense spending. “They’re talking about cutting government spending, but they’ve been largely silent on defense.” That could mean new allies or new headaches for Gates....

...Republican Congressmen have consistently pushed for more money to pay for development and deployment of those systems. Republicans in both chambers have offered little support for Obama’s stalled plans to close detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay, so a power switch could delay those moves for years.

Perhaps the most significant change for active-duty troops if a Republican takeover occurs will be the new faces representing them in Congress. The GOP is fielding 15 House candidates with military experience in Iraq or Afghanistan, with at least half in close races in competitive districts.

Currently only four House members — two Republicans, two Democrats — boast any on-the-ground experience in the wars, and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., is the only Senator to have served in the conflicts....




Looking at that last point, the face of Congress is almost certain to change on the veteran's front. The number of Congressmen who are veterans is almost certain to decline. While service on its own is no qualifier for public office, those that have worn the uniform tend to have a different point of view and might be more inclined to vote for some veteran's issues. The article below also proposes that any attempts at bipartisanship may suffer as well, which is something I had never even considered.


The number of veterans serving in Congress is likely to drop as a result of Tuesday’s elections, according to the executive director of a nonpartisan group that teaches veterans how to run for political office.

Seth McCormick Lynn, executive director of the Veterans’ Campaign, said Thursday that the number of veterans in the Senate — now 26 — might increase as a result of the election. But in the House of Representatives, the number of veterans is certain to decline from the current 95.

Of the total, 61 are Democrats — including two delegates — and 60 are Republicans.

A drop in the number of veterans in Congress would be significant, Lynn said. “The lack of military experience in Congress has implications far beyond foreign policy and national defense,” he said. “Veterans share a common bond that transcends party affiliation. Fewer veterans mean increasing polarization and partisanship.”

In the Senate, 20 incumbent veterans are not up for election this year, Lynn said. Three veterans are leaving, one by choice and two as a result of defeat in their party primary. Meanwhile in Senate races, 10 challengers who are veterans could be elected on Tuesday. Lynn said two of the 10 are in states that lean toward their party, five are in races considered toss-ups, and 10 are facing non-veteran incumbents in races in which the incumbent is favored.

In the House of Representatives, 10 of the 95 incumbent veterans are retiring, two are resigning to run for the Senate, and two were defeated in their party primary, Lynn said. That leaves 79 veteran incumbents up for re-election, but only about one-quarter are in races that the Cook Political Report estimates they could lose.

There are 110 veterans running for Congress, but 74 are in contests against “safe” incumbents and only seven are in races in which they are considered to have a chance of winning, Lynn said.

“Taken together, these numbers included that no matter which way the election swings, there almost certainly be fewer veterans in the 112th House of Representatives,” Lynn said.

Lynn, whose organization is affiliated with George Washington University in Washington, D.C., teaches veterans of any political affiliation how to run for elected office. “A lot of veteran candidates are using their service records to bolster their private-sector credentials,” he said. “The subtext is, ‘Look, I have managed a major corporation, so you know I am smart enough to fix the economy, but I also did two tours in Afghanistan, so you know I am not just in this for myself,’ ” he said.



There are many reasons to vote today for the right candidates. All I ask is that as you enter the booth today, remember those that are out there on the front lines, and if you can...vote for their interests today, too.


 

24 comments (Latest Comment: 11/03/2010 10:47:20 by TriSec)
   Perma Link

Share This!

Furl it!
Spurl
NewsVine
Reddit
Technorati

Add a Comment

Please login to add a comment...


Comments:

Order comments Newest to Oldest  Refresh Comments

Comment by wickedpam on 11/02/2010 12:35:24
Morning



Comment by TriSec on 11/02/2010 12:41:11
Hello again....

All voted. #24 in my precinct. No issues to report in Ward 6, Precinct 2, Waltham, MA.



Comment by wickedpam on 11/02/2010 12:56:33
No issues to report in my little district either - infact when I voted there was whole 3 people there (other then the workers that is). Doesn't help that the guy running against Frank Wolf was pretty much a ghost

Comment by Raine on 11/02/2010 13:28:42
Good Morning!

Have not voted yet. I will after

Comment by wickedpam on 11/02/2010 13:32:17
I don't think Shakira is a US citizen

Comment by Scoopster on 11/02/2010 14:17:15
Mornin' all! Gonna be voting after work, then a little poll watch action.

Comment by BobR on 11/02/2010 14:40:43
Voted on the way to work. Interesting electronic machines. Not touchscreen, they had a scroll wheel and an Enter button.

Comment by wickedpam on 11/02/2010 14:53:04
Quote by BobR:
Voted on the way to work. Interesting electronic machines. Not touchscreen, they had a scroll wheel and an Enter button.



never seen those - we have the touch screen in Manassas

Comment by TriSec on 11/02/2010 15:31:06
We vote on an optical scanner. We used to have the old mechanical lever machines (which I miss.)



Comment by wickedpam on 11/02/2010 15:31:34
can anyone recommend a good but cheap digital audio recorder?

Comment by livingonli on 11/02/2010 16:41:53
Good day everyone. After almost a week of late shifts it is very difficult to get up in the morning and I have to be in early tomorrow. I haven't voted yet and this is the first year I will have electronic voting after all these years of the lever machines in New York state.

Comment by Scoopster on 11/02/2010 17:47:05
This is what I missed when I was heading to DC..



Comment by TriSec on 11/02/2010 19:30:33
Following up from this morning, Cost of War is now back up and running. We are passing through:

$ 1, 101, 748, 850, 000 .00




Comment by Scoopster on 11/02/2010 23:47:12
Allll right kiddies! Looks like they're playing games early, declaring Rand Paul the winner with a 6% lead and only 31% reporting.

Comment by Scoopster on 11/02/2010 23:57:06
... and now the lead's down to 4% with 37% reporting..

Comment by livingonli on 11/03/2010 00:35:52
How do they consider Blanche Lincoln toast with no votes even counted yet?

Comment by Scoopster on 11/03/2010 00:55:07
Alan Grayson losing big..
On the other hand, we're up big so far in Illinois and Pennsylvania.

Comment by Raine on 11/03/2010 01:01:57
OK, so far this night isn't that awful.... OR should I saw Offal?

Comment by BobR on 11/03/2010 01:08:15
hitting the bottle...

Comment by wickedpam on 11/03/2010 01:11:25
well, we can confirm Kentucy is 55% asshat

Comment by livingonli on 11/03/2010 01:14:08
If we lose Feingold as well, we will be in trouble.

Right now, I have MSNBC on the TV, Free Speech TV on the desktop and Mike Malloy on the laptop talk about covering the bases

Comment by wickedpam on 11/03/2010 01:33:24
so how many teabaggers got voted in?

Comment by TriSec on 11/03/2010 10:47:20
The dark, bitter part of me wants to see the Republicans fail and the country slide back into a double-dip recession.

I know that doesn't help, but having irrefutable proof of how bad their policies are would bode well for 2012, right?