McCain, Republicans Hurt by Cheapskate Stances on Domestic Issues

Rupert Murdoch, an arch conservative, predicts a Democratic landslide in the November 2008 elections. For once, I fully agree with Mr. Murdoch, and here's why...

John McCain and Republicans running for reelection to Congress in November will be hurt by their cynical, short-sighted, cheapskate stances and votes on important domestic issues that affect middle-class and lower-income American families... all while lavishing $12 billion monthly ($5,000 per second!) on the Iraq War.

Two bills that neatly symbolize the unreasonable fiscal cruelty of President Bush, who was aided and abetted by Sen. John McCain and just enough Republicans in Congress, are:

• The Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act, a new GI Bill sponsored by Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA), a highly decorated veteran and former Navy Secretary; and

• The State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), which provided health care for uninsured, lower-income children.

Both bills were passed by Congress by unusually strong bipartisan votes. (Sen. "Straight Talk Express" McCain stood with George Bush and took clear stances against both bills, but was curiously absent from the Senate votes.)

President Bush vetoed the SCHIP bill twice in 2007, which proposed to expand the program by $35 billion over five years and to cover the 8 million American children who have no health care. (The Bush administration spends $35 billion in Iraq in three months.)

Now, President Bush promises the same shoddy, shameful treatment for U.S. veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Sen. Webb's GI bill aims at restoring U.S. veterans' educational benefits back to the level of those granted to World War II soldiers. The legislation was passed by both the Senate and House on a strongly bipartisan vote, but President Bush promises a veto when it reaches his desk in a few weeks.

Get this: George Bush and John McCain believe that benefits granted in the new GI Bill are too generous for U.S. soliders, and might cause civilian life to be too attractive. Seriously. Explains retired four-star Army General Wesley Clark:

"It's offensive to suggest that we should fix the system so that civilian life is unappealing to service members, thereby forcing them to stay in the military.

Moreover, failing to provide adequate education benefits for our returning soldiers will only dissuade a large number of our best and brightest from choosing military service over other career options."

And the New York Times wisely opined, to reported White House chagrin, over the Memorial Day weekend:

"Having saddled the military with a botched, unwinnable war, having squandered soldiers’ lives and failed them in so many ways, the commander in chief now resists giving the troops a chance at better futures out of uniform.

"He does this on the ground that the bill is too generous and may discourage re-enlistment, further weakening the military he has done so much to break.

"So lavish with other people’s sacrifices, so reckless in pouring the national treasure into the sandy pit of Iraq, Mr. Bush remains as cheap as ever when it comes to helping people at home."

Take the time to read about these two urgent issues facing middle-class Americans, at:

• McCain and Bush Reject Education Benefits Bill for U.S. Soldiers
• Bush Crushes Health Care for Uninsured Children

Hooray for Rupert Murdoch for telling the truth! Unbelievably, it seems he's more of a "straight talk express" these days than self-anointed last-honest-man, John McCain.

(Photo taken on February 18, 2008 at Fort Stewart, Georgia, at a homecoming ceremony for the U.S. Army's 293rd Military Police Company: Stephen Morton/Getty Images)

Related Reading
Profile of U.S. Senator Jim Webb of Virginia
Profile of Retired US Army General Wesley Clark
New York Times, May 26, 2008: Mr. Bush and the G.I. Bill