< Return to MilitaryGear.com
All Posts Information June 12 2008
 — By CJ

Folks, I’ve said many times that the recently created Votevets.org is a partisan organization designed to get more liberal, anti-war members elected and not, as they claim, to get more veterans in office “regardless of party”. In a recent email, Brian McGough, a senior advisor to VoteVets, put out a call looking for veteran experiences with government contractors (a common target of liberal wrath). While passively acknowledging that some government contractor do “such a great job”, they really only want to hear negative stories:

Dear CJ,

We all dealt with contractors downrange in Iraq or Afghanistan, some of us more than others. Some of the contractors do great work and some of them don’t do such a great job. The Democratic Policy Committee wants to hold hearings on the ones who do aren’t doing the job as well as they should be.
We are looking for your stories about contractors and bad work. Specifically, we need to hear if you have any experience with contractors doing substandard electrical work, contractors that needlessly put soldiers lives in danger or contractors that took part in corrupt practices. We will pass those stories along to the committee, which will be able to use them to focus their hearings on the reality on the ground.

If you have any of these experiences please get back to me with your stories. Please hit reply or send an email to brian@votevets.org.
Thanks,
Brian McGough
VoteVets.org

So, even though my experiences with contractors in Iraq were actually quite good, they wouldn’t be used or passed along to the committee. In other words, our elected official will possibly be basing future policy and law on the biased experiences of those presented by VoteVets. I work closely with government contractors right now and I can tell you that they work harder than anyone else and are VERY responsive to our needs.

Wow! It must suck having to base your existence on such pessimism!!

(7) Readers Comments

  1. CJ,

    Thanks. As a retired US Army NCO. Who is now working as a contractor. We bust our asses to support you guys. Have there been bad guy’s working with us. Yes. But at the same time I ask this, has there ever been a bad solider?

  2. VoteVets.org

    Is a left wing site.

  3. this really pisses me off. Yes, I know there are bad contractors, but there are good ones as well. If they are going to “make policy” about contractors, they should hear both sides, good and bad. It is people like this that make me keep my mouth shut to strangers about having been over there as a truck driver.

    I am tired of being spit on!

  4. White Rose,

    I know what you mean. But the left wing has their own agenda. Maybe someday they will wake up. But I will not hold my breath waiting on it.

  5. When I was deployed to Iraq last year, our term for “contractor” was “mercenary.” The officers kissed up to them. The enlisted saw them for what they were. Semper Fi.

  6. Ya know JD.

    Keep your blinders on. In fact turn them around where your eyes are covered so you can’t see your nose.

  7. That’s a pretty broad brush, JD. Remember, it’s not just Blackwater that provides contractors. If the US hadn’t been so happy to downsize the military in the ’90′s we wouldn’t need KBR to provide trucks or cooks.
    Unless you speak Arabic or Dari, you should be damn glad there was a contractor somewhere along the line to translate the fine intel found in the cache or safe house that you and your buddies worked so hard to get. That intel probably helped to target the next cache, or take out an IED cell.

    After 21 years in service, I might just go back in theater as a contractor, because at my rank the Army thinks its more important that I handle paperwork on the FOB than serve as a translator with a CA team.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>