I’m calling out the Press-Enterprise newspaper.

Sorry this is late. But as I was sorting the editorial pages to determine which I would keep, which I’d toss, in the Saturday May 3 edition of The Press-Enterprise (3512 14^th St, Riverside, CA  92501), I came across “Protests only embarrass troops,” by a Dennis C. Wyckoff, resident of Adelanto, California, a small desert town perhaps 40 miles due north of San Bernardino, on US 395. (Parenthetical observation: I’ve been through Adelanto — a wholly unaesthetic, bust-blown burg of nothingness — several times and can attest there is considerably less than nothing to be said on the town’s behalf that would recommend it for anything save razing.)

In his guest op-ed, Mr. Wyckoff begins with, “As a retired Navy chief petty officer, I have had to endure the hypocrisy, disdain and vitriol of the socialist Democrats of this country.” Within the body of his virulently partisan smorgasbord of the most un-American diatribe, he claims he is “a veteran of three combat operations (Libya, Desert Storm, and Somalia).” With this very self-anointed entitlement to squeal cacophonously, the retired sailor continues, “I have been vilified by those who claim their First Amendment right allows them to aid and abet the enemy.” And, “Our military heroes want to finish the job and come home victors, irrespective of the loss of life and sacrifice.” The absolutely incorrect kicker in his drool of toxin is this however, “The Democratic Party is chock-full of those who could never emotionally, physically or intellectually withstand the sacrifices of war.”  

Although you’ve likely heard all you need, to know where this fellow is coming from, certainly nowhere near Jefferson or Madison, “I am not a warmonger, but I welcomed the chance to protect the Hollywood elites and even O’Donnells’ [Rosie] right to call my commander in chief a terrorist. For those of you who have a big empty hole in your soul or nothing better to do with your lives, I want to tell you, from experience, that you are contributing to the deaths of our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines. Please don’t protest for my brothers and sisters in arms. We don’t want it.” Mr. Wyckoff finally signs off with, “Our policies in Iraq and Afghanistan might not be palatable for everyone, but we are there for the safety and well-being of Americans.”

Without ordering for any prioritization, let’s take this piece of screed, one foul lump of excreta at a time.

Openers: I volunteered to join the United States Army June 22, 1964 (RA 16 805 398), and, for the three years that composed my enlistment, I served in the infantry. Although the noted author likely does not realize it, there are but 2 combat arms in our uniformed military: the Navy is NOT one of them. The two are the Army and the Marines. *

I appreciate his service, but unless Mr. Wyckoff was in the Seals, being offshore of Libya, Desert Storm and Somalia, he was about as close to genuine combat peril as he is right now in his living room in the desert town of Adelanto. I’m just a tad unsure of the naval or air force potency those three had at the time. Although it’s my bet Mr. Wyckoff won’t, he can check the roll call of those lost, to learn which of our military branches have suffered the most losses. Hint: it ain’t the Navy!

Moving on to Number 2, in our no-account countdown of scurrilous pedantry: Democrats as “never [being] emotionally, physically or intellectually [able to] withstand the sacrifices of war.” As a preface to my comments on this stream of digested bovine matter, I’m going to refer to the above by suggesting that being stationed aboard a US Navy vessel hardly composes a “sacrifice of war;” certainly not close to equivalency with patrolling the mean streets of Baghdad.

But let’s check the statistics: Republican members of the House or Senate who are military veterans and Democrats. In the House, currently 38 Republicans served in the active military, 16 in only either the Reserves or Guard. Democratic vets with active duty number 33, with 9 members having served only in either the Reserves or the Guard. In the United States Senate, 10 Republicans served on active duty, five in either only the Reserves or Guard. Relative to Democrats, nine served actively, and four served only in the Reserves or Guard. Speaking of actual, honest-to-godawful-hell combat, without going back to either grunt.space.swri.edu/housevet.htm, or  grunt.space.swri.edu/senatevet.htm, I know that Senators Ted Stevens, Jim Webb, John McCain, John Kerry, Jack Reed, Chuck Hagel and Daniel Inouye saw as much of it as they had to. (And by the way, Senator Daniel Inouye, Democrat of Hawaii, is the only Medal of Honor recipient in either chamber of our federal government.) The same can be said of House members Charlie Rangel, John Conyers, Jack Murtha, Doc Snyder, and at least Duncan Hunter.* None of this propounds the tally as a contest, only to crush any proposal that somehow Democrats don’t have the “right stuff.”

*      May, 1965, I was third in line, rear of PFC Hendrix, who was on point, on a patrol snug up to the DMZ. Hendrix was blown to bits by a mine such that there wasn’t an entire pound of his flesh to send home. Don’t know whether welcomed-the-chance-to-protect-the-Hollywood-elites retired Navy chief petty officer Wyckoff ever had his guts ripped open by shrapnel that blew to bloody confetti a patrol member, but I seriously have grave doubts.

**   Combat vets not sorted by party affiliation.

Next in line is Number 3. The military is composed of men and women as diverse as the country they came from. Once and for all (like FOREVER!) could we just stomp into the earth any suggestion that each and all have one opinion concerning Iraq, and that they all march mindlessly in lockstep? Just the idea that any one person or direction of opinion nets each and all is so pathetically ludicrous that it should not require iterating. I can’t top Nebraska’s Republican Senator and decorated Vietnam War vet Chuck Hagel, but I can quote what he said to General Petraeus in the last hearing: “Let’s get one thing straight right now: no one can speak for all the men and women who are in Iraq, or who have served there. So let’s cut that out right now, shall we!”

Fourth on this narrative of shame that I want to squat over is, “I want to tell you, from experience, that you are contributing to the deaths of our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines.” The ONLY ones who contributed to the deaths . . . are those who pulled the polling booth lever or punched the card on behalf of the delusional candidate who sent them, again, and again, and again, and . . .  It would be rather tough to put someone in harm’s way without first putting him or her in harm’s way. Once there, the best way to remove them from harm’s way is to remove them from harm’s way. This tautology may sound simple, but to Wyckoff it’s clearly an intellectual leap of the most incredible breadth.

Fifth on my agenda of opprobrious invective against this most petite of chief petty officers is a strong remonstration against “finish the job and come home victors, irrespective of the loss of life and sacrifice.” Only one who has never approached the apron of acquainting the sting of battle would have the temerity to say anything so thoroughly reprehensible. Only a coward through and through would utter as did Wyckoff. 

Last may be the errant spitting cobra venom that splattered my eyes: “we are there for the safety and well-being of Americans.” Hmmm, and this axiom of idiocy mirrors the Senate and House hearings testimony of an entire parade of newly retired generals and a slew of recently released federal reports, all observing the United States of America is exponentially less safe and exponentially less capable of responding militarily to an international emergency, precisely how? (Case in point, see: http://news.aol.com/story/_a/top-us-commando-says-strain-of-war/n20080505180809990024  Admiral Eric T. Olson, head of US Special Operations Command, today reported that the strain of war was limiting our ability to be effective elsewhere.)

All this said, sadly there is much like this toxic fume permeating the air in America. My effort here was simply to embarrass to shame both the author and the news-rag that published the evidence of the author’s seriously unbalanced state of mental health; a la “bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran” John McCain, eh? Although that it may have makes no difference, I couldn’t locate a counterpoint in the P-E to the drivel that was Protests only embarrass troops. Nonetheless, even if the rag had printed another perspective, the fact they gave this one anything more than an immediate and unceremonious toss into the trash speaks to the tragedy that is the paper’s editorial board.

— Ed Tubbs