This is kinda interesting: with full disclosure of donors, we're able to see which candidates are getting donations from serving members of the military. And their preferences are: (1) Ron Paul, (2) Barack Obama, and (3) John McCain. Neither the Republican nor the Democratic frontrunner get much love, which is great, since I find Mr. 9/11 and the Hildebeast deeply scary.
Paul leads in donations from military voters, with Obama next
By BENNETT ROTH, RICHARD S. DUNHAM and CHASE DAVIS
Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON — Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, the congressman from the Houston area who opposes the Iraq war, has gotten more contributions than any other White House contender from donors identified as affiliated with the military.
According to a Houston Chronicle analysis of campaign records from January through September, Paul received $63,440 in donations from current military employees and several retired military personnel.
Democrat Barack Obama, another war critic, was second in military giving. The Illinois senator got $53,968 during the nine months.
He was followed by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz, a decorated Navy pilot and former Vietnam prisoner of war, who received $48,208 in military-related giving. McCain has been one of the most vigorous defenders of President Bush's decision this year to increase U.S. troops in Iraq.
The military contributions — nearly 1,000 of them are listed in Federal Election Commission records for this year — represent a small fraction of the overall contributions to the candidates.
Paul, whose campaign Web site notes his military service as a flight surgeon in the Air Force in the 1960s as well as his opposition to the current war, raised a total of $5 million from July through September alone. Also, many contributors do not disclose their occupations, making it difficult to determine the total extent of military contributions to any one candidate.
Nevertheless, analysts said the ability of Paul and Obama to rake in as much money from military employees as they did suggests there is a certain degree of dissatisfaction with the Iraq campaign among veterans and those in uniform.
One of the contributors to Paul's campaign was Lindell Anderson, 72, a retired Army chaplain from Fort Worth, who donated $100 to the Texas lawmaker.
"As a Christian, I think he speaks to a theme that the United States shouldn't be the policeman of the world," said Anderson.
Anderson said he strongly disagrees with Republicans who call Paul anti-military: "He spent five years in the military. People in the military have to respect his integrity" whether or not they agree with him on the war.
But an official with the American Legion, the veterans' service organization that has supported the Iraq war, said she didn't know why military employees support Paul.
"I don't know the rhyme or reason behind it," said Ramona Joyce. "It's America. Anybody can throw their money at who they want to."
At the Texas headquarters of the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Austin, state adjutant Roy Grona said military personnel do not vote as a bloc.
"There's probably a lot of veterans that aren't happy with the war in Iraq," he said.
Grona said Paul has been endorsed by the VFW in his congressional races in part because of his support for veterans' benefits.
The average size of Paul's contributions from military sources is $500, with donations ranging from $50 to the maximum $2,300.
More than a third of Paul's military-related contributions came from Army affiliates; a third came from the Air Force; and a fourth from Navy donors. The rest came from affiliates of the Marines and other branches.
Jennifer Duffy, an analyst with the non-partisan Cook Political Report, speculated that Paul might be an attractive candidate for military personnel who oppose the war, "but don't want to cross the line and vote for a Democrat."
Paul has made withdrawal of troops from Iraq and a criticism of aggressive U.S. foreign policy central themes of his maverick campaign.
Kent Snyder, Paul's campaign chairman, said the contributions were evidence that many in the military agreed with the candidate's position.
"I guess they want to get out of Iraq, too," said Snyder.
Texas A&M political science professor George C. Edwards III attributed support for Obama among the military to the factors that he attracts support from many black voters, and blacks are a bigger proportion of the military than their overall share of the national population.
Edwards, who was a guest professor at West Point for three years, said "an awful lot of people in the military just think this war has been a disaster for the Army."
He said they believe the war has "stretched it thin, used its supplies and has been bad for morale."
"They may be quite upset and this is a way they can do something about it," he said.
Obama's support came from across the military, including a squad leader in the Army, a member of the Navy stationed at the U.S. embassy in Iraq, and state Rep. Juan Garcia, a Democrat from Corpus Christi.
Garcia, a retired Navy pilot, serves as an instructor at the Naval Air Station Corpus Christi with the Naval Reserves.
"The men and women of the military are looking for a leader like Barack Obama who will turn the page on foreign policy and national security issues," Obama spokesman Bill Burton said.
Edwards attributed McCain's backing to his being "a former military guy." McCain received the largest number of supporters from Navy, in which he served.
"John McCain has extremely strong support among veterans, especially in the early primary states," spokesman Brian Rogers said. "He's a veteran himself and he's been there for them on the issues for over 20 years."
The troops on the front lines generally don't want their sacrifices wasted -- not quite the same thing as having been in favor of Iraq from the get go.
I assume McCain's appeal is having "been there/done that/got the scars." It is one of the things I find appealing about him. Other than on immigration, his foreign policy stances haven't been too whacky.
Obama is the preferred candidate of many who simply want the greatest degree of change. His stance and track record do suggest that he would end the Iraq conflict as soon as he felt it were possible -- which must appeal to some in the field.
Ron Paul is the darling of the hyper-constitutionalists and all of those who'd like to tell the world to go away and solve their own malfing problems. Zak, and (at least for a time) GelCube both stand as local .org military types who'd considered Paul the best choice.
"The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that's why it's so essential to preserving individual freedom.” -- Milton Friedman
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -- H. L. Mencken
Indeed.. I frankly don't know of anyone in my unit (an infantry battalion, mind you), including fellow officers and commanders, who honestly think us being in Iraq is a good thing, or is doing any good. But we keep quiet and follow orders, since talk like that in public is anathema to your career.
its typically the naive privates and such out of high school who are all "lets go"..they probably got too much Fox news in basic training. :)
"urbani, seruate uxores: moechum caluom adducimus. / aurum in Gallia effutuisti, hic sumpsisti mutuum." --Suetonius, Life of Caesar
By way of contrast, the number one recipient of campaign dollars from military contractors is Hillary Clinton. I'm sorry, did I say dollars? I meant free speech.
Robert Heinlein wasn't clever enough to come up with the celebrity clause, as our Prole did. I say she's improving on the book.
RASCZAK: Here in History and Moral Philosophy we've explored the decline of Democracy when social scientists brought the world to the brink of chaos, and how the veterans took control and imposed a stability that has lasted for generations since... You know these facts but have I taught you anything of value? You. Why are only citizens allowed to vote?
LANNY: It's a reward... what the Federation gives you for doing Federal Service.
RASCZAK: No. Something given has no value! Haven't I taught you dimwits anything? I guess they ought to revoke my teaching credential... When you vote, you're exercising political authority. You're using force. And force, my friends, is violence, the supreme authority from which all other authority derives.
CARL: Gee, we always thought you were the supreme authority, Mr. Rasczak.
RASCZAK: In my classroom, you bet. Whether it's exerted by ten or ten billion, political authority is violence by degree. The people we call citizens have earned the right to wield it.
Robert Heinlein wasn't clever enough to come up with the celebrity clause, as our Prole did. I say she's improving on the book.
It just occured to me how American that is (or rather non-drafting).
I mean for Swedish standards it's just to go back to pre-1995 levels of draft and get a female draft (and that would probably happen if the threat levels goes up to cold war standards) and you're basically there. Only difference is that it would be a citizen duty and not something that gives you citizenship.
We are all aware that the senses can be deceived, the eyes fooled. But how can we be sure our senses are not being deceived at any particular time, or even all the time? Might I just be a brain in a tank somewhere, tricked all my life into believing in the events of this world by some insane computer? And does my life gain or lose meaning based on my reaction to such solipsism?
Project PYRRHO, Specimen 46, Vat 7
Activity Recorded M.Y. 2302.22467
TERMINATION OF SPECIMEN ADVISED
Persons of public interest. If you've never been in a newspaper you don't qualify because nobody really cares about you, that's how easy it is.
On the other hands, there are criminals like Crossloper already said, and there are people that get news coverage all the time but for reasons nobody can tell. I can't support a system that gives voting rights to people like Paris Hilton.
Of course criminals would count, Yin&Yang or so, you need a balance between the side of light and the dark side.
There is a light side to politics?
Why did the chicken cross the road?
So that its subjects will view it with admiration, as a chicken which has the daring and courage to boldly cross the road,
but also with fear, for whom among them has the strength to contend with such a paragon of avian virtue? In such a manner is the princely
chicken's dominion maintained. ~Machiavelli
Harding's admin running a bordello/speakeasy in the White House.
Senator Craig's "Happy Feet."
Gore inventing the Internet.
....and that's only the yanks. You can mine the political shenanigans of a whole world for more of the "lighter" tidbits.
"The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that's why it's so essential to preserving individual freedom.” -- Milton Friedman
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -- H. L. Mencken
I'm being assailed by a mental midget of ironically epic proportions. Quick as frozen molasses, this one. Sharp as a melted marble. It's disturbing. I've had conversations with a braying mule with more coherence.
Who Do Our Soldiers Like?
Reply With Quote
Re: Who Do Our Soldiers Like?
<- 
GOGOGO 
GOGOGO WINLAND 
WINLAND 
Originally Posted by Proletariat
Bookmarks