Comments on: Why we DON’T want to vote for Democrats, even if we don’t vote for Republicans

By: Brock

Brock — Mon, 01 May 2006 17:16:03 +0000

My BS in Econ (how apropos) from a service academy led me to believe exactly as Eric says. The particular blend of Kool-Aid I willingly drank was laced with “limited government is the answer” cyanide and “this is the highest calling” endorphins that to this day make me proud to have held such strong idealism. In actuality, all the idealism did for me was feed a notably acid cynicism as I watched the military and government do exactly opposite what I was taught to strive for.

By: Eric

Eric — Mon, 01 May 2006 04:57:36 +0000

VRB, Chris is not saying that it’s horrible that “white guys” didn’t get a break. He is saying that a truly color blind society, which supposedly want to be, wouldn’t distinguish between different ethnic groups. Even if we used to in the past.

Aside from that, yes, much of the career military force of the late 80′s and early 90′s was quite idealistic. We believed that libertarianism and conservativism could be blended, a la Reagan and Goldwater. We did believe that the military was about defending our country, not being used where the US had no interests. And yes, we felt very betrayed by the cost, both lives and money, of Somalia and Bosnia, were upset that the Iraqi Shi’ites were hung out to dry and even more upset that we were not used to do anything about people like bin Laden when they were directly attacking us.

By: Kay

Kay — Sun, 30 Apr 2006 18:39:49 +0000

VRB, I guess it comes down (at least for me) to my understanding of human nature. And I know, beyond any doubt, at this point that there are not enough people who view the world as I do who *will* vote as you suggest. It doesn’t matter what anyone believes unless they’re willing to band together to vote their conscience truly. My family and I all made the pact a few years ago and voted Perot – and look where it got us! That was a lesson to us – and until I see enough evidence of a groundswell of libertarianism, I don’t think I’ll do that again. However, the ‘net has made a great deal of difference in how I perceive things – and I believe in the next 20-30 years it could make the difference that no other medium had been able to make – so I do believe that a libertarian or independent has more of a chance in the coming years than ever before.

By: VRB

VRB — Sun, 30 Apr 2006 18:06:45 +0000

I am making another comment about the post, because I’m not really into Chris bashing. What I guess I don’t understand; is that when you are not satisfied with any of the candidates, why not vote for yourself. When you vote for the lesser of two evils, you still get evil. I have never though it as a wasted vote to vote for a Libertarian, an independent or write in someone, whom I think would be better. This is because too many have died for the right to vote. To me, a wasted vote is no vote.
I have felt if enough people did this, maybe the politicians would notice if they won with something like 20% of the vote. That citizens could begin to shape the debate instead of having to accept what the parties tell us what we want. Maybe not, politicians have a way spinning any circumstance.

By: VRB

VRB — Sun, 30 Apr 2006 16:53:12 +0000

Chris, you are speaking to the wrong person when it comes to get me to understand how white males have been denied. Minorities and women had been in the military long before you were born. I don’t try to defend my attitudes and will not argue. It comes from growing up and seeing many qualified minorities being denied including some of my family.

By: Chris

Chris — Sun, 30 Apr 2006 14:30:04 +0000

There are many other reasons as well, but Eric has a fairly neat summary.

What about this. You are a young officer, having prepared the last two years to enter a career field, and suddenly for no reason your billet is gone. They don’t tell you why, but they offer you a choice of four very bad assignments that you willhate, or a buyout package.

Simulataneously they are doing to to every other white male officer you know except service academy graduates (who have their own protective association).

Suddenly all of those billets that were going to young white males are instead going to minorities and females, without regard for law, regulation, qualifying scores, or order of precedence.

This is no bash against those that benefitted from this policy; many were and are excellent soldiers, officers, and airmen; but you don’t do social engineering in the military (or anywhere else for that matter but that’s another issue), because it is destructive to the mission, to morale.. really to everything that the military is and stands for.

By: Kay

Kay — Sun, 30 Apr 2006 12:17:11 +0000

Awesome post, Chris! While a big part of me agreed with Brad’s original post, I also remember Waco, Ruby Ridge and the first Trade Center Bombing – as well as the Oklahoma City Bombing – the handling of which I personally think was badly bungled by the Clinton administration as well.

I will be among the classic liberal contingent who will NOT vote for a democrat.

By: VRB

VRB — Sat, 29 Apr 2006 23:32:42 +0000

I guess I forget that having a volunteer Army, that those who join the military may be more idealistic than I would have thought. Relative to the pay, it was way mo better than in the 60′s.

By: Eric

Eric — Sat, 29 Apr 2006 23:05:49 +0000

I’ll describe some of it. Imagine that you have served in the military for 5 to 15 years. You are what is called mid-career. You have served in combat, whether it was Bosnia, Panama, Somalia or Iraq and Kuwait. Your evaluation reports consistently report that you “exceed the standards”, are considered to be “among the best” and should be promoted ahead of your peers. Yet, you cannot get promoted because of the downsizing of the military. Your weapons and equipment have not been upgraded or replaced since 1989 or 1990. Weapons systems are deadlined (i.e. unusable) because there are no spare parts.

Your unit is never full strength because of the cutbacks, but the number and frequency of missions assigned have doubled since the 1980′s. As a soldier (sailor or airman) who joined in the 1980′s because you believed in defending the United States against the threat of Soviet Russia, the missions you are assigned cause you to question your nation’s political leadership. The morality is often questionable. When there are enemies who actually threaten your country, you aren’t allowed to do anything about them. Your pay increases are consistently 1/2 to 1 percent behind the inflation rate.

And then, to make matters personal, you receive a letter from your branch manager (or whatever other branches call the personnel officer responsible for helping you manage your career) letting you know that as a mid-career officer or sergeant, you are at risk of involuntary separation from the military at any time.

By: VRB

VRB — Sat, 29 Apr 2006 21:51:06 +0000

Chris, you don’t describe how Clinton’s administration dismantled the military. Why was it difficult to stay in the military?

By: Brad Warbiany

Brad Warbiany — Sat, 29 Apr 2006 19:09:26 +0000

I guess you’re right… So that gives me another question. How can we rein in the Republicans on spending? It seems like as long as their guy is in office, they’re more than willing to send him pork-riddled, government-expanding bills, and he’s more than willing to sign them.

By: Eric

Eric — Sat, 29 Apr 2006 03:24:02 +0000

You nailed it Chris. During the Clinton years, here are a few examples of what Chris is talking about:

- Waco
- Ruby Ridge
- The 1993 WTC bombing, bin Laden’s first attack on the US. He was convinced by the weak response that he could openly wage war on us.
- Hiding the “third terrorist” in the OKC attack, most likely an Iraqi operative.
- The deal with North Korea

Current issues due to the fall out of the Clinton years:

- The near open revolt by the CIA against the President
- The continuous, unstoppable leaks of classified and confidential information to the press and the Democrats by mid-level Exec branch staff.
- The continuous political back stabbing by generals appointed by Clinton (Shinseki, for example)

And that’s really just for starters.