VFW should focus on veteran's issues
Joseph Ryan's well written article (Sept. 18) set my teeth on edge.
It noted the political arm of the VFW announced its support for Congressman Mark Kirk who talks a good game on veteran's issues, but has a record in Congress of voting against most of the bills written to help veterans.
VFW's support of Kirk and Rep. Peter Roskam proves its "political arm" is nothing more than the voice for the extreme right wing of the Republican Party and doesn't represent the rank and file of the Veterans of Foreign Wars.
Its support of Peter Roskam against Tammy Duckworth proves it is in bed with the extreme right. Supporting a conservative agenda is more important to them than veteran's issues, which is one of the reasons they were originally established.
Supporting Roskam, who was never in military service, over Duckworth, was a shameless act of betrayal to its members.
Major Duckworth lost both legs when terrorists in Iraq shot her helicopter down. A horrific wound that required months of recovery in a military hospital.
You would think that out of respect for this wounded soldier, the VFW would have abstained from endorsing anyone under the circumstances if it wouldn't support her.
No, it disregarded her service and great sacrifice of a fellow war veteran and went with a candidate who has never served his country in the military. Nor had he any record of supporting veteran's issues.
Al the VFW had to do was abstain from choosing anyone, but it couldn't do that. Now, it is backing a man who has a proven voting record in Congress against important bills for veterans.
As a veteran of both the Korean and the Vietnam wars, I resent the partisan favoritism of the VFW based solely on political ideology.
It should be concerned with veteran's issues alone. Surely its membership is made up of both Republicans and Democrats.
R.P. Harrison
Elk Grove Village