The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Reader Mail
Print Email
Text Size

Reader Mail

Ronald Reagan's War

Sorry, Charlie. God bless Ben Stein. Don't cry for her, South Carolina. Plus more.

(Page 4 of 16)

br> -- Tom Bullock br> West Covina, California /p> p> I have always considered there something, to be polite, more than "twisted," in how the left disparages, ridicules and sneers at our nation's warriors, but have always felt a bit uncomfortable with some of the bureaucratic rules and regulations over veterans' benefits I have heard about when Republican administrations have had power. Ben Stein's moving recommendations should make their way to all the Republican candidates, not because they are good politics(their affect would probably be negligible), but because they are the minimally decent and humane actions a country can take to recognize the importance of our warriors and their families. br> -- Paul Zisserson /p>

Ben Stein is to be commended for his focus on Veterans. In truth, Veterans are political footballs, with endless lip service paid to their benefits, but no effective action ever taken. Veterans are among the least demanding of our citizens, and seem to expect the least for their service, which is the most demanding service provided to the nation by any group. What Ben proposes is just a start, as he says. I look forward to his forthcoming recommendations. Maybe some moderator can list Ben's points in a question to candidates in some up-coming debate. Democrats like to denigrate Veterans, particularly those of Vietnam and now Iraq, while Republicans seem to take Veteran service for granted. The worst abuses by politicians occur when they think there are political points to be scored on some Veteran issue. The policies are never appropriate or effective. Take the old Democrat initiative of defining drug addiction as a disability for Vietnam vets, hence those Vets with drug addiction were given a disability check. Drug rehab programs were funded, but the Vets who attended them never got off drugs, inasmuch as they would lose their disability checks if they became drug-free. So the Federal Government was paying Vets to remain addicted, while paying for ineffectual rehab programs. That's certainly one way to maintain a captive constituency for incumbents who claim to have Veteran interests at heart.

Most recently, Chet Edwards of Texas (17th District) crowed about the massive Veteran's bill he got through Congress, which Bush signed for political reasons, in the midst of the expose of poor conditions at Walter Reed and the extreme red tape to which wounded Iraq War Veterans are subjected, along with the semi-hysteria about post-traumatic brain injury common in Iraq War Vets, which unfortunately makes good care less available for Vets that need it, and continues to pour federal funds into a healthcare system that is highly dysfunctional. A better approach would be to simply have the Feds pay for private insurance policies for the Vets, and allow them to get the best care they can under private policies in their own communities, rather than keeping them corralled on the Veterans Health System reservation (where the poor care is only marginally better than that genocide-by-other-means system totally run by the Feds, the Indian Health Service), after the model of the GI Bill for education originated in the post-WWII era.

p>As an aside, regarding traumatic brain injury--one might cite the case of Earl Rudder, who led the assault on Point-du-hoc on D-Day. He was knocked unconscious by a shell that exploded close to him and killed one of his officers standing next to him. When he regained consciousness, he continued directing the assault. Of note is that he had been ordered by his commanding officer not to go ashore with the first wave, as he was too valuable to lose. Rudder defied the order, stating that without him, the assault would not succeed. He led from the front. He was one of the first up the ropes. He also took a bullet in the leg during the assault. The point: He almost certainly had traumatic brain injury from the concussion he suffered from the exploding shell. In those days, no such entity was considered, as it was long before CT and MRI scans. Nevertheless, he went on to become, Aggie jokes aside, the greatest president that Texas A & M has ever had, and built the University into what it is today. Our current military contains individuals of equal caliber. Even with traumatic brain injury, they are the best among us. Full support for them is long over-due. The abuse of Veterans by Congress of course goes back to the Revolutionary War and the Continental Congress, and is a long established American tradition, unfortunately. br> -- Kent J. Lyon br> College Station, Texas /p>
Page: ‹ First   2 34 5 6   Last ›

topics:
Taxes, Foreign Policy, Education, Barack Obama, Islam, Hollywood, Law, Military, Iraq, Pakistan, NATO, Africa, Conservatism, Oil

Letter to the Editor View all comments (4) | Leave a comment

office 2007| 3.13.10 @ 10:36PM

Is Office 2007 professional better than Office 2007 ultimate ?

Leave a Comment

N.B. We encourage readers to share and discuss their thoughtful and relevant comments about this Spectator article. Comments are routinely monitored and will be deleted if profane, bigoted, or grossly impolite. Please be respectful. (And don't feed the trolls!) Thank you.

Related Articles

More Articles From Reader Mail

http://spectator.org/archives/2008/01/08/ronald-reagans-war
ADVERTISEMENT

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

Who Castrated Ann Coulter?

David Catron | 2.6.12

Bigoted Barack, Red in Tooth and Clause

George Neumayr | 2.10.12

Unsafe at Any Smoke

Eric Peters | 2.10.12

Access This

Ross Kaminsky | 2.10.12

The Delousing of a Movement

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. | 2.9.12

The Show Me State's No Show Primary

Andrew B. Wilson | 2.10.12

Justice Ginsburg Should Resign

William Tucker | 2.8.12

No Double Play

Peter Hannaford | 2.10.12

ADVERTISEMENT