And you seem to be remarkably sensitive about the subject.
indeed. I always get frustrated when people who aren't at fault get the blame.
It is a fact that the USAF has made more than one attempt to scrap the A-10 over a period of decades (see A-16, for example) because they prefer multi-purpose aircraft which can be switched to other tasks as required, whereas the Army prefers dedicated close-support planes because they can't be switched away.
the problem is this isn't the Era of the A-16 anymore. Technology marches on. The A-16 is a product of the 1980s. No one envisioned satellite guided bombs being dropped in support of troops in contact from a miles high B-52 at the time.
The Army prefers whatever it can get, and If that is USAF B-1s and B-52s doing CAS, Norwegian F-16s, UAVs, Brit or Marine Harriers, or Mud Hens then so be it. The GWoT has seen a vast expansion of CAS capable aircraft that have actually been used
in combat. These are not theoretical tests performed under ideal conditions in a lab environment. This has all been proven. and Apparently it was never worth paying attention to until suddenly talk of the A-10 being retired surfaced again and then all the sudden the USAF was dog meat despite all its done over the last 12 years. And it has done an awful lot.
There are also incidents like Operation Anaconda where the US Army launched a huge operation and didn't bother to tell the USAF which sent them into "emergency savior" mode when the mission went south. The USAF pulled off some miracles on that one. Including scrambling A-10s long distance to get to the fight.
I would also like to mention how thanks to restrictions on the AV-8B, A-10, and AC-130 in Libya meant that F-15Es and other assets were the sole aircraft in support of our special forces who weren't there. With issues like that cropping up its not a surprise that the USAF might start to see diminishing returns, and other aircraft that can do the job better in some cases.
I also want to throw this in, because it can't be said enough: The USAF does not use A-10s like A-10s anymore. All A-10 Upgrades have been about catching it up electronically with other aircraft and increasing its distance from the enemy including the ability launch PGMs and use targeting pods to increase its altitude and other stand off advantages.
It has long been an endemic characteristic of the culture of independent air forces to prefer to carry out the tasks which only they can do, rather than tasks which are in support of other services.
The Bottom line is the USAF has been providing sterling service for the ground forces without pause for the last 12 years now. I try to judge things on a case by case basis myself. Do some research, I think you might be pleasantly surprised at what the USAF has been doing now (Right up to providing thousands of ground troops themselves in Iraq and Afghanistan and I don't just mean JTACs and SpecOps) I know this because I work with people from the Air Force who lost limbs in combat in these places.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10314346
The Military overall is a helluva lot more connected and jointly oriented than it was in the 1980s. You also have an entire generation of young blue suiters that have cut their teeth in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya who probably wouldn't even recognize the 80's army/air force rivalry.