Pages

Monday, February 28, 2011

Frank W. Buckles, last U.S. World War I veteran, dies at 110

Frank W. Buckles died early Sunday at age 110, having achieved a singular feat of longevity that left him proud and a bit bemused.

 
 
1/10
5 Seconds
00:00
00:00
Frank W. Buckles, shown at the annual memorial service honoring Gen. John J. Pershing at Arlington National Cemetery in 2007, was the last known American survivor of World War I. He died early Sunday at age 110.
By Paul

Nov. 11, 2007

Duggan
Monday, February 28, 2011; 10:32 AM 
Frank W. Buckles died Sunday, sadly yet not unexpectedly at age 110, having achieved a singular feat of longevity that left him proud and a bit bemused.
In 1917 and 1918, close to 5 million Americans served in World War I, and Mr. Buckles, a cordial fellow of gentle humor, was the last known survivor. "I knew there'd be only one someday," he said a few years back. "I didn't think it would be me."
His daughter, Susannah Buckles Flanagan, said Mr. Buckles, a widower, died of natural causes on his West Virginia farm, where she had been caring for him.
"We have lost a living link to an important era in our nation's history," Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric K. Shinseki said of Mr. Buckles, whose distant generation was the first to witness the awful toll of modern, mechanized warfare. "But we have also lost a man of quiet dignity who dedicated his final years to ensuring the sacrifices of his fellow doughboys are appropriately commemorated."
As time thinned the ranks of those long-ago U.S. veterans, the nation hardly noticed them vanishing, until the roster dwindled to one ex-soldier, embraced in his final years by an appreciative public.
"Frank was a history book in and of himself, the kind you can't get at the library," said his friend Muriel Sue Kerr. Having lived from the dawn of the 20th century, he seemed to never tire of sharing his and the country's old memories - of the First World War, of roaring prosperity and epic depression, and of a second, far more cataclysmic global conflict, which he barely survived.
Mr. Buckles, who was born by lantern light in a Missouri farmhouse, quit school at 16 and bluffed his way into the Army. As the nation flexed its full military might overseas for the first time, he joined 4.7 million Americans in uniform and was among 2 million U.S. troops shipped to France to vanquish the German kaiser.
Ninety years later, with available records showing that former corporal Buckles, serial No. 15577, had outlived all of his compatriots from World War I, the Department of Veterans Affairs declared him the last doughboy standing. He was soon answering fan mail and welcoming a multitude of inquisitive visitors to his rural home.
"I feel like an endangered species," he joked, well into his 11th decade. As a rear-echelon ambulance driver behind the trenches of the Western Front in 1918, he had been safe from the worst of the fighting. But "I saw the results," he would say.
He saw the world
With his death, researchers said, only two of the approximately 65 million people mobilized by the world's militaries during the Great War are known to be alive: an Australian man and a British woman, 109 and 110 respectively.
Mr. Buckles said he was just a naive schoolboy chasing adventure when he enlisted Aug. 14, 1917, after the United States joined a war that had been raging for three years, with millions dead. "I knew what was happening in Europe, even though I was quite young," he told a Washington Post reporter when he was 105. "And I thought, well, 'I want to get over there and see what it's about."
After the armistice, he traveled the globe as a purser on commercial ships and was caught in Manila when Japan invaded the Philippines in 1941. He endured 38 months of cruel deprivation as a civilian prisoner during World War II before being freed in a daring military raid.
In 1953, he and his wife bought a cattle farm with a Colonial-era stone house near Charles Town, W.Va., and there Mr. Buckles quietly spent the rest of his life, his doughboy tunic hanging in a closet. As his generation passed away, he held fast as a centenarian, doing daily calisthenics and immersing himself in books and newspapers.
Then, on Feb. 4, 2008, a Florida man who had been in Army basic training when hostilities ended in November 1918 died at 108. As best as the VA could determine, that left only Mr. Buckles, who warmly indulged people's growing fascination with him.
He was an honored guest on Capitol Hill, at the Pentagon and in the Oval Office. School children, history buffs, journalists, younger veterans, and even Britain's defense secretary visited him at the farm, admiring him like a museum piece.
"Well, I guess I'm famous now," he said slyly. Not surprisingly, some were quick to declare him "a hero" - a notion he dismissed as sentimental.
The VA, established in 1930, does not have complete records from World War I. But amid all the attention Mr. Buckles received, no one surfaced claiming to have also served in the U.S. military before the armistice. Mr Buckles's secret to longevity: "When you think you're dying," his son-in-law once heard him quip, "don't."
Letters from strangers, some seeking autographs, arrived at his home in stacks. He signed as many as he could until a frail hand forced him to stop. And despite the ailments of age, he went on championing his favorite cause: a proposal to refurbish the District of Columbia's neglected World War I monument and rededicate it as a national memorial.
Appearing before a U.S. Senate panel in 2009 in support of the idea, Mr. Buckles greeted lawmakers and others as they filed toward him in a reverent procession. With his old Army ribbons pinned to his blue blazer, he seemed a memorial in his own right to a dimly remembered catastrophe that left an estimated 16 million people dead worldwide.
'I was just 16'
Wood Buckles - his given name, recorded in the family Bible before birth certificates were required in his home state - was born Feb. 1, 1901, on his parents' farm in Bethany, Mo. He said destiny seemed to side with him early, in 1903, when he and his brother Ashman fell deathly ill together with scarlet fever.
Ashman, 4, succumbed; Mr. Buckles pulled through and experienced a century. Few others born during the McKinley administration lived to have a Facebook page, as he did.
"My father took newspapers," he told the Library of Congress's Veterans History Project a decade ago. "I read about the war."
The tangle of alliances and volatile rivalries among Europe's old empires, the diplomatic deceits and blunders that ignited the conflict in 1914 were hard for an adolescent to sort out. But the din of rabid patriotism surrounding America's entry into the war in April 1917 stirred his imagination, Mr. Buckles said.
"I was just 16 and didn't look a day older," he once wrote. After Navy and Marine Corps recruiters shooed him away - "they'd take one look at me and laugh" - the Army, expanding massively, inducted Mr. Buckles, who swore without proof that he was old enough to join.
A sergeant insisted that he needed a middle initial, Mr. Buckles recalled. So he adopted an uncle's name, Frank Woodruff Buckles, and never stopped using it.
"Every last one of us Yanks believed we'd wrap this thing up in a month or two and head back home before harvest," he said. "In other words, we were the typical cocky Americans no one wants around until they need help winning a war."
In December 1917, as his Army detachment steamed for Europe on the British liner Carpathia, Mr. Buckles said, crewmen shared stories of the grim dawn less than six years earlier when their ship had been the first to reach survivors of the Titanic. From England, he said, "I was anxious to get to France, and I used several methods, including, I should say, pestering every officer of influence in the place."
A lifetime later, recalling the scorched French countryside from the comfort of his den, he spoke of the weary, grateful German POWs, some of them teenagers like himself, who he helped repatriate after the vast bloodletting of the world's first industrialized war.
One gave him a souvenir, a soldier's belt with a buckle inscribed, "GOTT MIT UNS" [God with us], which he kept for the rest of his years.
In war and peace
The nation's official toll from 19 months of war: 116,516 deaths, about half in battle, most of the rest from illnesses, mainly the 1918 influenza pandemic.
After his discharge, Mr. Buckles said, he paid for typing and shorthand classes and took a clerical job with a steamship line - a generation before the first G.I. Bill would make college and home ownership possible for millions of returning World War II vets.
He weathered the Depression at sea on his purser's salary, regularly making port calls in newly Nazified Germany. He saw Adolf Hitler at the 1936 Summer Olympics, he said, and watched Jesse Owens anger the dictator by sprinting to victory in Berlin's Reichssportfeld.
Then, in December 1941, he was working in a shipping company's Manila office when Japanese invaders landed in Luzon after the attack on Pearl Harbor.
"Three years, two months," he said of his captivity in the Philippines, eventually at a notorious camp in Los Banos. There, under pitiless Japanese guards, hundreds of Allied civilian and military internees lived in squalor, subsisting on often wormy rations.
"The starvation was so bad . . . it is surprising that any of us survived," said Mr. Buckles, who was among 2,147 Los Banos prisoners liberated Feb. 23, 1945, in a risky assault by U.S. paratroopers and Filipino guerrillas.
American commanders in the fight to retake the Philippines had ordered the rescue mission, 25 miles behind Japanese lines, fearing that the guards would begin massacring the captives before the main U.S. ground advance reached the camp.
Mr. Buckles turned 44 that winter, suffering from beriberi. Deciding he had had enough adventure, he said, he worked in sales for a West Coast paint company after marrying in 1946. Then he settled on his 330-acre Gap View Farm, driving a tractor past his 100th birthday until the years finally caught up with him.
His wife, Audrey Buckles, died in 1999 at age 78, after which Flanagan, their only survivor, moved to the farm to help care for her father.
Because Mr. Buckles served just one hitch in the Army and returned from France with no wounds or medals for bravery, he was eligible under Arlington National Cemetery protocols only for inurnment in a vault for cremated remains. In March 2008, however, the Bush administration ordered a rare exception for an old corporal of the so-called war to end all wars, and for the passing of living memory.
Mr. Buckles wanted a grave site at Arlington and a traditional white marble headstone. And he will get his wish.
























     enlistment photo provided by the Buckles family shows Frank Buckles in August 1917. "Frank was a history book in and of himself, the kind you can't get at the library," said his friend Muriel Sue Kerr. Having lived from the dawn of the 20th century, he seemed to never tire of sharing his and the country's old memories -- of World War I, of roaring prosperity and epic depression, and of a second, far more cataclysmic global conflict, which he barely survived.


May 26, 2008

Frank Buckles receives an American flag during Memorial Day activities at the National World War I Museum in Kansas City, Mo.

Wonkbook: Government shutdown delayed

Posted at 7:01 AM ET, 02/28/2011


By Ezra Klein
PH2011021406379 (2).jpg
At least for a few weeks. Late on Friday, House GOP leadership unveiled a two-week extension of government funding that cuts $4 billion -- but only goes after programs President Obama targeted for elimination in his budget. For Democrats, that's good enough. Reid spokesman Jon Summers, in a statement that should be taught in political flack school as an example of how to attack your opponent while agreeing with the reasonable compromise measure they've offered, said, "We are encouraged to hear that Republicans are abandoning their demands for extreme measures like cuts to border security, cancer research and food safety inspectors and instead moving closer to Democrats' position that we should cut government spending in a smart, responsible way that targets waste and excess while keeping our economy growing."
As for what happens when this spending bill expires in a few weeks? That's tougher. The Republican proposal goes after some of the low-hanging fruit by using the cuts Obama identified in his budget. And it doesn't bridge the two essential arguments between the Republicans and the Democrats, which are how much spending to cut, and where it should come from. So we can't yet say that disaster is averted. But it is, at the least, delayed.

Tea Partyers Say Budget Cuts Don’t Go Far Enough

 


PHOENIX — Tea party activists did not seem impressed as Rep.Joe Barton tried to brag about the $60 billion in budget cuts in the House-passed continuing resolution to fund the government.
They interrupted the Texas Republican as he touted “the largest spending cuts in history” as a “good start in the right direction.” Members of the Tea Party Patriots gathered at the first-ever policy summit here shouted back, “More, more.”

“I hear it,” Barton said, trying to return to his speech focused on Republican policy proposals to change entitlement programs and federal regulation. “You’re not going to get to the finish line the first time you set out.”

More than 1,000 people gathered at the Phoenix Convention Center on Friday evening for the opening session of the summit. Rep. David Schweikert (R-Ariz.) began the ceremony with an invocation and businessman Herman Cain, who is expected to run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012, received a standing ovation.

But Barton didn’t enjoy the same reception. He received some criticism for touting his Congressional experience and after thanking the movement for helping Republicans win back the House in last fall’s midterm elections.

“I’ve been in Congress 26 years,” Barton said at the beginning of his speech. “We lost the majority the last four years. And then you folks came along, and God bless you, I’m back in the majority. Thank you, a lot.”

Tea party activists present said they are sensitive to Republicans who assume their movement will blindly back the party.

“That was the wrong thing to say to this crowd,” Ken Campbell, a California-based activist, told Roll Call. “People didn’t believe him. Where has he been all these years?”

Cutting spending will grow the economy

» 3 Comments | Post a Comment
Eric Cantor
Credit: EVA RUSSO/TIMES-DISPATCH
America is at a tipping point, and Republicans have begun to take action.
Last week, the House passed unprecedented legislation reducing discretionary spending this fiscal year by more than $100 billion. In addition, we made clear that our long-term budget, to be unveiled in the spring, will address the entitlement crisis that threatens to bankrupt our country — a long overdue move that politicians for too long have kicked down the road. This show of fiscal restraint represents not merely a clean break with Congress' free-spending past, but a rededication to economic growth and a laser-like focus on job creation.
It's important to recognize the link between cutting spending and growing the economy. Like the gardenerpruning the tree, we do not cut for the sake of cutting, but out of necessity. It's the only way to restore economic health and free up the private capital necessary for new growth. Put simply, less government spending equals more private sector jobs.
Economic growth is generated when businesses weigh their risks against their potential reward (returns after taxes) and make a decision that an investment is worthwhile. That investment can take the form of a capital investment or an investment in additional labor (jobs). Especially in this increasingly interconnected world, businesses will logically move their investments to wherever they can achieve the greatest returns without assuming too much additional risk.
For many years, America offered unparalleled opportunity for businesses to grow and succeed. Investors could find in the United States comparatively low taxes, a consistent regulatory environment and a stable currency. Tens of millions of jobs were created as America served as the global driver of growth and prosperity.
Yet today many doubt whether America can still power the world economy forward. Uncertainty over our deteriorating fiscal situation and increasingly burdensome regulatory structure has made job creators and investors think twice about deploying their capital in the United States.
As the federal government continues to borrow nearly 40 cents for every dollar it spends, America's $14 trillion debt hangs over the economy like a dark cloud waiting to unleash a violent storm of higher taxes, inflation and higher borrowing costs. The very businesses and investors we need to grow our economy are waiting to see if this cloud will pass.
The more local and national business owners I meet with, the more obvious it becomes that our businesses are innovative and poised to grow; government just has to stop making it harder for them to compete.
As part of our larger effort, Republicans are reviewing and cutting job-impeding regulations that stifle job growth. Next week, we will repeal the onerous 1099 reporting requirement to provide small businesses with much-needed relief. Additionally, we are focused on other ways to grow the economy, including tax reform and implementing job-creating trade agreements.
Will the administration and the Senate join us in getting our fiscal house in order? Or will they continue to add entitlements and borrow and spend at unsustainable levels? If only they would unite with us, confidence can be restored in America and capital investment can return.
But if they don't walk us back from the precipice, businesses will see only weaker prospects for profit and growth on our shores — and turn instead to other countries they deem safer. What does this mean for America? It means we would be a lot more like Europe. Our graduates and work force would have less opportunity to find work. Our prospective entrepreneurs would have less incentive to pursue their ideas. Unemployment would be permanently higher and growth would be permanently weaker.
During his recent speech to the Chamber of Commerce, President Barack Obama insisted that in response to his policies, businesses have a "responsibility" to hire more workers and support the U.S. economy. But that's not how it works in market-based economies. There is no magic hiring wand.
If the president genuinely wants to create jobs, he should take a cue from Virginia. Gov. Bob McDonnell has turned a $1.8 billion deficit into a $403 million surplus, cut $4.2 billion out of the 2011 and 2012 budgets — and he has done so without raising taxes.
America needs to show the world that we are serious about slashing our debt. By cutting $100 billion off the president's proposed budget and taking the lead in reforming entitlements, House Republicans have demonstrated that we are more than ready to help make the tough choices necessary to move us in the right direction. Moving forward, we will use every tool at our disposal to remove barriers to economic growth so that people can get back to work and we can start to get our fiscal house in order.

Eleanor Clift Asks McLaughlin Group “Since When Does Scott Walker Represent ‘The People’?”

 Tea Party Express
Newsweek's Eleanor Clift on Friday amazingly asked, "Since when does Scott Walker represent 'the people'?"
Such happened during a heated discussion on PBS's "The McLaughlin Group" about the goings-on in Wisconsin (video follows with transcript and commentary):




PAT BUCHANAN, MSNBC: You've got to stop the, they call it collective bargaining. It is collusive bargaining. What you've got is a union puts enormous amounts of money in, they get their buddy in the governor’s chair, then they get together, they cut a deal, give them a sweetheart contract and give it to the taxpayers. What this Governor Walker is saying, “Those days are over. We've got somebody representing the people now, and this is going to be an adversary proceeding between you folks and us.”
JONATHAN CAPEHART, WASHINGTON POST: None of these deals are over unless you’re police or firefighters.
ELEANOR CLIFT, NEWSWEEK: Since when does Scott Walker represent "the people"? He’s representing…
BUCHANAN AND MONICA CROWLEY TOGETHER: He got elected!
CLIFT: …the money interests that helped him get elected including…
JOHN MCLAUGHLIN, HOST: Let her finish.
CLIFT: …including lots of money from the Koch brothers.
Yes, that whopping $ 43,000 that Walker got from the Kochs, which Clift and her ilk conveniently ignore represented a small fraction of the millions he raised last year.
Maybe someone should have told Eleanor that Walker won in 2010 by roughly the same margin Barack Obama did in 2008, as she certainly thinks the current White House resident represents "the people".
More importantly, as is clearly evident in Clift’s protestations, Democrats elected with union money represent the people. Republicans supported by individuals don’t.
As I’ve said for years, it takes a lot of rationalizations to be a liberal these days.

Beware the Gang of Six(Tea Party Express)

Imagine for a moment a private financial services firm caught running a ponzi scheme in which public funds were spent on lavish projects for the manager’s friends.  Astoundingly, instead of incarcerating the perpetrators and returning the money to the investors, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) negotiates with the criminals.  That’s right.  The SEC collaborates with the criminal executives to force the public to contribute more money to the institution and leave it there longer, in order to rectify the scheme and achieve solvency.  Sounds perverse and preposterous?  Well, some Republican senators are concocting a similar approach to “solving” the budget crisis created by the Democrats.
Last December, Senators Tom Coburn and Mike Crapo, two reliable conservatives, supported the Debt Commission’s report which would attempt to cut the budget deficit by raising $ 3.3 trillion in taxes over 10 years.  Although Coburn admitted that he would have authored a different proposal, he supported the full package because “our country deserves us to sacrifice like the call we’re going to make to everyone else to sacrifice to accomplish what we have to accomplish and that is to get out of this hole.”
Unfortunately, the good Senator from Oklahoma has shown that he is so committed to tackling the deficit that he is willing to cut a deal with the Democrats, even if that means increasing taxes.  The Hillreports that Coburn, along with Mike Crapo and Saxby Chambliss, are in negotiations with Democrat Senators Conrad, Durbin, and Warner, to work out a long term solution which would leave everything on the table, including tax increases.  They are now being referred to as the Gang of Six.  Earlier this month, the Wall Street Journal reported that the same band of lawmakers were considering a bill that would trigger increases in revenue and reductions in spending if an agreement is not reached in the near future:
“The tax-writing committees would be given two years to overhaul both the individual and corporate tax codes, with general instructions to close tax breaks and minimize or eliminate tax deductions while lowering tax rates. The committees would be given a target for additional revenues to be raised by the new code. The deficit commission’s version of tax reform would net $ 785 billion in additional revenues over 10 years.
If Congress failed to enact the tax code overhaul, the legislation would mandate an across-the-board tightening of tax deductions to meet the higher target.”
While we applaud Senator Coburn’s alacrity in trying to cut the budget deficit and tackle entitlement reform, he is misguided in his eagerness to empower those who plundered the treasury with the keys to ‘fix’ it.  Let’s be clear.  There is no revenue problem.  The budget crisis is a result of decades’ worth of greedy leftist politicians who squandered tax payer dollars on programs and handouts to special interests.  These policies and politicians need to be vitiated; not the hard earned money of the American people.
Cutting the deficit is not an ends to itself.  It is a means to reinstate our government back to its constitutional mandate.  Raising taxes for the short-term objective of cutting the deficit only empowers the very same criminals to misuse and misappropriate the public funds once again.  Besides, stymieing economic productivity through tax increases is a counterintuitive way of balancing the budget in the long run.  Coburn’s incessant calls for sacrifices on the part of the American people are understandable, but it should be the Democrats and their indissoluble rent-seekers who need to sacrifice.  Starve the beast, we say!
Parenthetically, this is the reason why a balanced budget amendment is not the most effective way to limit government.  Many states have such requirements, and in addition to the accounting gimmicks that are used to circumvent the law, Democrats use budget laws as excuses to raise taxes.  The best way to inhibit unlawful government is to enact a spending limit (say 19% of GDP).  This will preclude the left from focusing on the revenue side of the ledger.  It’s not about deficit reduction; it’s about government reduction.
A similar disconcerting aspect of the Debt Commission’s report that these Republicans are supporting is Social Security reform.  While conservatives adulate politicians for tackling entitlement reform, they do so on the assumption that the reforms will promote more liberty and limit government.  Unfortunately, the Debt Commission made no reference to reforms that would empower the citizen to control his or her own retirement.  They only recommended raising the retirement age, raising payroll taxes, means-testing benefits, or raising the exemption level.  Sadly, these Republicans are supporting some of the commission’s ideas as bold and courageous solutions to entitlement reform.
Let’s be clear again.  The objective of entitlement reform is not to make a Democrat-run program solvent.  Our objective vis-à-vis entitlement reform should be focused on returning the wealth to the American worker and taxpayer by promoting more liberty and prosperity.  There can be no discussion of raising the retirement age without offering young workers private accounts or an option to opt out.
There is no problem with diminishing Social Security benefits or raising the retirement age and making it more sustainable for those who choose to participate.  But how can we compel every American to contribute a large percentage of his income to a plan that will be means-tested and administered at the mercy of corrupt politicians?  Are we going to continue to control when a person can retire, perhaps until age 70?  Are we going to grant the very crooks who purloined the trust fund-the power to control more of our retirement funds?  Are we going to let them means-test our private capital that was originally intended to be an insurance program?  This is purely unconstitutional and should be the next civil rights issue for young voters.  We must demand that Republicans not sign onto the perpetuation and entrenchment of Social Security as a permanent form of involuntary servitude.
There is no doubt that Senator Coburn intuitively opposes tax increases and supports private accounts for Social Security.  However, it seems that his motivation to immediately negotiate any deal that could possibly close the budget gap outweighs his conviction to be dogmatic for the sake of liberty.  Most of all, he is willing to offer concessions that will enable the very people who started this mess to perpetuate it.
There is no way that the likes of Dick Durban will ever acquiesce to private retirement accounts or to tax reform that doesn’t raise any new taxes.  Any final deal with them will invariably abrogate some conservative principles.  Coburn is absolutely correct about the imminence of the budget crisis.  But, that must be dealt with by defeating the Democrats at the ballot box in 2012, not by negotiating with them.  The voters support our views, even regarding Social Security.
As we prepare for battle over budget and entitlement reform, we must remember who originally orchestrated our fiscal ruin.  We must ‘pin the tail on the donkey’.  Let’s punish the plunderers, not the new generation of taxpayers.
Red Meat Conservative (Cross-posted)

Revealed: The Group Behind the Bills that Could Legalize Killing Abortion Providers


It's no coincidence that bills to expand justifiable homicide laws have popped up in South Dakota, Nebraska, and Iowa. Meet the group that launched the effort.