Deployed Troops donate to Obama 6-1 over McCain

“Why do the troops hate the troops?”

Deployed Troops Donate to Obama 6-1 Over McCain

Apparently our troops don’t think much of McCain’s experience or ideas for security. Maybe they just want to come home?

Honestly, after years of hearing that if you don’t support the Bush military policy, you don’t support the troops, you have to wonder what the neo-cons will do now. Today, a study by the Center for Responsive Politics reported that members of the military are giving more donations to Senator Obama than Senator McCain, and when you just examine those troops who are deployed, Obama attracts more donations by a 6 to 1 factor.

Troops, of course, aren’t much different than most Americans, who overwhelmingly oppose the Bush military policy that John McCain would continue (the latest AP-Ipsos poll had 62 percent disapproving of the Bush policy). It’s just that troops have a lot more personal experience on this particular issue. We know that those who served believe Iraq has overstreched the military, and for years that those who have fought in Iraq and Afghanistan are solidly against the current policy.

6 TO 1! That’s a lot for people who don’t get paid a lot of money! In fact if you compare what our troops are paid versus what the contractores are paid, it’s a SIN! No wonder Obama has more money to spend than McCain. 6 TO 1!

Here’s something from today’s NTY:

Insurgency’s Scars Line Afghanistan’s Main Road

“Not far from here, just off the highway that was once the showpiece of the United States reconstruction effort in Afghanistan, three American soldiers and their Afghan interpreter were ambushed and killed seven weeks ago… The soldiers — two of them members of the National Guard from New York — died as their vehicles were hit by mines and rocket-propelled grenades. At least one was dragged off and chopped to pieces, according to Afghan and Western officials. The body was so badly mutilated that at first the military announced that it had found the remains of two men, not one, in a nearby field.

Our troops know the truth because they are living it. They are not subject to the lies, and hypocrisy of Bush/McCain’s strategy. They want to come home to their families. They want the benefits that they earned when they come home! They want CHANGE! They understand that it is no longer good enough to say “Support our troops!” That is nothing but an empty Bushie slogan used to promote one man’s (GW Bush) personal vendetta and another man’s (McCain) desire for POWER!

No, today we must change this empty propaganda to something with a some teeth. Today we must rise up and say “It’s time to SAVE our troops, declare Victory in Iraq and bring them home! That’s what over 2/3 rds of the American public wants. That’s what the Iraqi’s want. And apparently from their donations, that’s what the troops want!

Remember to Re-elect Bush/McCain 08! Spending $4566 PER SECOND in Iraq while losing the “War on Terrorism” in Afghanistan and Osama Bin Laden goes FREE!


  1. pollchecker

    Perhaps the fact that our military privately disagrees with Bush/McCain’s policies and is donating so heavily to Obama is the reason for this. I guess “Supporting our troops” doesn’t extend to the right to vote.

    Brain Dead Bureaucrat Watch: VA Blocks Voter Registration at Vets’ Hospitals

    When it comes to making profoundly stupid bureaucratic decisions, the Department of Veterans Affairs is often in a class by itself. When VA bureaucrats aren’t losing laptops with millions of veterans’ personal data or forgetting to include Iraq and Afghanistan veterans in their budget calculations, they are giving themselves obscene raises. For all the hard working doctors and nurses in VA hospitals and clinics across the country, it’s a real shame that some top level VA officials are dragging the VA name through the mud.

    Today we have one more bureaucratic blunder to add to the list. The VA has banned voter registration at veterans’ nursing homes and homeless shelters. The irony is almost too great. Disabled veterans, who have made such tremendous sacrifices in defense of democracy, are now being denied assistance in voting.

  2. AveryMoore

    The surprising 6-1 advantage of troop support for Obama mentioned above is not confined to the US Armed Forces. Obama’s visit to Germany was far from indifferently received in Europe.

    Nor, contrary to media inferences, is the EU community solidly behind US\UK efforts to retaliate against Russia economically.

    Without acknowledging that he understands the political downside of provoking the cost of home heating to rise, the UK press has taken to wondering, ‘Where is Gordon these days?’

    PM Gordon Brown has remained absent from view and thus subject to controversy over whether he is ‘in hiding.’ Surely a Conservative PM would be front and centre in the debate. Those naughty Russians would get a stern lecture, for sure.

    And France? It was almost stunning how quickly Sarkozy, not known for his diplomatic temperament, rushed to the rescue. Somehow he became almost a saviour to Europe for negotiating with the Bear. But nowhere is France’s outspoken disdain for Georgia’s inclusion in NATO mentioned or the reasons for the rift fully developed into reasons of state.

    But now a Der Spiegel interview has uncorked some of the mystery. The supposed solidarity of European opinion with US objectives to contain Russia and deal with a new cold war in Europe is looking thin.

    You can read the entire interview “’Serious Mistakes by the West’ in English here,1518,572686,00.html.

    The questions used by the interviewer to tease out a ‘correct’ answer in some cases are hilarious.

    Here are some excerpts:

    SPIEGEL: Mr. Schröder, who is at fault for the Caucasus war?

    Gerhard Schröder: The hostilities undoubtedly have their historic causes, as well, and the conflict has had several historic precursors. But the moment that triggered the current armed hostilities was the Georgian invasion of South Ossetia. This should not be glossed over.

    SPIEGEL: Do you believe that the American military advisors stationed in Tbilisi encouraged Georgia to launch its attack?

    Schröder: I wouldn’t go that far. But everyone knows that these US military advisors in Georgia exist — a deployment that I’ve never considered particularly intelligent. And it would have been strange if these experts had not had any information. Either they were extremely unprofessional or they were truly fooled, which is hard to imagine.

    SPIEGEL: That may well be, but something else is now at stake: Russia has never overcome the loss of its superpower status, and in recent years it has felt cornered and humiliated by NATO. During the wars in the Balkans, the Iraq invasion by the “Coalition of the Willing” under Washington’s leadership, the Kosovo declaration of independence …

    Schröder: … don’t forget the development of an American missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic …

    SPIEGEL: … the Kremlin has been forced to look on. Isn’t it possible that an economically and militarily strengthened Moscow now sees US friend Saakashvili as the best possible opportunity to retaliate against the West? And that Putin wants to assert imperial claims?

    Schröder: In my view, there have indeed been serious mistakes made by the West in its policy toward Russia. Can we conclude that this bears some relationship to the recent events in the Caucasus, as Russia’s response, so to speak, to the Georgian provocation? I think it’s wrong to combine these two notions.

    SPIEGEL: You don’t share the newly erupted fear among many in the West of a “Russian threat?”

    Schröder: No, not at all. There is a perception of Russia in the West that has very little to do with reality.

    SPIEGEL: Could the new, highly self-confident leadership duo in Moscow feel that the West needs them more than they need the West?

    Schröder: It is a mutual dependency. There is not a single critical problem in world politics or the global economy that could be solved without Russia — not the nuclear conflict with Iran, the North Korea question and certainly not bringing peace to the Middle East. The set of problems relating to the climate can also only be addressed universally. Incidentally, Moscow ratified the Kyoto Protocol to fight global warming, while we are still waiting for Washington to do so. And when it comes to energy policy, only dreamers can pursue the idea that Western Europe could become independent of Russian oil and natural gas. On the other hand, the Russians need reliable buyers for their energy shipments.

    SPIEGEL: Does Georgia belong in NATO?

    Schröder: I thought that the German government — and I certainly wish to compliment Ms. Merkel and Mr. Steinmeier in this regard — together with the French government, took the smart approach at the NATO summit in Bucharest in April

    SPIEGEL: … because they opposed the Americans’ and the Eastern Europeans’ desire for fast acceptance of Georgia and Ukraine, and instead shelved the issue with what amounted to vague promises.

    Schröder: Imagine if we were forced to intervene militarily on behalf of Georgia as a NATO country, on behalf of an obvious gambler, which is clearly the way one ought to characterize Saakashvili. Georgia and Ukraine must first resolve their domestic political problems, and they are still a long way off. I see the chances of Georgian accession becoming even more remote as a result of the recent events in the Caucasus and, in this connection, I have great difficulties following the rather ostentatious promises made by the NATO secretary general a few days ago.