Topics Topics Help/Instructions Help Edit Profile Profile Member List Register  
Search Last 1 | 3 | 7 Days Search Search Tree View Tree View  

Visit The Brewery's sponsor!
Brews & Views Bulletin Board Service * World Expressions * Why doesn't Bush support our troops? < Previous Next >

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
  Start New Thread        

Author Message
 

Chumley
Senior Member
Username: Chumley

Post Number: 2410
Registered: 02-2003
Posted on Tuesday, October 26, 2004 - 08:53 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Just before Memorial Day, Veterans Affairs Secretary Anthony Principi said, "Our active military respond better to Republicans" because of "the tremendous support that President Bush has provided for our military and our veterans." The same day, the White House announced plans for massive cuts in veterans' health care for 2006.

Last January, Bush praised veterans during a visit to Walter Reed Army Medical Center. The same day, 164,000 veterans were told the White House was "immediately cutting off their access to the VA health care system."

In January 2003, just before the war, Bush said, "I want to make sure that our soldiers have the best possible pay." A few months later, the White House announced it would roll back increases in "imminent danger" pay (from $225 to $150) and family separation allowance (from $250 to $100).

In October 2003, the president told troops, "I want to thank you for your willingness to heed the important call, and I want to thank your families." Two weeks later, the White House announced it opposed a proposal to give National Guard and Reserve members access to the Pentagon's health insurance system, even though a recent General Accounting Office report estimated that one out of every five Guard members has no health insurance.

This election year, the administration increased spending on veterans by $519 million. In 2006, it plans to cut veterans spending by $910 million.
 

el_mocoso
Junior Member
Username: El_mocoso

Post Number: 48
Registered: 02-2001
Posted on Tuesday, October 26, 2004 - 08:59 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Just lobbin' them up there today, aren't ya!

el_mocoso

(Message edited by el_mocoso on October 26, 2004)
 

Jonathan Henderson
Member
Username: Henderson1966

Post Number: 142
Registered: 03-2003
Posted on Tuesday, November 02, 2004 - 02:37 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I'm not contradicting you Chumley, but I wary of all published political "facts," especially during an election year. First of all, all bills pertaining to financial issues must originate in the House of Representatives. If you can find the text of these allegations on http://thomas.loc.gov/ it would be much more convincing. Having taught political science at the college level for some time, I have found most political information at the popular level to be deeply partisan and apocryphal.
Cheers,
Jonathan Henderson
 

Kent Fletcher
Advanced Member
Username: Fletch

Post Number: 596
Registered: 11-2002
Posted on Wednesday, November 03, 2004 - 01:59 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

The same day, the White House announced plans for massive cuts in veterans' health care for 2006. (snip) Last January, Bush praised veterans during a visit to Walter Reed Army Medical Center. The same day, 164,000 veterans were told the White House was "immediately cutting off their access to the VA health care system."

Chumley, are you a vet? Do you have any idea how the VA healthcare system is SUPPOSED to work?
(I am, and do)

Veterans get care for service related health problems, and beyond that veterans who are indigent can get general health care at VA facilities. Period. The system was never intended to be an ongoing provider to everybody who ever served. There was a fair amount of abuse of the system. There were vets getting care for non-service-related health issues - vets who COULD afford their own health care. THOSE are the people who were affected. And your quote of "cutting off access" is a gross miss-characterization. They would still have access if their personal situation was such that they were actually QUALIFIED to receive it.

You're really going to have to work harder at coming up with something of SUBSTANCE to rail against Bush about.

(Message edited by fletch on November 03, 2004)

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Bold text Italics Underline Create a hyperlink Insert a clipart image

Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action: