Blogs for Bush Team
Matt Margolis, Founder/Editor
Mark Noonan, Editor
Kevin Patrick, Senior Writer
Paul Lewis, Senior Writer

News Tips

Guest Bloggers
Leo Pusateri

Blogroll For Bush


Above are the 43 most recently updated blogs. Click here for the full blogroll

Allies


Archives
Categories

B4B Coverage Of...
The 2004 Republican National Convention
The Alito Nomination
The Roberts Nomination
The Roberts Hearings
Hurricane Katrina

Recent Posts
Dear Iran and Venezuela
Abizaid bodyslams Blitzer...
More News to Annoy Democrats
Open Thread: Another Primary Tuesday
Why I Don't Worry About November
Just for the Record
Building a Border Fence?
Sister Leonella
Unhinged Clinton Defenders
Democrats Are Weak On National Security
We Don't Need No Thought Control From Roger Waters
Even a Clinton Can Get it Right
What Media Bias? Part 66
Why to Stay Away From Paranoid Conspiracy Theories
Offending Islam
Too Soft at Guantanamo Bay
Saddam and al-Qaeda
Common Article III of the Geneva Convention
We Must Defeat Political Correctness To Win The War On Terror
Regarding laughing matters...


Margolis Media Works

Add to My Yahoo!
CentCom

GOP Bloggers

Thank you, President Bush

Social Security Information



Blogs for Bush Store





Search The Grand Old Portal

Donate to Blogs For Bush to help keep us blogging!
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Prime Sponsor

Premium Sponsors

More Sponsors


GOP Bloggers


Subscribe To B4Bcast!


Site Credits
RSS 2.0

Powered by:
Movable Type 3.2

Design by:





ANNOUNCEMENT: Matt Margolis & Mark Noonan get a book deal!


September 12, 2006
Laying Another Democrat Myth to Rest

We've been hearing all year how allegedly more Democratic military veterans are running for office this year than GOP veterans - the point of all this, of course, is to try and say that, somehow, the Party in favor of defeat is actually the Party of veterans. I always knew it was a bogus claim, but never bothered to check the detals because I didn't have time. Brendan Conway, over at The Weekly Standard, does have the time:

I discovered this by reviewing the biographies of the nearly 225 incumbents and challengers who were still seeking election as of early September in the 91 House and Senate races identified by the Cook Political Report in its August 16 "2006 Competitive House Race Chart" and its September 7 "2006 Senate Race Ratings." These are the real 2006 races: the one in which activists and citizens invest the bulk of the time, money and sweat.

In the House and Senate, among Cook's 91 competitive races, there are currently 14 Republican veteran challengers around the country and 16 Democratic veteran challengers. Among incumbents, there are 9 Republicans and 5 Democrats.

The number of Republican challengers will dip by as many as 5 today, should Republican vets lose their primaries--three of them are competing for the same Arizona seat held by retiring Rep. Jim Kolbe, for instance.

What effect will these races have on the veteran composition of the House and Senate if Democrats win? Not much. There are 69 Republican veterans and 40 Democratic veterans in the House; in the Senate, there are 17 Republican veterans and 15 Democratic veterans.

Bottom line: neither Party has a lot of veterans among their current officeholders, and this is because those in the boomer generation who were most likely to end up in politics were most likely to get out of serving in the military during their youth.

And, so, yet another Democratic half-truth fades in to nothing...

Posted by Mark Noonan at September 12, 2006 07:59 PM



Comments

...the point of all this, of course, is to try and say that, somehow, the Party in favor of defeat is actually the Party of veterans.

Mark, they are the party of veterans--veteran kooks, veteran liars, and veteran commies. An example of each: Jack Murtha, Cynthia McKinney, and Bernie Sanders.

I rest my case...

Posted by: keefer [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 12, 2006 08:24 PM

Hey keefer (or should I make that reefer)

Whenever a codger like you expresses his disapproval for courageous veterans, I know that they must be individuals of great integrity.

November is coming, bringing great changes and new hope for a beleaguered nation. So, reefer, go ahead with the name calling if it makes you feel better, we understand, it is a scary time for Repugs & Bush supporters right now, and if you feel the need to lash out in fear & frustration, it's o.k.

Posted by: Canadian Observer [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 12, 2006 10:02 PM

C.O. I'm glad your keeping that optimistic outlook, not that it's going to do you any good up north!

Posted by: bearmanUSMC [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 12, 2006 10:25 PM

CO,
Come again. Courageous veterans, Jack Murtha, Cynthia McKinney and Bernie Sanders? Individuals of great integrity?

BDS is serious, but you go well beyond BDS.
Maybe put your name on the wait list for Canada's MRI.Maybe something physical will appear that can be treated in a few years.

Peace.

Posted by: SEW at September 12, 2006 10:42 PM

Actually, the claim by Democrats is that they have more veterans of the Iraq war running for office. That is true. Facts are facts.

Posted by: baysidebomber [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 12, 2006 10:46 PM

Hmmmmmm............bayside bomber? Should we listen to him........nawwwwwww!

Even if that were a fact though, what does it prove? No really, I'd like to know. I know a million servicemen & women who are conservative and would never desire to run for office! Of course maybe they would if the GOP was out recruiting them the way the DNC does disgruntled servicemen. if that was the case, we would have way more running repub than dimocrat!!! but what's the point? To prove we are right? We don't need servicemen running for office to do that, we need them in the feild fighting to do that!

Posted by: bearmanUSMC [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 12, 2006 11:06 PM

C.O. I'm glad your keeping that optimistic outlook, not that it's going to do you any good up north!

Posted by: bearmanUSMC at September 12, 2006 10:25 PM


bearmanUSMC

Not only for us up north, but the entire world and then when that glorious day comes around and you have a Democratic President (Feingold) well, there will be celebrations around the globe.

Posted by: Canadian Observer [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 12, 2006 11:13 PM

As everyone knows the military voted 72-17 for President Bush. Since the dems are so enamored with our military all of a sudden how about everyone on the left just let the military choose our leaders?

Posted by: CJ [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 12, 2006 11:21 PM

CO- Will the celebrations around the world include the middle east?

Posted by: Rich at September 12, 2006 11:48 PM

Since the dems are so enamored with our military all of a sudden how about everyone on the left just let the military choose our leaders?

CJ, that sounds like a plan.

Posted by: Retired Spook [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2006 12:17 AM

O.K. C.O. optimism just went out the friggin window! either your insane, desperate or a little of both, but it will be a cold day in hell when that P.C. coward ever gets into office! As a matter of fact, i'd be willing to bet on that! I will move to Canada the day Feingold becomes pres. Bwahahaaahahaaaaa!!!!

Posted by: bearmanUSMC [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2006 12:20 AM

Hey CJ & Spook. Did ya notice how many kookbats posted on LEO's memorial thread for our fallen soldier? Let me give you a hint, I can count them on 0 hands! That's right not one peace lovin moonbat! yah, they just love our military boyz, at least the ones that turn on us!!!

Posted by: bearmanUSMC [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2006 12:24 AM

Hey Canadidian Observer--

Maybe when it's your business you can talk to us about our elections. Until then, why not go resurrect your Canadian "intellectual heavyweights..." You know, Paul Martin, Pierre Trudeau.. And discuss some French-type things...


Sit this one out and let the big boys fight it out, okay?

Posted by: Psycmeistr [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2006 12:38 AM

bayside,

Well, the story I was hearing six months ago was that 50 Democrat veterans were running for office and 0 GOP veterans...so, that was the lie...but, no matter: the main point stands...Democrats are not attracting droves of anti-war veterans as an indicator of veteran support for defeat in the war.

Posted by: Mark Noonan [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2006 12:46 AM

Kerry sent out an email today drumming up support for 4 Vets he supports. Of course, he couldn't help but mention Viet Nam.

I addressed here at We Are The Troops

Posted by: Lew Waters at September 13, 2006 02:43 AM

erry sent out an email today drumming up support for 4 Vets he supports. Of course, he couldn't help but mention Viet Nam.

I addressed here at We Are The Troops

Posted by: Lew Waters [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2006 02:44 AM

baysidebomber - Name them.

Posted by: Kahn [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2006 08:37 AM

CO- Will the celebrations around the world include the middle east?

Posted by: Rich at September 12, 2006 11:48 PM


For those in the middle east who want to be left in peace, yes, they will celebrate the good fortune of having a smart, reasonable, respected man of integrity lead the American people. But for criminals like Bin Laden and his followers, having Bush in power is like having a birthday party every day. He doesn't have to lift a finger to destroy the U.S., Bush is slowly doing the job for them.

Posted by: Canadian Observer [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2006 09:58 AM

Kahn-

If you're interested in knowing their names, do the research yourself. I certainly have nothing invested in educating you. Besides, I was in no way making a political statement; just pointing out facts.

Posted by: baysidebomber [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2006 10:20 AM

"If you're interested in knowing their names, do the research yourself." Liberalese for "I don't have any facts, I'm just regurgitating the liberal talking points that I have been fed"

There are a handful of recent veterans (not the 50 that has been bantered around) who are running as Democrats. Most, or all, are former JAG Corps types. That's where you find the highest concentration of liberals in the military.

Its also true that the majority of the veterans of the Iraq War are still in uniform. They feel that the call to arms is more important that cashing their "veteran" status ticket in for a political office.

Posted by: A-10 [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2006 02:02 PM

Ah but Bayside, you made the claim - not me. I say you're full of crap and you won't name them because you can't name them.

Posted by: Kahn [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2006 02:32 PM

Congratulations.

Posted by: baysidebomber [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2006 03:58 PM

Why bayside - I'm impressed. Admitting you are full of crap? How refreshing in a liberal.

Posted by: Kahn [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2006 04:02 PM

I'm not a liberal. I was merely congratulating you on your bold declaration that I am full of crap. Way to take a stand.

Posted by: baysidebomber [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2006 04:15 PM

But you made a statement and then refused to back it up. Can't you? Can't you back up your own statements?

How would YOU define being full of crap? Because from here, you are sitting right in the middle of the crap zone.

Posted by: Kahn [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2006 07:53 PM

What statement did I refuse to back up? The only statement a list of names would back up is "I know the names of all of the Democrats running for Congress who are Iraq war veterans". I did not make that statement. In fact, if you had even a basic understanding of the rules of logic you would realize that a list of names would in no way prove the statement that I did make, which is that more Iraq war veterans running for Congress are Democrats than Republicans. If I gave you a list of 10 Democrat names, who is to say that there aren't 20 Republicans?

Again, if you are interested in the facts surrounding this topic, you should do the research. You might learn something.

Posted by: baysidebomber [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2006 08:16 PM

baysidebomber;

That's pretty pathetic, even for you. When you make a statement, you should be able to back it up. If not, you're full of shit.

Posted by: Mel Evenson [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2006 09:07 PM

And.....

Air America To Declare Bankruptcy

Bwahahahahaha!!!!!

At the same time Hanoi Jane is starting a Lefty station for women.

Bwahahahahahahaha!

Gotta love them dhimmicrats! They are great comic relief.

Posted by: phnxbmed at September 13, 2006 09:09 PM

"Actually, the claim by Democrats is that they have more veterans of the Iraq war running for office. That is true. Facts are facts."

Facts are facts - so name them. Oh and good point, you said the ratio was slanted to the dems - so name the Republicans also.

Posted by: Kahn [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2006 09:18 PM

This is after the primaries.

Democrats:

David Harris
Chris Carney
Patrick Murphy
Joe Sestak
Tim Walz
Tammy Duckworth

Republicans:

Van Taylor

6 > 1 ...do you need me to back up that statement with a mathematical proof?

I am NOT suggesting that this is of any great significance. I just feel that no discussion is worthwhile if it is not based on facts. Do you disagree?

Posted by: baysidebomber [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2006 11:09 PM

bayside. Sure. Thanks for posting the names. I ridicule when people make baseless claims and appreciate it when they back something up.

Now as to the ratio... 6 to 1 would mean more if it wasn't actually six to one. So five more Democrats veterans are running than the single Republican. Hardly a convincing argument. I wonder which Iraq war they were in? Also, as someone else pointed out most of the Republicans are still serving.

I've said this before but it's still valid. The liberals have NOT been joining the military (especially as officers) and it is going to bite the party eventually. Virtually no-one from the liberal Ivy League joins.

I don't know about the other services but the Marine Corps cadre of officers is increasingly southern, Christian, and conservative. The Marines enlisted ranks are almost purely either rural or inner city. I've also heard (just anecdotally) that the Marine Corps is becoming largely Catholic.

This, plus the fact that many military feel betrayed by the Democrats and the press (yes, they do) will CERTAINLY lead to chages in the coming decades.

Posted by: Kahn [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 14, 2006 12:32 AM

Please report any inappropriate comments to abuse (at) blogsforbush (dot) com. Be sure to include the title of the blog entry, the name of the commenter, and the text of the offending comment.

Post a comment




Remember Me?
(you may use HTML tags for style)