by Jim Cash, Brig. Gen., USAF, Ret.

Posted 070911

    I normally will not indulge myself by bowing to the temptation to climb into the ditch with far-left liberals on a personal basis, but sometimes there must be an exception to the rule.  This letter is a cleaned up version directed at a local left-wingnut, who repeatedly attacks our military, and those who serve, through the “Guest Opinion” section of our local newspaper.  From this point on I will simply refer to him as Mr. Lefty.

   I would like to begin with a few generalizations followed by specifics.  It is well known that the far-left has created despise for our military system, and its members, that has been allowed to enter the mainstream of the Democratic Party.   Have you ever noticed how the far-left starts a paragraph when referring to the military?  “While honoring the service of---I must disagree with”.

   My friends, that is just another cheap shot.  The far-left honors nothing that the military does, or has done.  I hold that type comment in total contempt.

   The following points that I will try and make are not from a book, newspaper or magazine.  They are life lessons that I have personally observed over a long period of time, and I can honestly say to you that all my adult life has been devoted to serving this great nation.

  First, let me say that in my 35+ years of military service, taken in total, the most well educated, common sensed and patriotic group of Americans that I have observed came from our US Military.  [Whereas] John Kerry [along with like-minded leftists] is truly a foolish man.

  To become an Officer in the US Air Force required a college degree, and to even be considered to command a Fighter Squadron required a Masters Degree.  Most Colonels and all Generals in the US Air Force have attended three Military Service Schools, and War College.

  From the beginning, a key point made over-and-over to all emphasizes the importance of civilian control over the military.  That is the major difference between the United States and the dictator infested, third world countries in South America who experience a military coup every year or so.  No one supports this concept more than our senior military, so the US Military leadership does not need the likes of Lefty to talk down to them about their obligation to service.

  Second, no one dislikes the idea of going to war more than the soldier.  He is the guy being shot at.  I have never met a senior military officer who actually wanted to employ force.  It is the military’s job to tell congress what the cost is to carry out their mandate, budget for the mandate, then carry out that mandate when the President so orders---nothing more.  Lefty’s comment concerning “the natural tendency of military leaders to rely almost exclusively on the projection of force” borders on the insane.

  Third, Big Military, defined by lefty as “those who Lord over us and defy any democratic reform whatsoever”, are you, me and our kids who serve and have served.  Who does he think runs the Pentagon?  It is the great guys and girls that you and I raised, educated, and saw leave the nest to go out and make the world a better place.  It is the same young people who fight and sometimes die giving the far-left the opportunity to come back and impugn their integrity with cheap articles like his without loosing his head.

   Fourth, our military is doing a great job in Iraq.  Even hard core liberal journalists are taunting the success of the surge.  Lefty’s comment that “they have completely failed to dismantle the nerve center of radical jihad” is absurd.  Does he even understand what a nerve center is?  I think not, because there is none in this instance.

   The key to solving the Middle-East issue is Iran.  Iran with a nuke is not the answer.  But they, Mr. Lefty and his far-left cohorts, probably can fix that problem by simply talking to the Iranian leaders.  I’m sure they will understand and stop training, equipping and providing explosive devices to the insurgents that slip through Syria bent on killing those awful GIs who make up the awful US combat forces.  And, with their persuasive Democratic personalities, I am sure they will persuade Iran to give up their quest for the nuke, embrace Israel, and have Hamas give back the West Bank.  GIVE ME A BREAK!!!!

   Fifth, while on active duty, I served under Presidents Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan and Bush.  Without doubt, the most asinine statement Lefty made in this article was ‘This bunch of Republicans has done more to harm our military than any Democratic Congress, or President, in history”.

   Lyndon Johnson put 500,000 troops in Vietnam, tied both hands behind their backs and refused to let them fight the war.  I know.  I was there flying F-4s when Johnson and McNamara were picking targets from the White House, and we were not allowed to hit Mig Aircraft until they were airborne.  The Army was put in defensive enclaves, and Generals were replaced for going too far in protecting their resources.

   I was there as a F-15 Squadron Commander when Jimmy Carter cut spare parts procurement for all military systems to include the new F-15 fighter, and less than 33% of the birds were flyable any given day.

   I was there as an F-16 Wing Commander when Ronald Reagan fixed the parts problem and over 85% of our birds were flyable every day.  And, I observed with dismay as pardoned felon, Bill Clinton cut the military to the point that we are suffering 15 month tours for our Army personnel in Iraq today.

   Mr. Lefty, how can you make such absurd statements?  As military people and leaders, we all suffered when the Democrats were in control, and we hung in there until finally a Republican came along and fixed it.  Anyone who thinks that the Democratic Party cares more for this country's military people than the Republicans is a hardcore fool!!!

   Sixth, the question, “can a Democratic government afford to wait another 500 days” is very interesting.  I know the far-left hates George Bush, but is possible that Lefty is advocating overthrow of the US Government?  Obviously, although at times misguided, the President has done nothing even approaching a level deserving Impeachment, as Bill Clinton did.  I can see no other meaning to that statement.

   Seventh (and finally),  my friends, this article is a classic example of the American People being bam-boozled by the far-left into thinking that there is no Islamic threat, we can talk to them and make friends, and we need to get out of Iraq.  What is happening in the world right now is far bigger than just Iraq, and only our military stands between maintaining the American way of life and its total destruction.

   It does not bother me at all to be belittled by the far-left personally.  In fact, I enjoy knowing that I have succeeded in some small way.  However, to Mr. Lefty and his ilk, I think I can safely say---Your timing is very bad.  The American People are a smart lot.  They can see through the far-left and their socialist leanings, and THEY LOVE THEIR MILITARY PEOPLE.  Their military is family.

   The Democratic Party will pay a high price in the long run for degrading our men and woman in uniform once again, as they did in Vietnam.  America is tired of the war, but they will never tire of the patriotism shown by our military, both its leadership and its warriors.

 

THE EXPERIENCE OF HILLARY CLINTON
 
Observations of background info not broadcast by the media.
 
The following written by Dick Morris ... a Democrat and speech writer for Bill Clinton who knows the Clintons very well.
 
Polls suggest that the leading attribute attracting voters to Hillary's presidential candidacy is her "experience," a virtue which contrasts, presumably, with the lack of it in Senator Barack Obama, her chief rival.  But a close examination of her record as first lady and as New York Senator suggests that her experience is largely in the avoidance of death by scandal.  Were it to be captured in a television series, it would certainly not rise to the level of "Commander In Chief" and probably not even to that of "West Wing."  It would find its televised metaphor in the reality series "Survivor."
 
Consider what her experience has been.  She burst forth on the national stage with two tasks in her husband's administration: The selection of the nation's first female Attorney General and the design and adoption of a comprehensive program of health care reform.  Her efforts to designate an Attorney General hamstrung the new Administration for months as two nominees, in succession, had to withdraw their names from consideration.  Finally, at the eleventh hour, she urged her husband to appoint Florida's Janet Reno, a selection Bill Clinton would come to describe as "my worst mistake."  In the bargain, she suggested the appointment of Lani Guinier as head of the civil rights division, a job she was shortly forced to relinquish when her radical views became known, another embarrassment for the new Administration.  Her other selections for the Justice Department, the White House staff and the Treasury were her three law partners: Web Hubbell, Vince Foster, and William Kennedy, appointments which culminated in one imprisonment, one suicide, and one forced

resignation.
 
Her other assignment, health care reform, collapsed in such a debacle that it cost her party

control of both houses of Congress, a fate from which it took twelve years to recover.
 
Beyond these initial tasks, her main focus in the Administration was scandal defense.  From

Jennifer Flowers to Whitewater to the FBI file affair to the travel office firings to her

Commodities Market winnings to the missing Rose Law Firm billing records to the Paula Jones scandal, she orchestrated the Administration's defense against scandal allegations.  In the process, she almost got herself indicted for perjury and obstruction of justice.
 
And her advice in handling these matters was uniformly bad.  It was Hillary who counseled Bill not to settle the Paula Jones lawsuit even when the plaintiffs called for neither an apology nor payment and she who stonewalled the release of Whitewater documents even when it led to the appointment of a special prosecutor.  When the prosecutor whose appointment she had caused heard about the depositions in the Paula Jones case she had refused to settle, the Monica Lewinsky scandal eventuated.
 
During the period of 1995-1997, the period of the Clinton Administration's greatest achievements, she was nowhere to be seen, focusing instead on writing It Takes A Village, and on dodging criminal inquiry.  She did not participate in the formulation of a balanced budget, nor in welfare reform legislation, nor in the reduction of crime that stemmed from the 1994 anti-crime bill.
 
Her experience continued when her race for the Senate and its aftermath became, in turn, mired in scandal.  The pardon of the FALN terrorists to get Latino support in New York, that of the New Square Hassidim to get Hillary Jewish support, and the clemency shown toward Hillary's brothers' clients to get them financial support caused her ratings to plunge to their lowest level in March of 2001 as she took her Senate seat.  The theft of White House gifts, almost $200,000 of which had to be returned, did nothing to endear her to the electorate.
 
Since then, Hillary has done nothing of note in the Senate except to vote for the Iraq War, a

position she has since disavowed, and to win the applause of her colleagues for not being partisan and obstinate. Her main efforts have been directed at raising massive sums of money for herself and her colleagues and making a lot writing and selling her memoirs.  Her efforts on behalf of New York after 9-11 have been exposed as largely derivative of those of her colleague, the more effective Chuck Schumer.
 
She has passed no important legislation, except for twenty bills renaming post offices and

courthouses and congratulating Alexander Hamilton, Shirley Chisolm, Harriet Tubman, the American Republic, and the Syracuse men's and women's Lacrosse team on their respective accomplishments.
 
Is this the experience upon which her candidacy is based?   Has anything been missed?