Hmmmm, I didn't realize war veterans fell into

• I guess they are going after the - liberals as well.
  • Just as the other NEVER mentioned conservatives, this one doesn't mention liberals... at all. nm - Whatever happened to reading comprehension?
    • Your time may be better spent - sm
    • You need to reread the title....... - 'Conservative extremists' is the title.... g
      • Wrong. Rightwing Extremists, not conservatives. - nm
        • What hate group do you suppose you - should be in..... I can think of one! nm
          • Which one is that? - nm
            • You're so "bright", you figure it out.... - nm
        • Hmmmm, I didn't realize war veterans fell into - those categories, as stated in the document!
          • The document does not state that vets - are terrorists.
            • Oh but your "interpretation" is correct no doubt? It is - obvious what is meant............sm
      • Provide a link to the document with that title. None of the official copies I've seen use the wor - nm
        • "Official copies"? Try the copies your PD - have received... nm
          • In other words, you can't. Thanks for trying. We have some lovely parting gifts for you. - nm
            • You are one of those lazy people who just doesn't - want to look! I found it!!!
              • And, once again, where? Lies. nm - put up or shut up time
                • Why do you continue to ask "where" when you have - been given an answer..... slow perhaps? NM
                • have you bothered to go to your local PD? - Doubt it............. I have! duh!
                  • Nonsense. - nm
                    • Stop. Don't waste your energy. - They are so entrenched in their

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

until I saw her post, which nobody can help but see when they try to get to the political boards.  Now she's denying doing it, so go figure, eh? 

They must be getting desperate, and remembering how they got others banned on here, if you suddenly stop seeing posts from me, you'll know they got me banned, as well.

Just in case this is the last post I'm allowed to post here, I just want to point out that in my original post above, I never once singled out a single person or poster.  I was speaking in general terms.  It was then that they started copying and pasting my posts  on theri board and posting their attacks, singling ME out and mentioning my moniker.

I'm also sorry for any trashing YOU might get from them simply because you're being nice to me.  I've noticed you're also suddenly one of their targets now.

Like I said, if you suddenly don't see my posts any more, you can just assume that history has repeated itself and that I've been banned, as well. 

I hope you have a wonderful evening wherever you are, too. 

posted this.  This is all very complicated, and I, too, thought it was explained in a common-sense kind of way, while still having its moments of humor.

It's more than obvious that some people want this administration to fail, no matter what, and that's very, very sad.

Sorry for the double post!! 

In any other situation, that could be flattering.  However, in this situation, it's downright creepy and even scary because you don't appear to be a very stable person.

I saw most (not all, apparently) of what happened the other day.  And, no, you're not going to bait me into repeating the two-letter *word* he posted simply because you want to get me banned from the board (which will probably happen, anyway, if I continue to disagree with you and espouse liberal beliefs on the LIBERAL BOARD, so be patient, you'll eventually get your way).  Nice try, though.

It obviously was his first time on the board.  He was there because a prior comment of his that was 1-1/2 years old was posted there out of context.  He then was attacked for posting his initial response that was equally 1-1/2 years old. 

Since you obviously have no respect for the moderator's rules, I think it's best if I don't continue feeding the trolls, especially unstable ones.

Have a blessed day, dear.

we wanted him to run our country further into the ground, spend a record amount of money, and turn our country into a socialist country.  I mean....if we are dumb enough to really want that.....yes....Barry is doing an absolutely wonderful job!!! 

t is the VETERAN, not the preacher, who has given us freedom of religion. 

It is the VETERAN, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press.

It is the VETERAN, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech.
   
It is the VETERAN, not the community organizer, who has given us freedom to assemble. 

    
It is the VETERAN, not the lawyer, who has given us the right to a fair trial. 

It is the VETERAN, not the politician, who has given us the right to vote. 

There was one VETERAN and one community organizer in the last election.  We know now that we made a very bad choice and we did it because one was young and one wasn't; one was black and one wasn't; one was glib and one wasn't, and because one would say anything to get elected while the other wouldn't.

Bad thinking = wrong reasons = poor choices = catastrophic outcomes.  This is one catastrophe for which we have no one to blame but ourselves and our shallow enthusiasms..

McCAIN HAS NOT DELIVERED ON HIS PROMISES TO VETERANS

Union members respect Sen. John McCain’s service to our country. When will he start respecting ours? Although McCain talks about his support for veterans, he repeatedly votes against increased funding for veterans’ health care—and more. We call on John McCain to join us in supporting our veterans and working to turn around America.

McCAIN REPEATEDLY VOTED AGAINST VETERANS’ HEALTH BENEFITS

McCain Opposes the 21st Century GI Bill Because It Is Too Generous. McCain did not vote on the GI Bill that will provide better educational opportunities to veterans of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, paying full tuition at in-state schools and living expenses for those who have served at least three years since the 9/11 attacks. McCain said he opposes the bill because he thinks the generous benefits would “encourage more people to leave the military.” (S.Amdt. 4803 to H.R. 2642, Vote 137, 5/22/08; Chattanooga Times Free Press, 6/2/08; Boston Globe, 5/23/08; ABCNews.com, 5/26/08)

McCain Voted Against Increased Funding for Veterans’ Health Care. Although McCain told voters at a campaign rally that improving veterans’ health care was his top domestic priority, he voted against increasing funding for veterans’ health care in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007. (Greenville News, 12/12/2007; S.Amdt. 2745 to S.C.R. 95, Vote 40, 3/10/04; Senate S.C.R. 18, Vote 55, 3/16/05; S.Amdt. 3007 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 41, 3/14/06; H.R. 1591, Vote 126, 3/29/07)

Opposed an Assured Funding Stream for Veterans’ Health Care. McCain opposed providing an assured funding stream for veterans’ health care, taking into account annual changes in veterans’ population and inflation. (S.Amdt. 3141 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 63, 3/16/06)

McCain Voted Against Adding More Than $400 Million for Veterans’ Care. McCain was one of 13 Republicans to vote against providing an additional $430 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs for outpatient care and treatment for veterans. (S.Amdt. 3642 to H.R. 4939, Vote 98, 4/26/06)

Voted Against Establishing a $1 Billion Trust Fund for Military Health Facilities. McCain voted against establishing a $1 billion trust fund to improve military health facilities by refusing to repeal tax cuts for those making more than $1 million a year. (S.Amdt. 2735 to S.Amdt. 2707 to H.R. 4297, Vote 7, 2/2/06)

McCain Opposed $500 Million for Counseling Services for Veterans with Mental Disorders. McCain voted against an amendment to appropriate $500 million annually from 2006-2010 for counseling, mental health and rehabilitation services for veterans diagnosed with mental illness, posttraumatic stress disorder or substance abuse. (S. 2020, S.Amdt. 2634, Vote 343, 11/17/05)

McCain Voted in Support of Disabled Veterans Only 25 Percent of the Time from 2004-2005. While McCain claims he “has been a leading advocate” for veterans with disabilities, statistics show he supported the Disabled American Veterans’ interests only 25 percent of the time in 2004-2005. In 2006, that figure slipped to 20 percent of the time. (Project Vote Smart)

McCain Voted Against Providing Automatic Cost-of-Living Adjustments to Veterans. McCain voted against providing automatic annual cost-ofliving adjustments for certain veterans’ benefits. (S. 869, Vote 259, 11/20/91)

INCLUDING BETTER ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE FOR GUARD AND RESERVISTS

McCain Opposed Increasing Spending on TRICARE and Giving Greater Access to National Guard and Reservists. Although his campaign website devotes a large section to veterans issues, including expanding benefits for reservists and members of the National Guard, McCain voted against increasing spending on the TRICARE program by $20.3 billion over 10 years to give members of the National Guard and Reserves and their families greater access to the health care program. The increase would be offset by a reduction in tax cuts for the wealthy. (www.johnmccain.com/Informing/ Issues/9cb5d2aa-f237-464e-9cdf-a5ad32771b9f.htm; S.Amdt. 324 to S.C.R. 23, Vote 81, 3/25/03)

McCAIN ALSO VOTED TO OUTSOURCE JOBS AT MILITARY FACILITIES

McCain Supported Outsourcing VA Jobs. McCain opposed an amendment that would have prevented the Department of Veterans Affairs from outsourcing jobs, many held by blue-collar veterans, without first giving the workers a chance to compete. (S.Amdt. 2673 to H.R. 2642, Vote 315, 9/6/07)

He Also Supported Outsourcing at Walter Reed. McCain opposed an amendment to prevent the outsourcing of 350 federal employee jobs at Walter Reed Army Medical Center—outsourcing that contributed to the scandalous treatment of veterans at Walter Reed that McCain called a “disgrace.” (S.Amdt. 4895 to H.R. 5631, Vote 234, 9/6/06; Speech to VFW in Kansas City, Mo., 4/4/08)

AND HE REPEATEDLY VOTED AGAINST FUNDING FOR THE VETERANS AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT

2003: McCain Voted Against $122.7 Billion for Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain voted against an appropriations bill that included $122.7 billion in fiscal 2004 for the Department of Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development and other related agencies. (H.R. 2861, Vote 449, 11/12/03)

2001: McCain Voted Against $51 Billion in Veterans Funding. McCain was one of five senators to vote against the bill and seven to vote against the conference report that provided $51.1 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, as well as funding for the federal housing, environmental and emergency management agencies and NASA. (H.R. 2620, Vote 334, 11/8/01; Vote 269, 8/2/01)

2000: McCain Voted Against $47 Billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain was one of eight senators to vote against a bill that provided $47 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs. (H.R. 4635, Vote 272, 10/12/00)

1999: McCain Voted Against $44.3 Billion for Veterans Programs. McCain was one of five senators to vote against a bill providing $44.3 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, plus funding for other federal agencies. (H.R. 2684, Vote 328, 10/15/99)

1996: McCain Voted Against a $13 Billion Increase in Funding for Veterans Programs. McCain voted against an amendment to increase spending on veterans programs by $13 billion. (S.C.R. 57, Vote 115, 5/16/96)

1995: McCain Voted to Underfund Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain voted for an appropriations bill that underfunded the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development by $8.9 billion. (H.R. 2099, Vote 470, 9/27/95)

1995: McCain Voted Against Closing Tax Loopholes to Increase Veterans Funding by $74 Million. McCain voted against eliminating tax breaks and closing tax loopholes to provide revenue to restore some of the proposed cuts in Veterans Affairs spending. (S.C.R. 13, Vote 226, 5/25/95)

1994: McCain Voted Against Funding the Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain was one of nine senators to vote against appropriating $90 billion in budget authority for the Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development departments. (H.R. 4624, Vote 306, 9/27/94)

http://www.vaiw.org/vet/index.php

Here's what I don't get.  Everyone knows that going into Iraq was a bad move.  Even Bush is saying now that he would have done things differently (part of his rewriting history).  Noone is blaming the soldiers, noone at all.  They simply did what they do -- obeyed orders.  Granted, it's bound to be pretty crappy right now to be a soldier and realize that you are/were fighting in an unjust war, but that does not mean it was their fault.  It simply means they were dumped on by an irresponsible, oil hungry government -- namely Bush and Cheney.  So, instead of these people trying to justify the war by saying the people of Iraq were freed (while they are now dodging more bullets than ever before) and blaming those who oppose the war (not the soldiers), why don't they spend more time being mad at the ones who put them and their families as well as the people of Iraq in this mess in the first place?

About the video.  Yes, he obviously has suffered, but I don't think he really has a grasp on the situation.  He talks about *freeing* the Iraqi people.  What he and many others like to ignore is that the term *freedom* means different things to different people.  In this case, Bush's idea was to turn Iraq into a miniature US, which would mean loss of culture and religion for these people.  Obviously the Iraqi people are oppossed to this and should be.  Did you notice all the Iraqi thumbs ups in the news when US troops drove through the streets in tanks?  Guess what?  That was an insult.  We were not welcomed with open arms, as Bush said we would be, and as soon as we get out of there the better, not only for us, but for Iraqis as well.  So, this guy in the video---I guess he wants more Americans to suffer in an attempt to do what?  Free a people who don't want our version of freedom? 

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/presidentbush/2008/09/arrest-bush-che.html

(I don't know how to make sophisticated links.) 

It's not just about torture of terrorists.  It's many, many other things they have done. 

As a Veteran, a former State Director of Veterans Affairs and now as Assistant Secretary at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs I understand the urgent need to address homelessness. Last week’s meeting of the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness with Secretary Shinseki, and his counterparts at HUD, Labor and HHS, took an important step in coordinating our efforts to eliminate homelessness in our country. The VA estimates that one-third of homeless Americans served in the military, so this partnership is central to our efforts to help these brave soldiers.

One important outcome of the meeting was the announcement of an additional $75 million in housing vouchers. This new money will provide shelter for an additional 10,000 homeless Veterans and their families. These resources offer vital support to a community in need.

For state and local Veterans’ agencies, these funds come at a time when many local budgets are being squeezed by the current economic situation. While the VA works hard to offer support services and case management to eligible homeless veterans, local agencies play a crucial role in the care of these individuals.

Our nation's Veterans placed the good of the nation before their own and we are all dishonored when even a single Veteran sleeps on the street. I am proud of this administration’s commitment to fulfilling our nation’s promise to these brave soldiers. I look forward to working with my colleagues throughout government and the private sector to continue to fight this problem and make sure that no Veteran or American has to face the harsh reality of being homeless.

Tammy Duckworth is the Assistant Secretary of Public and Intergovernmental Affairs for the Department of Veterans Affairs.

My heart, and makes me furious at the same time.  Why isn't John "did-I-mention-yet-today-that-I-was-a-POW-for-5-years?" McCain more supportive of GI benefits?  Anyone?  Cause I'd love to know how he's justified it. 

This isn’t new (it’s from May), but it’s the first I saw it. I found it interesting but not surprising.  Our Veterans deserve much better.

Appearing yesterday at the Arlington National Cemetery to honor generations of sacrifices by American servicemen and women, President Bush said, "At our national cemetery, we take comfort from knowing that the men and women who are serving freedom's cause understand their purpose and its price." Yet the reality has been that the administration that most recently has sent those men and women to fight for freedom's cause has failed for live up to government's age-old promise to "care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow, and his orphan."

BUSH'S 2006 VA BUDGET HITS VETERANS HARD: President Bush's 2006 budget proposal included legislation that would raise veterans' premiums more than 100 percent on prescription drugs and add an annual $250 enrollment fee for veterans who want care for conditions not directly caused by military service and who generally earn more than $25,000 a year. The administration has recommended these same proposals in each of the past few years, only to have them beaten back by Congress each time. The user fee would increase costs for nearly 2 million veterans nationwide.

WAR VETERANS EXCLUDED FROM COST OF WAR ON TERROR: Conservatives in Congress rebuffed an effort to include $2 billion in emergency money for veterans' health care in the recently passed $82 billion Iraq war supplemental. The president's request increased the VA budget a mere 2.7 percent (including the increased co-pays and enrollment fees), hardly sufficient to deal with an expected influx of Afghanistan and Iraq war veterans in the coming years. Nearly 28,000 soldiers who served in Iraq and were discharged have already sought care at a VA facility. Of the nearly 245,000 veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan already discharged from service, 12,422 have been in VA counseling centers for readjustment problems and symptoms associated with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. VA Secretary Jim Nicholson has said the budget circumstances are not "dire," yet Senate Veterans Affairs Committee Chairman Larry Craig (R-ID) was forced to increase the 2006 budget request by $1 billion. Dave Autry, a spokesman for the Disabled American Veterans, said, "Vets are owed a debt and the government has said they are eligible for health care. The government needs to pay for it. It's a continuing cost of our national defense."

BUSH WANTS TO SHUT DOWN VETERANS HOSPITAL IN HIS OWN BACKYARD: Veterans in Bush's backyard, near his ranch in Crawford, Texas, are protesting his administration's decision to close a VA hospital in their town. "It would be, in my opinion, a tragic mistake to shut down our hospital, especially during a time of war when tomorrow's veterans are in harm's way today," said U.S. Rep. Chet Edwards (D-Waco). In May 2004, then-VA Secretary Anthony Principi announced he would be closing three veterans hospitals nationwide and partially closing eight others. For his work, Principi was rewarded with an appointment to the chairmanship of the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) commission.

VETERANS GROUPS SLAM BUSH BUDGET: More than 300,000 veterans' claims are pending before the VA, according to the Sarasota Herald-Tribune, and the number of claims pending for more than six months rose from 47,000 in 2003 to 75,000 at the end of March 2005. The deteriorating condition of VA health care has elicited plenty of criticism. The American Legion called Bush's budget "the wrong message at the wrong time to the wrong constituency." The Vietnam Veterans of America said the budget did a "disservice to those of us who donned the uniform to defend the rights, principles, and freedoms that we hold dear." And the Veterans of Foreign Wars decried Bush's decision as "especially shameful during a time of war."

Found this on a blog:

Woodland AOL

Reply » | Report Abuse | Judge it! | #2 6 hrs ago   This Hillary dem is voting for McCain because of this: “I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole. I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.”- John McCain 2005 Legislation failed. The failure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could have been averted IF Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 had been passed. Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 only had three co-sponsors : Elizabeth Dole, John McCain and John Sununu. For Nancy Pelosi blaming the GOP is downright an insult to ALL of US TAXPAYERS! http://beltwaysnark.com/2008/09/16/john-mccai... - oversee-fannie-and-freddiein-2 005/ http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd... Gee, and who did the now Government financed mortgage broker Fannie Mae give its money to when it wanted to influence a politician? OpenSecrets lists the top three politicians in which FNMA “invested” from 1989 to 2008. Top Recipients of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008Name Office State Party Grand Total Dodd, Christopher S CT D $165,400 Obama, Barack S IL D $126,349 ($6000 came from the PAC) Kerry, John S MA D $111,000 What about McCain? The folks at Fannie Mae didn’t show him a lot of love. According to Open Secrets: McCain, John S AZ R $21,550 (all from individuals). Oh yeah, and who tabbed the former head of Fannie Mae to head up his Vice Presidential search team? OBAMA, that’s who. Back in May Barack turned to Jim Johnson, former CEO of Fannie Mae. The Congressional democrats have ruined our economy. Bye, bye, dear party. I am moving to the fiscal conservatives. The social issues are not important to me at this time.

The article says one thing, the caption under the picture says:  Break from protocol: Michelle Obama puts her arm around the Queen, who reciprocates, as the pair chatted after a group picture of the G20 leaders was taken.

Michelle went first and the queen 'reciprocated.' (That being-gracioius thing again.) Fairly sure that's what I saw on the video, though now I cannot find the complete video on the internet anywhere, just bits and pieces of it. 

When was the last time you saw me, any liberal, or any liberal media promoting violence? 

Bush screws up the economy (or at least doesn't take any steps to fix it).

Obama works on fixing the economy.

Bush started 2 wars (one of which was/is bogus).

Obama is working to end those wars and bring peace to the region.

Bush had prisoners tortured.

Obama has stopped torture.

Bush talks to other countries in a threatening tone (remember the axis of evil?) and then doesn't have a clue why nobody likes us.

Obama talks to people like they are human beings and respects other cultures, and the results are astounding.

Bush talked about healthcare.

Obama will do something about healthcare.

Bush goes overseas and he's greeted with the sole of a Nike.

Obama goes overseas and is liked and respected.

Bush never held Israel to its agreement to stop settlements.

Obama has already noted that this will be enforced.

There are a few things like the patriot act and LGBT issues that haven't been dealt with yet, but I would say that overall Obama is the exact opposite of Bush.  Keep in mind, as he has only been in office for 5 months, he still has at least 3 years and 7 months to go.  A lot can happen in that period of time.

DHL said it was making the cuts to improve profitability and "to prepare the company for the economic challenges ahead."

The company said this latest action would add $1.9 billion to its restructuring costs, for a total of $3.8 billion over two years, most of it during 2008. The company said the cuts would reduce the annual operating costs of DHL U.S. Express to less than $1 billion, from its current cost of $5.4 billion.

DHL is owned by the German company Deutsche Post World Net.

words that rhyme with white, but the thing I find disturbing are the double standards.  For example, Reverend Wright (not to beat a dead horse so please forgive me) but if a white reverend said the kind of racist things he said about the black community, whoever white political figure attended that church for any amount of time would have had their career ruined.  If a church had the same values that Wright's did but you exchanged black for the word white, that church would have been labeled as a racist church....KKK....etc.  If a white reverend had given a benediction and said anything remotely like what Lowery did, not only would the race card have been thrown out, it would have been all over the news, the outrage from the black community would have been everywhere, and I'm sure a public apology would have had to have been made. 

As a younger white female, I understand the history as far as the facts go.  Did I experience it...no.  However, I have experienced racism in my own personal life with having some things done to me from a black person for no reason other than the color of my skin.  Do I judge all black people by the ones who were racist towards me....of course not.  There are good and bad in all races.  As a white person, I feel I have embraced what is right.  I treat people like I would want to be treated no matter what they look like or the color of their skin.  So to be lumped into the category Lowery lumped me into.....well...that is offensive to me. 

The comments made by black rappers and celebs saying things like....no more white lies...my president is black and using the N- word.  All very offensive to me especially to think that people use them as role models. 

And not to burst their bubble.....President Obama is half white.  So going by what they were spewing about not trusting white people and their lies....well I guess they can only trust Obama 50% of the time then since technically he is half white.  Hmm....funny how no one ever mentions his mixed race and just merely focus on the color of his skin and give him the title of a black man.