I may be forced to start a "Say, what?" series...What the heck is Bush smoking? Let's see the press corps ask Dana Perino about this latest distortion. We all know that McCain was vehemently opposed to Webb's GI bill. According to him, we can't have GI's receiving adequate compensation because 16% might not stay in the service. Yea, so let's ask "My Friends" McCain, what a soldier's life is worth?

This is rank dishonesty by Bush and maybe the straight talker will correct the record for Bush. You know, since he's such a straight talker. Hell, maybe Richard Cohen will write a nice op-ed about it all. OK, that will never happen so let's ask him to...cohenr@washpost.com

At a town hall meeting today in Baton Rouge, LA, Senator McCain was asked by a military mother why he opposes the Webb GI bill. In predictable fashion, he starts off by rightly stating that educational benefits for veterans have become outdated, but then goes into his debunked spiel about how the bill is too generous and would harm enlistment numbers. There's a reason your response was met with zero applause, Senator.

Download | play Download | play

You keep saying that you'll bring the troops home with honor. When have they not been honored? Can you please give examples? C&L and many other sites fight everyday for the rights of our troops, their health care, benefits and the conditions of Walter Reed. And the best way I know how to fight for them is to never send them to war without a true cause and bring them home now so their families can see them alive and healthy. You are against Sen Webb's GI Bill not because it doesn't give them adequate compensation for their service, but as you say, it will lead to many more troops leaving the armed forces sooner:

They are very hard to replace. Encouraging people to choose to not become noncommissioned officers would hurt the military and our country very badly." McCain argues his bill would have a smaller impact on retention rates than the legislation that the Senate passed.

Is that an honorable argument?

After Jim Webb's historic "21st Century GI Bill" passed both houses of Congress overwhelmingly last week, McSame apologists are coming out in full force as they try to explain why the two of them support the far inferior bill being offered by Senator Lindsey Graham. So when The New York Times published a scathing op-ed chiding President Bush for his absence of leadership on this crucial issue, who better to defend the administration than the stooges from "FOX and Friends"? In this particularly egregious example of White House shilling, the entire panel uncritically advances Bush-approved talking points, while Brian Kilmeade argues that this GI Bill is different from the WWII-era one because these troops volunteered, and therefore don't deserve the same benefits.

Download | play Download | play (h/t Bill W)

After all this is different. People point to, "Well, look what they did after World War II." Well, after World War II, people were conscripted. They said "You’re joining." They said for doing that and winning the war, here’s a college education. Now people are saying "I want to be a military person. I am signing on in a volunteer force."

Kilmeade's argument is so full of holes, it's hard to know where to begin.

On a funnier note, Bill W. writes: "How bad is it when you need Brian Kilmeade to help you pronounce 'vitriolic'? Gawd they are all so stupid."

Agreed, Bill.

VoteVets:

Republican Senator John Cornyn has lashed out at war veterans in response to our TV ad in Texas urging him to support the new Webb-Hagel GI Bill.

According to Roll Call (password protected), the Cornyn campaign "dismissed the charges of VoteVets.org as unfounded":

"The anti-war crowd is determined to use our men and women in uniform for their political advantage, even if our national security is jeopardized in the process," Cornyn campaign spokesman Kevin McLaughlin said.

What a bunch of jokers. Jim Webb and Chuck Hagel (who devised the new GI Bill), Rick Noriega (Cornyn's opponent), and VoteVets.org (whose veterans created the ad) have--not surprisingly--all served in a war. Yet *we're* the "anti-war crowd" according to the Cornyn campaign. However, John Cornyn--who was vehemently against serving in a war himself--is, I think, the real "anti-war" guy here, having avoided service during Vietnam.

VoteVets wasn't going to take this sitting down, and contacted Cornyn's office. And sadly, it's just more of the same.

Left in Alabama: More support for Jim Webb's GI Bill legislation. Are you listening, John McCain, and all you other Republicans in Congress?

PTSD: Given the underplayed, staggering numbers on veteran suicides, post-traumatic stress disorder, brain injuries and the like, it seems like awfully bad form to prosecute and imprison a veteran for pushing for PTSD benefits. While some innovative approaches for treating PTSD seem effective, replacing the VA's 'criminally negligent' leadership might also help.

The War Comes Home: Cutting to the heart of the war and Winter Soldier.

FranIAm: "Lest We Forget" — Revisiting Hiroshima.

Majikthise: Phylis Schlafly, rape denier.

The Satirical Political Report: A sneak peek behind the scenes of the Hamas superdelegates. (Horrors, has Joe Lieberman heard?)

Guest roundup by Batocchio. Please e-mail submissions and tips to Batocchio9 at yahoo dot com. Thanks!