VFW endorsements for the upcoming election

[stillkit]

Originally Posted by LauraC

It only proves that people/groups vote their own entitlements over the good of the country, something the Democrats have known for years and is why they are so liberal with handing out the goodies. The VFW, the teacher's union, Goldman Sachs - no difference. They all have their hand out.

That's how our democracy works. It's all a reflection of self-interest and those who organize themselves to affect the political process are the ones who drive policy.

The Framers of this country believed that was the only way to ensure that the Will of The People would be done, rather than the will of those who think they know what's best for others.

[nmnita]

I still have a problem with believing these endorsements really represent the true views of the members of the VFW. I understand some on the list support vets rights and this should be the way, but the list, the more I look at it seems to be geared to incumbants more than anything. I am still a little surprised at one of the endorsements in NM and the lack of same here in AR. it sounds like they are more worried about change, than anything else.


NIta

[Smash255]

Originally Posted by nmnita

I still have a problem with believing these endorsements really represent the true views of the members of the VFW. I understand some on the list support vets rights and this should be the way, but the list, the more I look at it seems to be geared to incumbants more than anything. I am still a little surprised at one of the endorsements in NM and the lack of same here in AR. it sounds like they are more worried about change, than anything else.


NIta

They are geared towards those who have a proven track record of standing up for veterans, fighting for veterans health care, etc. Some in the tea party crowd want to eliminate or privatize everything. Some have come out and said they want to privatize the VA, something tells me that is not going to sit well with the VFW. If you take a look into veterans legislation, veterans healthcare legislation, etc the vast majority of the endorsements make sense.

[stillkit]

Originally Posted by nmnita

I still have a problem with believing these endorsements really represent the true views of the members of the VFW. I understand some on the list support vets rights and this should be the way, but the list, the more I look at it seems to be geared to incumbants more than anything. I am still a little surprised at one of the endorsements in NM and the lack of same here in AR. it sounds like they are more worried about change, than anything else.


NIta

It is geared toward incumbents because they must have a voting record in line with the VFW's position on the issues. An outsider, new to Washington can't have a voting record.

The criteria for endorsement is pretty simple: A member of the House (such as Pelosi) must have voted in accordance with the VFW's stance on a piece of legislation at least 10 times. For Senators, (such as Reid and Boxer) the number is 7. After that, the amount of money actually donated to the campaigns is weighted toward those who are in positions of power and influence because they can be more effective in pushing through legislation important to Veteran's.

You would think that having a positive vote record and being in a position to advance the organization's agenda would be good thing. But, for a lot of members right now, that's not so. They're angry and outraged that the endorsements haven't gone to the "right" kind of candidates.

In other words, for far too many of our members, a candidates ideology is more important that actually doing what the VFW was organized to do: represent the interests of our combat Veteran's and active duty personnel.

If the rebellion successfully changes the criteria for endorsements into something which eliminates any possibility of "liberal" members of Congress gaining our help, regardless of how much they support Veteran's issues, it will not only weaken the organization badly, but tell future Veteran's and those coming home from war right now that they're not really important to us. Making the right political statement supercedes anything else.

It would be an example of political correctness, prejudice and bigotry destroying any chance of helping Veteran's in the future and that would be a tragedy. And all because the PAC supports the "wrong" candidates.

I hate to say it, but right now, I would not recommend that Veteran's join my beloved VFW. Hatred is driving it away from being of any use to them.

ps: The thread in the military forums is closed because of duplication, so we can just drive on here.

[domino]

Originally Posted by LauraC

It only proves that people/groups vote their own entitlements over the good of the country, something the Democrats have known for years and is why they are so liberal with handing out the goodies. The VFW, the teacher's union, Goldman Sachs - no difference. They all have their hand out.

Don't be so naive. The democrats learned this from the GOP. The GOP does the same thing, just different recipients.