Well, I guess when in comes to 'more right wing MT members' who are also vets, I probably fit the bill as well as anyone
I saw the poster's problems as more with 'Washington in general' than with McCain in particular. His first complaint was against inadequate treatment and the deliberate misdiagnosis of vet's illnesses. As I recall, we had a discussion on MT a while back about this exact issue, and found that two different sources were using the exact same medical report to support two opposite conclusions. The upshot was that vets were NOT being misdiagnosed with a lesser problem. Inadequate treatment for vets has been an issue since there was war (and I am sure Mr. McCain has experienced this personally, more than most). More can always be done; I feel more isn't done largely because Veteran's health care is the closest thing to socialized medicine in this country (but then, I am a right-wing military vet).
His next complaint was that Mr. McCain didn't vote to close a tax loophole that would have allowed Walter Reed Med Center to stay open (?). Perhaps I am genuinely missing the guy's point, but it sounds like he is saying that Walter Reed was closed for lack of money, therefore anyone who didin't vote for raising more taxes must be against Walter Reed. I think most folks understand that, in a multi-trillion dollar economy, specific tax cuts/increases are not tied so neatly to specific spending cuts.
Whether the McCain campaign (which probably means, "a specific ad somewhere") used stock footage of actors for a background shot or not, I have no idea. Whether John McCain personally cares at all whether Wesley Clark or Fred Thompson think POW experience does/doesn't qualify one for leadership, I don't know (but if I had to guess, I would suspect he would agree that POW status alone does not a leader make). Neither of these issues reflect on McClain or his proposed policies.
The idea that Palin 'broke OPSEC' by saying her son was shipping out is more than a little over-the-top, too. Neither Palin nor her son probably even know the exact date he'll land in Iraq. All the Pallin's know is that, on a certain date, the son leaves home, and will be headed for Iraq. That's what I got from her comments, as that is the same way I would describe any of my family members who have 'headed for the sand.'
As far as the surge - it worked. Get over it. Whether you were for it or against it, the bottom line is it worked. How can anyone say that a 'reduction in violence' is NOT a substantial measure of success?
Everyone is entitled to their opinion; that's one thing I love about this country. One thing I don't want to see, though, is a continuation of the disastrous change in the political landscape I've seen over the last 16 years. When William J. Clinton was president, I was absolutely astounded at the contempt and disgust, bordering an rabid hatred, that I saw many conservatives had for the man. It had never been matched in my lifetime ....until George W. Bush became president and I saw the rabid, venomous hatred and total contempt that liberals had for him. Sixteen years of contempt and disrespect have poisoned almost all political discourse and any chance we had for working for common causes across party lines. I fear this one vet is angry, and has fallen prey to this type of irrational contempt focussed on one man, rather than the issues.
Can't we have enough respect for one another to assume, unless proven otherwise, that we each genuinely want what is best for our country, but just see different roads to get there? I don't think all ideas are equal, or that they all will work, but let's lay aside the bitterness and irrational fear of others' motives. If I could ask (I would dare say beg) for any one thing in this election, it would be that we all agree that one individual is not the problem, and that whoever wins in November, we will strive to work together for what is best for our one nation.
(See? Not
too bad for a right-wing vet, eh?)
