Jay Stamper on Lindsey Graham: "There Is Something Disturbing About Someone Who Has Never Seen Combat Being So Consistently Eager To Deploy Other People’s Sons And Daughters Overseas"

Lindsey Graham (R-Meet The Press)

If Lindsey Graham loses his Senate seat in 2014, it's probably not going to be because he's a self-loathing closet case. In the South, that's how they like their homosexuals-- self-loathing and in the closet. And it's probably not going to be because the DSCC spends $3,862,547 or their Majority PAC puts in another $3,711,835, like they did in Claire McCaskill's race against Todd Akin, or $4,150,132 plus $2,996,159 like they did for John Tester in Montana or even the "mere" $882,789 and $300,000 they spent against Scott Brown in Massachusetts to win back that seat. As of now, the DSCC isn't looking to South Carolina as a likely pickup and is more likely to squander their money on hopeless ConservaDems Mark Begich (AK) and Mark Pryor (AR) and trying to defend open seats in South Dakota and West Virginia. I might point out at this point Obama's losses in those 5 states. Oh, look which one was the least red:

• South Carolina- 44%
• Alaska- 41%
• South Dakota- 40%
• Arkansas- 37%
• West Virginia- 36%

But they're ignoring South Carolina in favor of these 4 redder states because... well, it can't be because Lindsey Graham is less well-known or less loathed among Democrats. Meanwhile, though, Blue America has endorsed the one Democrat brave enough to take Graham on mano a mano, Jay Stamper who pointed out on his own campaign blog why Graham can be defeated next year. Among the 10 reasons are that Graham's last opponent, right-wing Democrat Bob Conley, spent only $15,000 against Graham's $6.6 million and still got 42.25% of the vote. In 2010, despite Democrats suffering massive defeats nationwide and votes being siphoned off by a Green Party candidate, Democrat Vincent Sheheen won 47% of the vote to Republican Nikki Haley’s 51.4% in the gubernatorial race. Sheehan is taking on the unpopular Haley again next year. Meanwhile, to protect his right flank, Graham has moved way to the right to please teabaggers and theocrats (many of whom detest him) and that makes him even less attractive to mainstream and independent voters.

When we first heard from Stamper back in April, we were still vetting him as a candidate. He checks out and he's now on the Blue America Senate page. Today he has a guest post for us about the importance of this race, not just for South Carolina but for all Americans.

Why We Should All Care About Retiring Lindsey Graham
by Jay Stamper

The outcome of the 2014 Senate election in South Carolina will affect all Americans-- not just South Carolinians.

As one of the leading obstructionists in the U.S. Senate, Lindsey Graham has abused his filibuster power, holding legislation and important confirmations hostage for purely political reasons. His conduct is hurting our entire country.

When Graham kills common sense background checks for criminals and the mentally ill, it doesn’t just affect South Carolinians. We’re all less safe-- no matter where we live.

When he supports cuts to Medicare and Social Security, seniors and the disabled are affected not just in South Carolina but in South Dakota, California, New York, Florida and everywhere else.

When he advocates warrant-less wiretaps, restrictions on free speech and suspending the bill of rights, our rights are threatened everywhere.

But the main reason we should all care about retiring Lindsey Graham is the carelessness with which he advocates the use of American military force abroad. There is something disturbing about someone who has never seen combat being so consistently eager to deploy other people’s sons and daughters overseas. Maybe that’s why he has falsely and repeatedly claimed to be a Gulf War veteran.

I believe that Graham may be one of those people who appreciates our military’s capabilities and are frustrated when they aren’t being employed. It’s like having a brand new sports car in your garage all gassed up, the keys in the ignition, but not being able to take it for a spin.

Having voted to authorize the use of force in both Iraq and Afghanistan, was Graham not chastened when these two wars left over 100,000 civilians and U.S. soldiers dead or wounded and our economy on life support. Did he consider resigning, maybe to write a memoir in the hope that we could at least learn from his mistakes. At the very least, did he shy away from any future discussion of foreign policy. No-- not Lindsey. Instead, he’s weighing in on Syria. After reviewing all the facts, he’s come to a conclusion that we need boots on the ground and we need to bomb the country with cruise missiles.

There are so many ways this can backfire. Cornering Assad with U.S. force would make it more likely-- not less-– that he would resort to using chemical weapons out of desperation. The Arab proverb is “an enemy of my enemy is my friend” and intervening would make us friends with the Muslim Brotherhood and al-Nusra Front, Syria’s al-Qaida. We could end up spending money and American lives replacing a brutal dictatorship with a radical theocracy. Lindsey actually wants us to arm fractured rebel groups, many of whom have already committed war crimes. Their empowerment would risk the disintegration of any central government and could turn Syria into a sort of lawless failed state like Somalia, even more of a refuge for terrorists than it is currently. Not to know how wrongheaded it is to intervene is to ignore the lessons of Iraq and Afghanistan and also to ignore the complexity of the Syrian situation, which virtually guarantees undesired and unintended consequences.

Lindsey, can you look into the eyes of these troops, or their parents, and honestly tell them that deploying on a mission to Syria has a high probability of making Americans safer, advancing the interests of the United States or contributing to regional stability in the Middle East? In fact, intervening in the crisis will not do any of these things.

Can you look into the eyes of the veterans of past wars who are disabled and homeless and tell them they just need to wait longer to get the help they need because we need those billions of dollars to fight yet another war? And how can we claim to support the troops when we send them to war and forget when they get home, voting to cut benefits for people who risked everything to serve our country?

Has Lindsey Graham thought about how $1.4 trillion in war spending could have been used to improve people’s lives? We could have increased funding for the National Institutes of Health by 600% every year for the last 10 years, speeding the development of treatments and cures for cancer, AIDS, cystic fibrosis, MS, and countless other diseases that destroy more lives every year than any Islamic terrorist could dream of. We could have provided low-income healthcare to 70 million people for 10 years, or hired an additional 2 million public elementary school teachers for 10 years. We could have provided 17 million military veterans VA medical care for 10 years, or provided 4-year university scholarships to 40 million students.

Don’t let Lindsey Graham (or anyone else) question your patriotism because you disagree with his foreign policy views. This is a senator who single-handedly blocked President Obama’s popular choice for Defense Secretary-- not out of principled opposition-- but to gain leverage over the President on a completely unrelated issue. As a result, the United States was without a Secretary of Defense at a time of escalating tensions overseas.

Even though you may not be able to vote for me, I’m running what amounts to a national campaign against Graham because it’s going to take the support of people from all over the country to defeat Lindsey and the millions of dollars that he's raised from special interest groups.

We will never be able to recoup the $1.4 trillion in war spending and we'll never be able to undo the unnecessary suffering of thousands of grieving families. But together we can make sure Lindsey doesn't get another 6 years to make the same mistakes all over again.