Republican Sam Johnson Makes Excuses To Support War Crimes

The Republicans supported withholding funds from an unpopular war. With unpopular war crimes, the GOP continues. Changing means admitting that they should have prevented the war crimes.

They may do something to appear to respond, but they have no intention of changing, or start doing what they should have originally done: Assent to the rule of law, and punish wrong doers for war crimes.

Ref Veteran flip flop discredits his argument.

* * *

The Republicans are making excuses again. Sam Johnson of Texas is hardly someone the GOP would want offering any support.

Johnson can't make up his mind whether he's for or against the American people. In 1995, Johnson claimed the President wasn't listening to America. In 2007, Johnson is the one who isn't listening: We the People want change, not the excuses of Veteran Sam Johnson to continue with illegal warfare and folly.

* * *

The same GOP Members of Congress who are whining about "supporting the troops" were in the Clinton era calling for funding cuts.

Then, the Republicans whined that the President was going against the Wishes of the American People to justify funding cuts; today, the Republicans are changing their tune, ignoring this President’s defiance of the law and public and refusing to support the needed changes.

* * *

Take Sam Johnson. With Clinton he said:

"I wholeheartedly support withholding funds from President Clinton's Bosnia Mission. Although it is a drastic step and ties the president's hands, I do not feel like we have any other choice. The President has tied our hands, gone against the wishes of the American people, and this is the best way I know how to show my respect for our American servicemen and women.Ref

In 2007, Johnson whines:

"Let my body serve as a brutal reminder that we must not repeat the mistakes of the past. We must not cut funding for our troops. We must stick by them. We must support them all the way."Ref

We must reject Johnson's claim of credibility; We must question his integrity; We must reconsider his excuses for inaction. We must ask why he is proposing to continue the mistakes of Vietnam: Continuing what is not working.

What Johnson said must not be repreated, will. Rather than repeating the mistakes, this President is compounding them, and making new ones.

The President cannot ask Americans to continue supporting a war of aggression by claiming the troops need our support. No, this President needs the support of a competent defense counsel before The Hague.

* * *

It is absurd for the GOP to parade veterans as if they have some more superiority and are immune to challenge. This is absolutely ridiculous.

___ Who in the American public would dare to stand by this President who, despite his so-called service during Vietnam, he appears to have not fully comprehended his lessons of warfare?

Despite this President serving in the national guard, the President has proven a failure.

Having prior military service may be an important feature, but it hardly justifies immunity to scrutiny. At best, claims that someone is in the military might raise questions:

___ Why are they mention they're in the military; why not let their argument stand on their own;

___ TO what extent are they using their "military service" as a basis to sway public option, but distract attention from their fundamental flaws in their leadership, logic, or their legal justifications?

* * *

I'm not impressed with the legal arguments presented. What's disturbing is to find, where the GOP cannot carry favor, it's parading veterans who are making arguments wholly inconsistent with previous statements.

* * *

People who make a decision -- rightly or wrongly -- without having asked tough questions is one problem; but when we have this much bungling, but people are asserting -- despite the recklessness -- that we need to keep doing what is stupid, are reckless.

This leadership did attempt to adjust in other wars. It can hardly be said, on top of their inconsistent arguments about Clinton and Bush, that doing more and continuing with what isn’t working, is anything but folly.

* * *

Choosing Sam Johnson doesn't help the GOP. His track record isn't credible. McCain and Johnson show that just because someone has been a POW it doesn't mean that they're able to make coherent arguments.

I'm not impressed when veterans take to the floor of the Congress to talk about their experiences, but ask that we focus on their military service, while ignoring their flawed positions.

The GOP is not impressing me when they attempt hide the inconsistent, flawed, and reckless policies by having We the People pretend that military service is the ultimate defense.

This President has military service, but ignores military experts. It can hardly be said that we are enjoying the fruits of his military training.

* * *

Johnson's credibility is worthless as a defense, justification, or legal foundation, it's a smokescreen. Johnson cannot credibly assert that anyone but his own position is misguided.

There should be constraints on a President who shows, without constraints, he has no clue how to conduct combat operations, oversee Generals, or adjust.

It's only when Congress, through close guidance, can this President hope he'll have the information he needs to adjust to reality.

It is appropriate for Johnson to go on the record so that future generations can see that military experience is not a guarantee that someone will make credible, coherent, or well founded decisions or arguments.

Johnson is relying on his military background to generate support for his inconsistencies. Beware the veteran who bangs the drums of war, excites the Congress, and pretends that he is not being inconsistent; for military veterans carry a double edged sword: They will claim wisdom from service to justify ridiculing others; then reverse themselves and say they are immune to scrutiny because of their service.

This is arrogance, contempt, and an insult to their good service. Johnson is bringing discredit upon himself, his service, and the Untied States Congress.

* * *

People should change their policies and positions when they get new information; or when reality makes hiding from reality impossible. Johnson, despite a change in position, denies the new information. This is hardly inspiring.

It is not impressive when Johnson claims he was joking about nuking Syria; the problem is that this leadership still believes there was something in Iraq that wasn't.

It is an error for American civilians to be forced to listen to, and accept the unchallenged positions of military veterans. They are not military personnel, and civilians are not obligated to blindly obey veterans. We have civilian control of the military, not civilian obedience to non-sense form the military or veterans.

* * *

It remains to be seen how many of the failed military personnel from the Vietnam Era are attempting to refight the lost cause of Vietnam in the lost war in Iraq.

Civilian leaders under Nixon are now in the President's inner circle. Americans are asked to believe that Iraq is something new; yet the results are the same: Denial, obfuscation, and absurd arguments to keep doing what is folly.

Johnson cannot claim the moral high ground when he's made inconsistent arguments. He may have changed his mind, but that does not make his assertions of 2007 credible, especially when he before emphatically asserted the opposite.

Either he was right then and correctly rebuked the President for ignoring the public; or he is wrong now for assenting to a President who ignores the rule of law and We the People.

Johnson cannot have it both ways, regardless his attempt to use his military service to stay on both sides of the line and the law. Either Johnson is for accountability and We the People; or he is with the abuse of power that selectively pretends things are fine, despite the looming prospect of war crimes indictments.

* * *

It is appropriate to attach strings to the President's plans: The GOP leadership refuses to do provide needed oversight in this reckless war.

Johnson cannot defend his statements of 1995 by stating that his position was unchanged; the issue is what needs to change in 2007.

Americans voted for a change. What excuses Johnson gives to stick with what is folly are less important than seeing Johnson, as a veteran, advocates folly while pretending it is something else.

We don't need more excuses of Sam Johnson. We need leadership and real change.