Gino Piroli – 5/23/05

This page was last updated on May 23, 2005.

Cuts in veteran benefits unfair; Gino Piroli; Beaver County Times; May 23, 2005.

If anything is “unfair,” it’s the column title. As you will learn below, there were no cuts in veteran benefits.

This is a rehash of Piroli columns of January 24, February 28, March 21, and May 16, 2005. This column offers no new insights and repeats known “inaccuracies” (I’m being generous.).”

Below is a detailed critique of the subject column.

“I received a letter from Dave Davis of Beaver in March addressing the problems with the rising costs in veterans’ benefits.

“He stressed that although the president and U.S. Rep. Melissa Hart, R-Bradford Woods, had stated repeatedly that they wouldn’t forget the sacrifices of veterans, their actions have proven otherwise.”

[RWC] As I mentioned above and note below, the facts don’t support the “cuts in veteran benefits” allegation. Check out this discussion of the topic on FactCheck.org. The Times itself refers to FactCheck.org.

“I wrote to Davis to tell him that I would use some portions of his letter, but a reply from his wife bore the sad news that he had died May 9.

“Even though he has passed away, some of his thoughts are relevant to the prescription drug program.

“He brought up that in Bush’s first year in office, the cost to veterans for drugs tripled to $7 per prescription.”

[RWC] If you must “blame” someone, it should be shared with Bill Clinton for “Bush’s first year in office.” A new president’s budget doesn’t take effect until October of his first year in office. From January through September of 2001, the federal government was running under Bill Clinton’s last budget. It’s curious how those facts tend to elude Piroli columns.

“In the present budget, they will cost $15, and there will now be an enrollment fee of $250. Davis took 13 prescription drugs, and the rise in costs would have had a big impact.”

[RWC] Do we spend enough on veterans? I don’t know, but it seems wrong to bash President Bush and the current Congress given the rate of increase over the most recent five budgets.

“Davis spent more than four years in the Army in World War II, 18 of them on Guadalcanal, and closed the letter with this comment: ‘Is this the eternal thanks I get’ for that service?”

[RWC] Mr. Piroli claims Mr. Davis spent 18 years on Guadalcanal? I suspect he meant 18 months. The Times really needs to assign Mr. Piroli a better editor.

“Davis was at one time president of the Rochester Chamber of Commerce and was honored by that group at a dinner prior to his passing.”

[RWC] How is this relevant to the discussion?

“That there would be cuts in veterans’ benefits was a known quantity even before the election. But in my VFW magazine, the officers chose to remain silent.”

[RWC] Mr. Piroli repeats a falsehood from the May 16^th column.

“They now find it necessary to speak out after the proposed budget was released and they could not avoid responding to the remarks made to The Wall Street Journal by Undersecretary of Defense David Chu.”

[RWC] If Mr. Piroli took the few minutes required to check, he would have found the proposed 2006 budget for the Department of Veterans Affairs proposed a funding increase as did the previous four Bush budgets. Of course, you don’t want to let facts get in the way of a good bashing.

“Joseph Calloway of the Knight Ridder newspapers reported in an op-ed piece that Chu said ‘Congress has gone too far in expanding military retiree benefits.’”

[RWC] The WSJ charges for back articles and I couldn’t find a free transcript of Dr. Chu’s full comments. Since I don’t have the full context of the comment, I can neither attack nor defend the quote attributed to Dr. Chu. If that’s the only quote you have, it’s easy to see why veterans would be upset with it.

“The story brought about many critical comments from all the veterans groups, including the Veterans of Foreign Wars. Other criticisms included a letter to the Journal by Thomas P. Cadmus, national commander of the American Legion.

“He wrote, ‘I resent the implication ... that veterans are nothing more than greedy pigs feeding off the government trough.’ He added, ‘His (Chu’s) remarks are a slap in the face to every veteran who took the oath to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies.’

“Retired Army Col. Harry Riley of Florida said, ‘I wonder if Mr. Chu ever considered how hard it was at Normandy, in the jungles of the South Pacific, the freezing battlefields of Korea and the rice fields of Vietnam as he sits in his office and denigrates the old and new warriors seeking benefits they earned.’”

[RWC] Here’s a little tidbit Mr. Piroli conveniently omitted; Dr. Chu himself is a veteran. Oops. Dr. Chu was an Army officer (1968 – 1970) and served a Vietnam tour, though not in a combat role.

---

“There were two recent war anniversaries that aroused diverse reactions to the events when they occurred.

“May 7 was the 60th anniversary of the surrender of German forces that ended the war in Europe.

“At its peak in the European theater, the United States had 3.6 million troops. They came back to huge welcoming celebrations.

“April 30 was the 30th anniversary of the end of the Vietnam War.

“Those who served there, although they never lost a major battle, came home to a rather indifferent and sometimes frosty reception.”

[RWC] Mr. Piroli forgot to mention it was his side of the political spectrum – liberals – that provided the vast majority of the “rather indifferent and sometimes frosty reception.” I’m not claiming that was Mr. Piroli’s behavior, just that of most of his fellow travelers.

“After all these years, it’s rewarding to see them being recognized for their service and sacrifices while fighting a war under the most difficult conditions.

“It was believed that the lessons of the Vietnam War would keep us from ever engaging in another war where the decision-making was made by civilians and politicians.

“We didn’t learn from Vietnam and are now in Iraq.”

[RWC] Man, another attempt to link the Democrat-escalated (JFK and LBJ) Vietnam War with Iraq. In case anyone forgot, these folks tried this with the 1991 Gulf War as well.

In case you missed it, Mr. Piroli failed to note his hero FDR made military decisions during World War II. Lest we forget, FDR ordered U.S. forces to back off and not take Berlin so the Soviets could. This was not the only WWII military decision “made by civilians and politicians.” Whom do you believe made the final – and correct – decision about dropping the atomic bomb on Japan? It was President Truman.

Mr. Piroli’s selective memory aside, he ignores the fact that the United States is a country run by civilians, not a military junta. Even the Commander in Chief of our armed forces is a civilian. No military officer is even in the presidential chain of succession. While I 100% agree civilians should not attempt to micromanage military operations, ultimately our civilian leaders are responsible.

It’s hard to argue with Mr. Piroli about Iraq on this subject because he made a “drive by” accusation without providing any examples. This is a trademark of Piroli columns.