Associated Press
It's hard to see Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) as much of a partisan. As he wraps up his first and only term in the Senate, the centrist Democrat hasn't developed a reputation for being especially ideological; he doesn't seem to care for the usual political games; and he's generally been a non-presence when it comes to hitting the campaign trail, even for his allies.
So when Webb appeared alongside President Obama in Virginia Beach yesterday, it raised eyebrows. When the senator delivered a blistering, almost angry critique of Mitt Romney, it was even more surprising.
Introducing President Obama in Virginia Beach, retiring Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), condemned Mitt Romney for failing to mention veterans or the military in his GOP convention speech.
The omission was all the more damning, Webb suggested, because Romney is of an age where he might have served in Vietnam but did not.
"If nothing else, at least mention some word of thanks and respect when a presidential candidate who is their generational peer makes a speech," said Webb, a former Navy secretary and decorated Marine who served in Vietnam. Romney was exempted from the draft, first as a student and then as a missionary.
"This was a time when every American male was eligible to be drafted. People made choices," Webb said. "Those among us who stepped forward to face the harsh unknowns did so with the belief that their service would be honored."
Webb proceeded to connect Romney's indifference to national security to the Republican's infamous "47 percent" remarks, in which he indirectly suggested veterans who rely on benefits are lazy parasites, dependent on government handouts. "In receiving veterans benefits they are not takers -- they are givers," Webb said.
But it was of particular interest to see the senator reflect on the Vietnam War era, and the decisions made at the time. The Romney campaign released a photograph this week of Romney in 1968, laying on a French beach alongside a giant "I Love Ann" sign he'd drawn for his future wife in the sand. It's a nice photo, and some wondered why Team Romney hadn't released it sooner, perhaps to help "humanize" the widely-disliked candidate.
The answer, I suspect, is the historical context -- while Romney was writing love letters in French beaches in 1968, Jim Webb and a whole lot of other men were on a very different foreign soil, engaged in a very different activity.
And though it hasn't been a campaign issue, Webb seemed eager to remind folks' memories yesterday.
Though the emotion of the delivery may not come through in the transcript, take a look at these remarks Webb made yesterday -- in a part of Virginia home to large veteran population -- before introducing the president.
"Governor Romney and I are about the same age. Like millions of others in our generation we came to adulthood facing the harsh realities of the Vietnam War. 2.7 million in our age group went to Vietnam, a war which eventually took the lives of 58,000 young Americans and cost another 300,000 wounded. The Marine Corps lost 100,000 killed or wounded in that war. During the year I was in Vietnam, 1969, our country lost twice as many dead as we have lost in Iraq and Afghanistan combined over the past ten years of war. 1968 was worse. 1967 was about the same. Not a day goes by when I do not think about the young Marines I was privileged to lead.
"This was a time of conscription, where every American male was eligible to be drafted. People made choices about how to deal with the draft, and about military service. I have never envied or resented any of the choices that were made as long as they were done within the law. But those among us who stepped forward to face the harsh unknowns and the lifelong changes that can come from combat did so with the belief that their service would be honored, and that our leaders would, in the words of President Abraham Lincoln, care for those who had borne the battle, and for their widows and their children.
"Those young Marines that I led have grown older now. They've lived lives of courage, both in combat and after their return, where many of them were derided by their own peers for having served. That was a long time ago. They are not bitter. They know what they did. But in receiving veterans' benefits, they are not takers. They were givers, in the ultimate sense of that word. There is a saying among war veterans: 'All gave some, some gave all.' This is not a culture of dependency. It is a part of a long tradition that gave this country its freedom and independence. They paid, some with their lives, some through wounds and disabilities, some through their emotional scars, some through the lost opportunities and delayed entry into civilian careers which had already begun for many of their peers who did not serve.
"And not only did they pay. They will not say this, so I will say it for them. They are owed, if nothing else, at least a mention, some word of thanks and respect, when a presidential candidate who is their generational peer makes a speech accepting his party's nomination to be Commander in Chief. And they are owed much more than that -- a guarantee that we will never betray the commitment that we made to them and to their loved ones."
To put it mildly, this was not a standard introduction to a presidential appearance.
We haven't talked about this since June, but there are legitimate, unanswered questions about Romney from that era, and there's some evidence to suggest the Republican has been far from honest with the public about his actions.
Leave a Comment:
As with all the other Republican scum, Romney was a service-avoider. They all supported the war, just as long as it was a case of "let's you and him fight."
I remember being an anti-war vet traveling to campuses, and the local YAF chapter would come out to harass me. I would say to them "Hey, since you believe in the war so strongly, why don't you do like your dad did in the big one and drop out, go enlist, volunteer for the infantry and volunteer for Vietnam? Then you can be a hero like your dad was." Every single time, they shut up. And none of them ever took up the challenge. Big "patriots" all of them - so long as the idea of "sacrifice" wasn't involved. (I'm sure their Republican fathers never got closer to the shooting than peeling potatoes for the duration back in the States)
TRUST, BENGHAZI and the PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES
Definition of TRUST
1. a : assured reliance on the character, ability, strength, or truth of someone or something
b: one in which confidence is placed
As Romney begins to receive the overwhelming tidal wave of debate advice from both Democratic and Republican pundits, some as silly as Peggy Noonan saying, “Once he steps on the stage with the President he will “LOOK” Presidential, people will be able to imagine him as President…..REALLY? Charles Krauthammer, “Go Big”…
Ms. Noonan and Mr. Krauthammer let me explain something to you, since this seems to be the miscalculation that the GOP has made. FOX Noise is the number one News Station in the ratings so therefore there must be more Republicans. No, I know you have problems with ARITHMETIC, but the Liberal and Independent viewers are split between MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS and Comedy Central (this one sad but true) LOL Fox Noise has a lock on the LOW, VERY LOW information viewers, but if you add up all other viewers there are more of us.
My point being is that the American Public is not that stupid or low information as those that watch FOX Noise. “Anyone but Obama” was your first miscalculation. Your second is that all Mitt Romney has to do is stand next to the President and he will be elevated. That might be true in other years, but this year, with so much hanging in the balance. “WE” the American People, the caveat being FOX NOISE VIEWERS, have been doing our research and sharing “OUR” opines online, for the first time since the Printing Press was invented and information could be shared with the masses, democracy has gotten a boost from the World Wide Web.
“WE” have seen every flip flop and “LIE” your candidate Mitt Romney has told for the past 20 years. We know more about Mitt Romney than any other Presidential Candidate ever. Because we see his record or lack of and read about it on Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, MSNBC comment blogs, MSNBC online, YAHOO News, ABC News.com, NBC news.com, Huffington Post, Mother Jones, the Nation, theGRIO.com and Politico etc. etc.
Mitt Romney is going into the debates with a “TRUST” deficit. We “KNOW” he lies and lies and lies. We know he has no conviction. We know he changes his views on policy from day to day, from hour to hour and from minute to minute. We know what he said in the debates with Kennedy, in the Republican Primary Debates, everything is in a loop. We see it over and over and over again…
The GOP is pinning all of its hopes on Mitt Romney looking Presidential and being able to deliver some good quotes and quips…LMAO The Press is complicit with Style over substance and the truth versus how well fiction is delivered. The Press and the GOP underestimating the viewer and reader of the 21st Century; information is at the tip of our fingers….or our smart phones….we can look something up in an instant.
Which brings me to my final thought, Benghazi….This sad and tragic event is not a political tool to be used by an amateur candidate for President. The Press is all in a frenzy thinking they have something on our President….No you don’t, because we “TRUST” the President, he has proven himself over the last three and half years to be a thoughtful, competent, confident and TRUTHFUL leader. “LIAR” is not the first word that comes to mind when you think of Barack Obama….unfortunately it is the first word that comes to mind when you think of Mitt Romney.
Whatever we find out about Benghazi, I “TRUST” the President did his best and that his team made the best decisions they could…after three and a half years I have not seen deception or incompetence….I TRUST the PRESIDENT and TRUST is very important. He will make mistakes, we are not voting for a GOD the only one who is perfect. I cannot “TRUST” Mitt Romney in the same way or as our Commander in Chief and that is the BOTTOM-LINE isn’t it?
Mitt Romney can take the stage, look Presidential, say funny quips and quotes, have a killer comeback or a gaffless performance….The press will say, “Mitt Romney looked Presidential, he gave a great performance, his opening joke gets rave reviews, he was SYALISTICALLY perfect”…unfortunately NONE of that will erase the LOOPS of LIES and DECEPTION that are forever memorized by technology of the 21st Century.
There is nothing he can do or say that will undo his online trail. On the day after each debate the ravenous dogs of fact checking will feast on his every word….GOP jubilation will melt away like the “TRUST” for the Republican Party and their UNTRUSTWORTHY Candidate Mitt Romney! The Fox Noise strategy of lies has come back to bite them….DOUBLE DOWN GOP! DOUBLE DOWN! LOL
I found this interesting because it put a finger on what I found especially troubling about Romney’s 47% speech. It made me think of my own family. Here is my husband on VA compensation and disability. And while we pay some tax – it is pretty low.
Years ago, after the war began in Iraq, as the applications and compensation for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder began to rise, Republican congressmen demanded that these awards be reanalyzed. We must be cheating, they claimed. These were Vets who simply wanted “free healthcare” from the government, they stated. Meanwhile my husband fell into the abyss of PTSD and lost pieces of his mind and self that he will never recover. Thankfully a change in congress, president and community support for vets put an end to these efforts to deny benefits to vets who really were sick or injured.
Let’s face it – we are going to pay the cost of the war in Iraq for a long long time, and in ways that the supporters (and former supporters) of that war and earlier ones did not anticipate. Maybe they don’t anticipate those costs because their families are insulated from the direct costs, their brothers, sisters, sons, daughters aren’t in general the ones bearing the social costs of war. Their family members aren’t coming home with the problems which last them and their families their entire lives. And so the lucky ones see these folks as ones who think they are “victims” looking for a handout. Instead of the people that they are - folks struggling against huge odds – who sometimes win and sometimes fail. If we are going to war, we need to be willing to pay for not just the present military costs (a thing our Republican candidate is willing to do) but to look into the future and be ready to pay the social costs too.
Is each person in our country “entitled” to healthcare, housing, and food? I don’t know – maybe that’s the wrong question, because I do believe that our society is better and stronger as a whole when all of our citizens have a safe and comfortable (heated/cooled) place to live, enough food to be healthy, and healthcare focused both on prevention, and cure or comfort. That is not about entitlement – that is about having a strong people in a strong country.
Couldn't agree more. People that don't travel, don't understand that having healthcare is a strategic advantage!!! Just look at Australia!!! Deeply entrepreneurial and independent. With a growing economy, rising dollar, and....
wait for it.......
Universal healthcare... as well as Universal retirement, and Zero interest education loans....
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/EBA6536E92A7D2D2CA256F9D007D8066/$File/ozhealth.pdf
Guess what? They aren't "socialist" and they are growing their economy, while our republican congress does absolutely NOTHING!!!
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2012-08-14/unproductive-congress-not-passing-bills/57060096/1
Kentuckiana: Thank you for your eloquent thoughts. Like many people, I have questions about people with an entitlement attitude, especially those who abuse the system. We all know that those people exist, but I don't believe it's anywhere near systemic like Romney has implied.
Romney either simply doesn't relate to what's happening in society or doesn't give a damn about how people are hurting. When he comes along to say things like the 47% comment, it feels like he's kicking people who are already down and nearly out. What stuck in my crawl (and head) about Romney's 47% comment was the part about "food"... as if people aren't entitled to food or to eating / nutrition, which seemed like he was saying it's okay for people to starve to death. His comments seemed particularly devoid of humanity, compassion, vision and leadership.
The crux of the issue very much feels like the elitist, wealthy class doesn't give a rats ass about the veracity of the economic oppression imposed on other citizens. To them, it very much seems that they view economic oppression as a game of sport, as if they have the weapons while the rest of society are the hunted and largely defenseless prey. Instead, these elitists seem to view their contributions to society and eternal saving grace as hoarding money, making things immensely difficult on people while making nominal donations here and there to charities, and ultimately having their names on buildings and in lights. And along the way, they don't care who, how and when they trample other people. All that matters step on whoever they can in their quest for more money.
Watched this speech on TV. Wow.... play this over and over.... The text doesn't do it justice...
I thought the same thing. It needed to be said, and Sen. Jim Webb succinctly and powerfully summed up what no one else has been able to put words to since Romney's fumble at the RNC convention.