posted on Oct, 27 2006 @ 04:23 AM
While the IAVA is not as far off the map as most anti-war groups (infact their founder has been called, and i quote, "a trojan jackass of the
anti-war movement") there is a little something that bears mentioning...
First a and foremost go here
and see what they base their ratings on.
Now realize that the group only has about 600 members, plus a 4 person board of advisors consisting of a few Vietnam era soldiers turned anti-war
So what you've really got is an organization wherein more than 1% of the membership is paid staff, and it picked a few anti-war activists to grade
congressional performance for them. Just because the group has initials doesn't make it all that meaningful. Maybe tomorrow night I'll go
bar-hopping in 29 Palms and find 600 marines to back politicians that I like based on the fact that the party not in power can afford to throw up
amendments that dont have a chance in hell just for the sake of looking good, when everyone with any political understanding at all knows that they
would never put some of that stuff up there if they had the votes to put it through. That's called creating a record to run against: when you're in
the minority you force the party in power to kill lots of nice sounding but impractical ideas so that when the next election comes around you can tell
people that the other side hates veterans, widows, school children and puppies.
I happen to agree that the Republicans in many instances deserve a low rating from veterans. My problem is that I don't think this group had the
political saavy to grade the Democrats realistically. They're forgetting that the unreliable vehicles and worn out body armor that George Bush sent
our reserves into battle with in many cases should have been paid for by Democratic state governments, or in the case of federal troops, by the
Clinton DOD. It's not like Bush took away stuff they used to have. Bush inherited an underequipped military from Clinton and, as Bush is prone to
doing, sat around reading childrens stories instead of addressing the problem. A California National Guardsman who has to run around in worn out body
armor has got a Democratic legislature to thank just as much as the Republican congress.