John K. has responded to my recent blog criticising McCain for voting against the bill for expand GI benefits:
Reading your blog is like listening to Keith O. on MSNBC. You need to read the Veterans bill the McCain supported that was not allowed to come to the floor through democratic leadership obstruction. If you do not want to present both sides of issues accurately, perhaps you should blog for the Huffington post. I hope you will enjoy the socialism that is coming. By the way the Congress is very good at signing bills that seem like no brainers. That is why we have the deficits we have and find ourselves with no energy policy a bankrupt social security and medicare program, etc. It would be nice if they would use their brains once in a while; like perhaps offering larger incentives for those who re-up in the service.
Your comments on the war in Iraq are democratic talking points. Few people doubt that getting involved was a mistake. Many people, including most democrats holding federal office understand that although for political purposes it sounds nice to say cut and run, the fact is we need to and will stabilize the country before we exit. Look how Obama's position has changed since he has learned more about what is happening.
First, let me say that I do not consider myself as belonging to either the Democratic or Republican parties. I try to develop my ideas and opinions by thinking through issues after gathering as much information as I can. For example, I have not read McCain's proposed bill although I did search for it on the internet. I went to McCain's website for his talking points. My caveat would be that any similarities between me and Keith O would be purely coincidental. Next I appreciate and respect your point of view and after re-reading this particular blog I find that the conclusion I was looking for is less than obvious. Taking the opportunity for a second chance (the writer's equivalent of a mulligan and I know how you feel about that - grin) my point was intended to be that because politics is about effective compromise and that the best politicians practice this art without locking into ideologic struggles unless core values are at stake, McCain, is simply on the wrong side of the issue given who he is. In the art of political compromise one doesn't always get what one asks for. Do I think that there are some aspects of the bill proposed by McCain that could serve GIs better within the greater context of American interests? Probably, but the central issue here is not the specifics of the bill but the question that I would put to McCain; Is this the hill you want to die on? That is, his risk of alienating a major section of his core supporters (veterans) to demonstrate his unwillingness to cooperate with his Senate colleagues causes me to question the soundness of his judgment making capabilities. Most simply put, he has chosen the wrong issue to demonstrate his maverick tendencies. This second attempt is straight down the middle about 235 yards at least insofar as making the point I intended initially. I will go even further and predict that this singular issue will cause him grief in the fall election.