Saturday, November 7, 2009
ANTI, Chickenhawk Tancredo Walks Off the Set when Confronted with the Truth!
On MSNBC last night, former Republican Congressman Tom Tancredo walked out during a discussion about health care with Markos Moulitsas and David Shuster (who was filling in for host Ed Schultz).
As Tancredo railed against health care reform, Shuster raised the question of whether the Veterans Administration -- a single-payer system -- is also a "threat to our freedom."
Tancredo's responded that there are problems in the Veterans Association's system and said that his liberal counterpart in the debate should talk to more veterans. Moulitsas, a veteran himself, swung back. The Daily Kos founder brought up the fact that Tancredo -- a Republican student activist during Vietnam -- GOT OUT OF serving in the war.
Moulitsas responded: "I did not get a deferment because I was too depressed to fight in a war that I supported in Vietnam."
When I saw this clip, I was somewhat befuddled. I've seen Tancredo in action for years. If nothing else, he CRAVES media attention. Why would he walk off the set of a nationally televised news shows over some skuttlebutt?? So I decided to do some internet searches about Tancredo's background. WHAT A MESS!!
According to Tancredo's bio:
Through college, Tancredo was a Republican and an active member of Young Americans for Freedom. He strongly supported the Vietnam War. However (and this is a BIG However) after graduating from the University of Northern Colorado, Tancredo became eligible to serve in Vietnam in June 1969. Tancredo went for his physical, telling doctors he had been treated for depression, and eventually got a "1-Y" deferment.
Chickenhawk: a politician, bureaucrat, or commentator who strongly supports a war or other military action, yet who actively avoided military service when of age.
Tancredo is a Chickenhawk, like so many other politicians who support the war(s).
This includes Cheney, Limbaugh and other Republican/Conservative War Supporters.
NOW WE KNOW WHY CHICKENHAWK TANCREDO WALKED OFF THE SET! This Totally Invalidates ANYTHING Tancredo has to say in the future!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
22 comments:
Without the spin the question is ,"Was Tancredo treated for depression and, if so, did that by government regulation disqualify him for military service?" Both questions should be easily answered. If he was treated for depression, that should have been verified. He had no control over the decision on his deferment at that point.
Tancredo may have fumbled the answers regarding Medicare and VA care but the truth is Medicare is in deep trouble financially and asking the seniors in Medicare might be asking the wrong group. Ask the docs whether they think Medicare reimbursement rates are fair? Seniors have told me that their medical records are labelled "Medicare". What does that tell you about discrimination against seniors in the kind of service they can expect? Can you blame the docs who get shortchanged on reimbursement for not wanting to spend more than the minimum amount of time with "Medicare" patients?
Some of the onerous provisions Pelosi put into the reform bill are noted here
Tancredo received a deferment.
Rush Limbaugh received a deferment.
Dick Cheney received 6 deferments.
BW Bush never served in Vietnam at the height of the war and was often missing in action when he was supposed to be in the Air National Guard.
(like his records are now mysteriously missing in action)
These Republican Chicken Hawks who advocate war are ridiculous!
My brother did serve in war. When he became disabled a few years ago he did seek help from the VA. Thank Heavens for the VA. They were able to diagnose and treat him. Though he is now diabled, at least he receives the proper medical care/treatment/services he so needs right now.
So let's suppose Tancredo is telling the world he is mentally ill with clinical depression. If he is so ill he could not serve in the military, then how on earth did he think he could serve as President of the USA???
There are no published reports he went to a mental hospital.
If you are saying it was a minor case of depression that could be treated with a pill or two and he is fully functional, then why couldn't he serve in the military as a private ---No? Instead HEAD of the Military???? Does that make sense??
Ultima wrote: Some of the onerous provisions Pelosi put into the reform bill are noted here.
x
Trying to being fair, I decided to click on the "here." There, I found 15 screens full of written text. But before reading the whole thing, I stopped at line 5 with a reference to a non-partisan group called the Lewin Group. So, I googled them and came across
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/05/lewin-groups-parent-compa_n_252180.html
It turns out that they are not so non-partisan. If I cannot trust line 5 into the discussion, I am not going to bother wasting my time reading the other 14 screens full.
Anon4,
Good catch.
From your link about the Lewin Group:
"House Republican Leaders John Boehner (Ohio) and Eric Cantor (Va.) have taken roughly $60,000 from the health insurance company that owns the research firm the Lewin Group, regularly cited by opponents of health care reform, according to Federal Election Commission filings."
FROM WIKI about the Lewin Group:
"The Lewin Group was purchased in 2007 by Ingenix, a subsidiary of UNITED HEALTH GROUP, but maintains editorial and analytical independence from its parent
company."
I agree. Their perspective is obviously slanted towards their parent company.
Tancredo had a 1-Y deferment, it didn't keep him from military service or the draft, it basically states he is only called up in case of a national emergency, meaning the last of the line.
Clinton and many other Democrats also got deferments, Clinton was on a 1-D deferment, meaning military reserves if he was to be called up.
Anon 4, there is no un-biased non-partisan group, each and every single one of them, on both sides and even those that say they are independent, all have a bias one way or the other.
Now, the trick is to understand each groups points and then be able to actually refute them in a way that is factual and clear.
Why is he so ashamed of his deferment?
Markos did not lie. He said, "I'm a veteran. i did not get a deferment because i was too depressed to serve in a war I supported."
Then Tancredo requests an apology? What did he say that was untrue??
Then Tancredo stomped off like a 2 year old who took his ball and went home.
If Tancredo was upfront and responded that he did have a 1-Y deferment, he did support the war and he has overcome his illness, and continued the interview, then we would not even be having this discussion.
There are groups that are NOT as blantantly ANTI Healthcare Reform then those owned and led by the healthcare groups like United Healthcare.
Where did Tancredo say he was ashamed of his defermant? It is one thing being depressed as we all get from time to time but evidently Tancredo's required treatment. Why attack him for something he had no control over? I think Tancredo felt insulted over Moulitas's insinuations and I don't blame him. Anyone who makes fun of or attacks someone for a mental or physical disability and then insinuates they are faking it, is a disgusting and hateful person IMO.
Let's face it in Tancredo's case he is anti-illegal and anti-the Democrats form of healthcare reform. The Daily Kos has the opposite point of view on both issues and that is why that personal attack on Tancredo occured.
Why is he so ashamed of his deferment?
Tancredo is not ashamed of the deferment. Markos brought it up as a way to discredit anything Tancredo was saying. It only showed the inability of Markos to carry on a debate civilly. Tancredo may have took it as Markos making fun of his clinical depression that he had/has? That would justify Tancredo demanding an apology.
Markos claims to be a veteran himself, he is not. He missed being deployed to the Gulf War. He only served a 3 year enlistment. Seems Markos lied about his status on TV.
Does serving in the military for 3 years give Markos the credentials to speak for veterans of wars? I don;t think so, and as a Veteran of the Gulf War, he does not speak for me.
Wrong Liquid.
Here is Military Definition for Veteran:
The term ''veteran'' means a person who served in the ACTIVE MILITARY, naval, or air service, and who was discharged or released therefrom under conditions other than dishonorable.
http://www.thecre.com/fedlaw/legal22a/uscode38-101.htm
Here is his record:
After graduating from Schaumburg High School in Schaumburg, Illinois, he served in the U.S. Army from 1989 through 1992. He completed training at Ft. Sill in Oklahoma and fulfilled his three-year enlistment as a Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) Fire Direction Specialist while stationed in Bamberg, Germany. By his own account, he "missed deploying to the Gulf War by a hair." Moulitsas has described the Army as "perhaps the ideal society – we worked hard but the Army took care of us in return."
Markos earned his VETERAN status when he served in ACTIVE MILITARY while in Germany.
I know this to be a fact since my oldest brother became a Veteran due to his active military service in Germany. My other brother served his active duty in Vietnam, as did my brotherinlaw. And, as I have previously mentioned, some of my nephews and one niece have served/serving active duty in Iraq.
I am very proud of ALL of our Military at home or abroad. We should honor them to the fullest!!
God Bless America!!
I also came across this:
Veteran's Pensions Eligibility:
You may be eligible if:
you were discharged from service under other than dishonorable conditions, AND you served 90 days or more of active duty with at least 1 day during a period of war time. However, 38 CFR 3.12a requires that anyone who enlists after 9/7/80 generally has to serve at least 24 months or the full period for which a person was called or ordered to active duty in order to receive any benefits based on that period of service. With the advent of the Gulf War on 8/2/90 (and still not ended by Congress to this day), veterans can now serve after 9/7/80 during a period of war time. When they do, they generally now must serve 24 months to be eligible for pension or any other benefit. But note the exclusions in 38 CFR 3.12(d), AND
you are permanently and totally disabled, or are age 65 or older, AND
your countable family income is below a yearly limit set by law
Source(s):
Military.com
For the U.S.:
In the United States military, active duty refers to military members who are currently serving full time in their military capacity. Members of a reserve component are not generally considered active duty. However, in support of the Global War on Terror and other contingency operations, a large number of Reservists in all branches have been called to active duty in an operational capacity. Many will argue that today's Reserve forces are no longer the "strategic" Reserve of the Cold War. Those Reservists deployed in support of contingency operations, either as a unit or by individual augmentation, are also considered active duty. These terms may also be applied to military forces of other nations, although the details concerning obligations to serve may differ. Verification of active military duty status may be made at www.ServicemembersCivilReliefAct.com.
Fair enough Dee, but that dictionary definition would qualify anyone who served only one day of service. The problem now becomes does Morkos' eligibility in the military make him eligible for any veterans benefits? No it does not. And if he were so engulfed with veterans desires, why did he not re-enlist in the military? And since you like wiki for his bio, why not use hi comment, "Moulitsas has described the Army as "perhaps the ideal society – we worked hard but the Army took care of us in return.""
Like I said he is not, by military definition a Military Veteran as he is not eligible for any benefits whatsoever from the VA.
I think it is the Army's call on whether he qualifies for veteran's benefits. Like I said, my brother served in Germany and he is considered a veteran. I would ask him but he is far too ill. He became disabled over the last couple of years and the VA has been very helpful to him and his family.
Regarding Markos, I think it is his personal decision on why he decided to enlist to begin with and whether he chose to re-enlist or not.
As for Tancredo, times were different. We had the draft then. It was a requirement. When Tancredo was in the YAFers he supported the war, but when it came time to serve, as required, he deferred. Many "rich boys" did the same thing back then, Clinton and Cheney and Limbaugh and many more.
I give credit to anyone who serves, voluntarily or not.
I also honor your military service.
All of us owe our military so much!
Tancredo didn't defer, the doctor at the physical deferred him. The doctors do ask questions during the physical and you are required to answer them truthfully, because if you don't and are later found to have lied, the military can hold you accountable. So, to lay blame at Tancredo for the doctors decision is unfair.
The GOP's Toxic Tea Party - San Gabriel Valley Tribune - Newt Gingrich is scared of the Republican Right Wing Extremism, Madness and Crazyness
By Joe Conason
November 04, 2009
The GOP's Toxic Tea Party
http://www.sgvtribune.com/opinions/ci_13714209
Some excerpts :
When Newt Gingrich warned Republicans that they were making a grave "mistake" by driving out moderates and enforcing the angry orthodoxy of the far right, the sober tone of his remarks was stunning.
This is a politician who is no stranger himself to the wilder shores of extremism, a populist and a purist who rose to great power against the GOP establishment, and a demagogue whose lexicon lacerated the "Democrat Party" as decadent, elitist, unpatriotic and immoral.
In his day, Gingrich channeled the same phobias and fury as the Tea Party activists whose growing influence in Republican ranks seems to have shaken him so badly. Why is Newt scared now?
Despite his habitual ranting against the Eastern elites, the former House speaker is a professional historian and an intellectual with wide-ranging interests - making him a figure of potential suspicion to radio talkers without much formal education and the raving mobs that follow them.
Much as he exploited the prejudices of the religious right and fantasies of the conspiracy crowd, Gingrich has always affected a more sophisticated and urbane attitude. He may be troubled to realize that he suddenly ranks far lower than Sarah Palin, who can barely muster a coherent political thought, or Glenn Beck, who enthralls his audience with weird, weepy rants.
Leaving aside any lingering presidential ambitions, Gingrich understandably feels that brand of leadership will have a very limited appeal for most Americans - and that the more voters see of it, the less they will like it.
Milenials.com
Vicente Duque
Post a Comment