posted on May 5, 2007 08:14:44 AM new
Marine's father gives Bush pen, support
By Jon Ward
May 2, 2007
It was just a regular, black-inked ballpoint pen that President Bush used to sign his veto yesterday, instead of his usual personalized Cross pen.
The pen was a gift from the father of a U.S. Marine killed in Iraq, who asked Mr. Bush last month to use it when he vetoed a timeline for withdrawal from Iraq.
Robert Derga, of Uniontown, Ohio, gave Mr. Bush the pen after an April 16 speech by the president at the White House.
Mr. Bush invited a number of "Gold Star Families" -- families who have lost a U.S. military member in Iraq -- to the speech, and met with them afterwards in the Oval Office.
Mr. Derga, 53, had brought the pen with him. It was the pen he had used to write letters to his son, Marine Cpl. Dustin A. Derga.
"It was just a common run of the mill ... I don't even remember the brand name," Mr. Derga said, in a phone interview last night. "It was just a $2 pen. Nothing special."
Mr. Bush met with the Dergas and other families for about 45 minutes, and spoke directly with each family.
"I looked the president square in the eye," Mr. Derga said. "I looked at him and said, 'Mr. President, if this Iraq supplemental comes down to a veto I want you to use my pen to do it.'"
Mr. Bush "kind of looked at me funny for a moment and then said, 'Absolutely,' and then handed the pen to his assistant," Mr. Derga said.
"He assured me he would use it," Mr. Derga said.
Dustin was killed in Iraq on May 8, 2005, while leading house-to-house searches in Ubaydi, Iraq. He was 24.
Dustin was the first Marine killed in Lima Company, with the Marine Force Reserve's 3rd Battalion, 25th Marine Regiment, 4th Marine Division, out of Columbus, Ohio.
But Lima Company, a group of 160 reservists, suffered the highest casualty rate of any company so far in the Iraq war.
They lost 23 Marines during their seven-month deployment in 2005.
Yesterday afternoon, Mr. Derga was shutting off his computer at work, around 5:30, when he received a call from Jared Weinstein, Mr. Bush's personal aide.
Mr. Weinstein was calling "to tell me that the president had signed the veto with my pen."
"They wanted to again give their heartfelt condolences on our loss of Dustin," Mr. Derga said. "I was pretty blown away is one way of putting it. I couldn't believe he actually did it."
Mr. Derga, a manager for Diebold, Inc., said that it was gratifying to be able to show his support for Mr. Bush and for the war, even if it has not always been easy to support the U.S. mission in Iraq.
"It's been painful for this nation and me personally but I still feel strongly about getting the job done over there and getting it done right," said Mr. Derga. "It meant a lot to us that we were able to make our position known, that we continue to support him."
But Mr. Derga said he is frustrated that many Americans do not believe Iraq is part of the U.S. fight against terrorism.
"I really feel strongly that this nation needs to wake up and understand what's at risk here and what's in the balance," he said.
As for Dustin, his son, Mr. Derga visits his grave in Reynoldsburg, Ohio, about two hours away, every few weeks, he said.
"He had a wonderful smile and a great dimple. He was a great kid. He loved to play baseball. He just loved working with his hands. And he was always interested in military service and public service," Mr. Derga said.
Dustin was a volunteer firefighter and steel worker. He was working toward a degree in EMS and fire science from Columbus State University.
"Probably his smile I miss more than anything," Mr. Derga said. "I think about him every day. I know I'll see him again, so it's just a matter of time."
Mr. Derga said that about 80 percent of the other Gold Star Families he knows agree with the president's decision to send more troops to Iraq to try to stabilize the country. "We have given the ultimate sacrifice in terms of our sons, and if we can still stand in the trenches with the president and support him, why can't the rest of the nation do it?" Mr. Derga said.
It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.George S. Patton
posted on May 5, 2007 09:50:26 AM new
As I sit here typing...tears are running down my cheeks.
I can't imagine the pain these families go through when they loose the most precious person they had in their lives....their children.
How can stories like this one NOT break every American's heart?
And as this father askes.....how can ALL American's not be willing to fight against those his son gave his life to fight against. I won't EVER understand it either. NEVER.
I wish this family and ALL families who have lost a loved one in ALL wars/conflicts where American treasure was the HIGH price we paid....peace in their hearts with the FULL knowledge their children were fighting against evil.
posted on May 7, 2007 12:35:26 PM new
One mother's view of troop support.
True troop support
My son is about to be drafted. It's no longer called that. Now it's called "involuntary reactivation." And it comes with orders for 25 days of refresher training and 18 months in Iraq. He's already served four-and-a-half years of active duty with three combat tours in Afghanistan. (Remember Afghanistan, the country that still needs resources and support?)
I am told that by speaking, by asking questions, I am not supporting our troops. Instead I guess I should circulate e-mails that sentimentalize this conflict, or buy a bumper sticker for which a few cents of the price is actually used for anything that could be remotely associated with "our troops." I have, instead, a few other ideas for supporting our troops:
*Take the time to urge your federal representatives to reinstitute the draft. This is a country that symbolizes justice for all and doesn't this also imply responsibility for all? If you supported this war, then support it with a real draft and not one that goes through the back door and requires the same men and women to serve again and again. The lack of a draft was just one more political manipulation designed to move this conflict forward.
*Urge these same representatives to increase the pay of those who are serving so that the military can compete with and attract those who would like to make a career of the armed forces. Why not attract the best? Police officers and firefighters also serve, but they also receive pay and benefits sufficient (they deserve more) to attract good candidates.
*When these men and women return and they come to you for a job, hire them. One young man from Indiana told me that a prospective employer thanked him for serving his country but then added that that didn't entitle him to a job. If you can't hire them, at least point them in the right direction. Tell them what they need to do to get hired and how to do it. They've risked so much; give them at least that extra minute.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on May 7, 2007 12:45:22 PM new
Again.....to remind those who haven't a CLUE.....soldiers don't just sign up for ONLY 4 years.
Try reading one of their CONTRACTS THEY sign. Then you won't be so ignorant.
maybe....
===========
The contractors that work in the dangerous areas of Iraq usually earn around $100,000.00 a year. BIG bucks because of the dangerous situation.
THINK the liberal left would support paying our TROOPS that much money?
Hell....they don't even want to allow them to recruit on THEIR liberal colleges.
I'd support that RAISE for them.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on May 7, 2007 05:33:20 PM newTHINK the liberal left would support paying our TROOPS that much money?
If you think the troops should be paid that kind of money then why didn't the Republicans do anything while they had control of Congress during since the Clinton administration. So much for the Republicans supporting the troops.
The Bush administration's new five-year defense spending plan provides a 3.1 percent pay increase for military personnel in 2006 and billions more in later years for building more powerful Army brigades, reflecting dual priorities of retaining troops and retooling the military to fight today's wars.
To achieve that, however, Pentagon budget officials had to slash $55 billion in projected spending over the five years for fighter jets, destroyers, submarines and other items, while adding $25 billion to transform Army ground units.
Yesterday, some lawmakers said the budget does not do enough to support the troops. Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) criticized the budget for not funding an increase in the death gratuity from $12,000 to $100,000 for survivors of troops killed in war zones, and for not providing a permanent increase in the size of the Army.
The troops did not see any increase in pay until the 2002 budget. Even then there pay only increased about 4%
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on May 7, 2007 05:57:58 PM new
Again you show your total IGNORANCE, ld.
There is just no END to how little you know.
Trying looking up all the money spend on RE-GROWING our military after clinton CUT it by 40%. That doesnt happen overnight.
Nor does replacing the 25% clinton reduced for our intelligence agency, the CIA, to do the most important work there is.
Nope...FIVE attacks and clinton was cutting back ALL military spending.
This admin. has increased benefits for our military to the tune of approx. 70%. Different amounts in different catagories.
Do a factcheck.org and you'll see how they often mentioned the DEM LIES on this subject.
It's not all about salaries.
But it HAS been about the dem party REDUCING funding to our military...then they #*!@ when they didn't have the necessary equipment when sent to war.
GET A CLUE as to why. DECREASING military spending by the DEMS/liberals.
THAT'S why.
Imo, we could NEVER pay them enough. We could NEVER put them in good enough housing....which this admin. ALSO spent tons on doing.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Funny section B #8 says:
I am enlisting/reenlisting in the United States xxxxx this date for xxx years and xxx weeks beginning in pay grade xxxxx.
That would mean when people sign up they are there for a pre-determined times whether it be 2 years, 4 years or 8 years subject to section C.
It is the military that is extending these terms (in the contract to do so) because of the shortage of troops. How long do you expect the same troops to keep fighting this war. If you think you are brave enough, how long do you think you would last Linda. I bet you would not last a week over there.
Furthermore it shows you have no sympathy for the mother in my post or the troops in the field. You expect them to fight, fight fight until they are either dead or have enough physical or physiological problems. So keep on saying how much you support the troops because you don't. If you did you would care for their well being more than you say you do.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on May 7, 2007 06:07:18 PM new
And NO, you're STILL uninformed.
When they sign up for FOUR years....their contracts make them VERY aware that is four years active duty and four more years....when and if they should be needed/recalled.
They owe a total of eight years when they sign a four year contract.
So when you liberals, who don't know what you're talking about speak about them being re-DRAFTED....it's just not true.
They're being asking to fulfil their FULL obligation that THEY agreed to do when they signed up.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on May 7, 2007 06:47:57 PM new
Bush’s approval rating falls to 28 percent
WASHINGTON: reuters, President George W Bush’s approval rating has fallen to 28 percent in a Newsweek Poll released on Saturday, an all-time low for Bush in that survey.
Nearly two out of three Americans – 62 percent – believe Bush’s recent actions in Iraq show he is “stubborn and unwilling to admit his mistakes,” Newsweek reported. Only 30 percent think Bush’s execution of the Iraq war demonstrates he is “willing to take political risks” to do what’s right.
Bush’s unpopularity may also be casting a dark shadow over the Republican chances for keeping the White House in 2008. Democratic front-runners lead potential Republican contenders in head-to-head match-ups across the board, the poll suggests.
Illinois Senator Barack Obama fares best against the lead Republicans so far in the race. Obama bested Republican front-runner and former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani by 50 percent to 43 percent among registered voters who responded to the poll.
Obama topped Arizona Senator John McCain by 52 percent to 39 percent and defeated former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney by 58 percent to 29 percent, the Newsweek reported.
New York Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, the front-runner among Democratic voters, topped Giuliani by 49 percent to 46 percent, beat out McCain 50 percent to 44 percent and outdistanced Romney 57 percent to 35 percent, the poll found.
Former North Carolina senator John Edwards topped Giuliani by six points, McCain by 10 and Romney by 37 points in the poll. The poll, conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International on Wednesday and Thursday, interviewed 1,001 adults 18 and older.
Your doing a "HECK OF A JOB" BUSHY.
"Bring Them On" the vetos that is for a great 2008 for the Democrats.
