Jogging with the President

[ubersoldier87]

Actually I'm not basing them on assumptions, I'm using facts. The fact that he cuts veteran's benefits. the fact that he led this war, and the fact of the number of deaths it has caused. And all those add up to prove that this man is nothing but a hypocrite, and that acts like this one, and I would bet money on this, will be shown at the RNC.

 

[O.S.T]

2). An example of Bush cutting veteran benefits... if by cut you mean a 2.1% INCREASE.

I'm using facts. The fact that he cuts veteran's benefits.

hm...

 

[Renegade Retard]

Actually I'm not basing them on assumptions, I'm using facts. The fact that he cuts veteran's benefits. the fact that he led this war, and the fact of the number of deaths it has caused. And all those add up to prove that this man is nothing but a hypocrite, and that acts like this one, and I would bet money on this, will be shown at the RNC.

Nah, no money, but I'll betcha a double cheeseburger!

I love using analogies to argue my point....

Vet's Benefits (let's assume that he did cut them) - I had to cut my daughter's allowance because money was tight. That doesn't mean I don't love her, it doesn't make her like me any less, and I don't have to prove my love to her to make up for the cutback. Furthermore, just because I had to cut her allowance doesn't mean my heart doesn't break when she gets hurt.

If by chance he did cut the benefits, I seriously doubt he did it gleefully. It is quite possilbe that he did it with a heavy heart (now I'm assuming), know that, while the action may hurt the vets, the move may have been for the good of the nation on the whole. Money doesn't grow on trees (though we Americans spend like it does). EVERY area has to face cutbacks from time to time for the good of the entire budget.

And even if he cuts the vets benefits, why must that mean that he can still genuinely care for this man? Just because he has to undertake a necessary evil, does that me he has no compassion?

 

[ubersoldier87]

Ooo, look I can posts links too.

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0328-11.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/1222-01.htm http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=7474070&BRD=1645&PAG=461&dept_id=33198&rfi=6
http://www.themeridiannews.com/bushveterans.html

 

[Sam_The_Man]

Oh, it was a most obvious pun, but the intent was not to be witty, but more of a reflection of a level of respect.

'A level of respect'? Frame it how you like, the fact remains you personally insulted me before I'd even entered the thread, something I've certainly never done to you.

Don't worry, I'm not offended. I find it hilarious when someone tries to pin something on me that I'm not. What are you trying to achieve? I know I'm not what you say I am, so what's the point?

You take a post of a good dead and turn it into something to bash someone.

I didn't use Bush's 'dead' (Freudian slip? He's got more dead than deeds, after all) to bash him. I said it was of no consequence, and couldn't be used by any side.

It must really pain you too much to admit that, though you disagree with Bush the politician, the acts of Bush the person were applaudible.

This reinforces my stance that the only thing you are capable of is vile contempt and hate.

I admit that occasionally Bush does something quite nice (but nothing that makes him a good President), therefore I am capable of nothing but hate. We apologize for the delay to the 19:43 service to Intelligence, the Logic Train has come off the rails (hey, if I can't please you, why try).

 

[ubersoldier87]

Vet's Benefits (let's assume that he did cut them) - I had to cut my daughter's allowance because money was tight. That doesn't mean I don't love her, it doesn't make her like me any less, and I don't have to prove my love to her to make up for the cutback. Furthermore, just because I had to cut her allowance doesn't mean my heart doesn't break when she gets hurt.

Hmm, did your daughter sacrifice her life to fight a war which you led? I don't think so. Bad analogy, sorry.

If by chance he did cut the benefits, I seriously doubt he did it gleefully. It is quite possilbe that he did it with a heavy heart (now I'm assuming), know that, while the action may hurt the vets, the move may have been for the good of the nation on the whole. Money doesn't grow on trees (though we Americans spend like it does). EVERY area has to face cutbacks from time to time for the good of the entire budget.

Oh yea right, he felt SO SAD when he cut them, so he could shove more money as tax breaks into the pockets of the rich and their companies who fund him and his campaign. What a TOUGH decision!

And even if he cuts the vets benefits, why must that mean that he can still genuinely care for this man? Just because he has to undertake a necessary evil, does that me he has no compassion?

A necessary evil? I want to know where the money was spent which he took away from these people, those who sacrifice their lives for him and his war. I'll bet that it all went into two things:

More supplies and weapons for the war.

and

His campaign (meaning the tax breaks which shelled out money to his rich promoters).

And neither of those seem more "necessary" to me than aiding the vets.

 

[W0RF]

Ooo, look I can posts links too.

You post articles from op-ed websites, I post an article from a website that helps organize military benefits. Apparently you need pwn3d harder:

The Veteran's Benefits Act of 2003 will mean $1 billion in new and expanded benefits for disabled veterans, surviving spouses, and children over the next ten years.

As enacted, the Veterans Benefits Act of 2003:

Allows the VA to provide specially adapted housing grant to severely disabled servicemembers prior to their separation from active duty service.

Increases the specially adapted automobile grant from $9,000 to $11,000, and increase the specially adapted housing grants from $48,000 to $50,000 for the most severely disabled veterans and from $9,250 to $10,000 for less severely disabled veterans.

Restores dependency and indemnity compensation (DIC), VA home loan guarantee, and education, benefit eligibility for spouses remarried after age 57, and burial eligibility for all remarried spouses.

Increases monthly educational benefits for spouses and dependent children of disabled veterans from $695 to $788 for full-time study, from $522 to $592 for three-quarter time study, and from $347 to $394 for half-time study.

Expands benefits eligibility to children with spina bifida who were born to certain Vietnam-era veterans who served in Korea near the demilitarized zone.

Allows the surviving spouse or dependent children to receive the full amount of accrued benefits if the veteran dies while their claim is still pending.

Eliminates the 30-day requirement for POWs to qualify for presumptions of service-connection for certain disabilities: psychosis, any of the anxiety states, dysthymic disorder, organic residuals of frostbite, and post-traumatic osteoarthritis.

Provides full compensation and DIC to members of the new Philippine Scouts if the individual resides in the United States as a citizen or permanent resident. Also extends eligibility for burial in a national cemetery.

Expands the Montgomery GI Bill program to cover self-employment training programs of less than six months and entrepreneurship courses at approved institutions.

Allows federal agencies to create "sole-source" contracts for disabled veteran-owned small businesses - up to $5 million for manufacturing contract awards and up to $3 million for non-manufacturing contract awards.

Allows federal agencies to restrict certain contracts to disabled veteran-owned small businesses if at least two such concerns are qualified to bid on the contract.

Mandates that the Department of Labor place staff in veterans' assistance offices at overseas military installations 90 days after date of enactment.

For more information on eligibility, filing claims, and claim status call 1-800-827-1000 toll free, or visit the VA Compensation and Pension page.

one last thing

His campaign (meaning the tax breaks which shelled out money to his rich promoters).

Of the top 10 individual donors to 527 committees, all are backing anti-Bush or Democratic-allied groups. Of the 50 largest groups, 34 of them are allied with the Democrats or anti-Bush.

The top donors include Soros, Peter Lewis, the head of Progressive Insurance, and Andrew and Deborah Rappaport. Andrew Rappaport is a partner in a Menlo Park, Calif., venture capital firm.

The Rappaports each gave $2,000 to the Howard Dean campaign earlier this year, but the clout they have with the 527 committees is much bigger: They have given nearly $3 million to groups such as the New Democrat Network.

source

A second last thing, do you read the articles you link?

Many veterans are particularly galled that the Bush administration has not backed away from a 1995 decision to rescind a promise of free lifetime health care benefits for soldiers, who from 1941 to 1956 had been told that if they signed up and served 20 years they and their dependents would get free care. The government stopped honoring that pledge in 1995, and many veterans 65 and older have been forced to pay for benefits through Medicare, which now costs about $60 a month and pays for 80 percent of medical care after a $100 deductible has been paid.

1995? wtf?

 

[spineblaZe]

:tup:

 

[ubersoldier87]

LOL, I bet you didn't even read them, you just looked at the site title and dismissed it as lies, just like you do with everything else that you disagree with.

If you had read them, you woudn't have failed to see how the accusations in those articles were made by VETERANS and their relatives. Like this one:

"My father was granted 100% disability six years ago for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder associated with the Vietnam War. He deserves every cent of it. As do all soldiers who are willing to go to war. Under the Bush administration, being granted the ability to receive war related compensation has become a rare privilege, not a right as it should be. Nearly a third of Gulf War veterans, about 209,000 veterans, have submitted claims to to the VA for disability. The backlog of unprocessed claims has reached the astronomical count of 489,297, a number which is unfortunately increasing all of time. There are also currently 500,000 Compensation and Pension cases still pending."

Now I'de like to see you call that a lie. but instead, you show your military site, made for recruitment and advertising. Nice source.

 

[W0RF]

read up, uber, one of us didn't read the articles, but it wasn't me.

After reading the quote you posted, I am curious, how does a backlog in processing claims = a cut in benefits?

Also, research and evaluate the difference between "dismissing as lies" and "noting that this is an opinion article which is not the same as a news source with verifiable statistics"

And if you think the information posted is a lie, call the 800 number and ask them yourself.

I also noticed that every single one of your articles PREDATES the Benefits Act of 2003 by a MINIMUM of 8 months. :tup:

 

[ubersoldier87]

Right... so the military site you show, which has a recruitment link up at the top, thats represents the views of the veterans, where as the veterans THEMSELVES who are expressing their views in my links, they are lying?

 

[Sir_Brizz]

That play on my name was incredibly witty and no-one has ever thought of it before.

Convinced yet?

In fact, I agree with Phoenix. This doesn't contradict anything I think about Bush. I still think he's not intelligent enough to rule the US, I still think his policies have been misguided on every front, and I still think his influences are extremely suspect. None of those mean he can't take a personal interest in someone's health.

If you're looking for an intelligent dictator/President...you might as well just revolt.

 

[W0RF]

....





....





SNAP!


OPINIONS ARE NOT LIES! I DID NOT SAY THEY (anecdotes aside, these are opinion pieces by Internet writers, not articles written verbatim BY veterans) WERE LYING!


I was simply stating the facts of the bill he signed MONTHS AFTER YOUR ARTICLES WERE POSTED!

link
link
text of the bill
link
link
link
link
link
link
link

let's also throw in the Appropriations Bill for fiscal year 2005:

Military Personnel and Medical Programs - The Subcommittee bill fully funds the 3.5% military pay raise proposed in the President's budget, and also increased levels for Basic Allowance for Housing, eliminating service members' average out-of-pocket housing expenses from 3.5 percent to zero in fiscal year 2005. Nearly $18 billion is recommended for the Defense Health Program, an increase of $2.2 billion over fiscal year 2004, and funding for military-related medical research and related initiatives is increased by over $900 million above requested levels.

The budget was approved 96-0 by the Senate.

 

[MetalMickey]

Politicians sometimes pose with cripples. Sometimes with people they arent even responsible for crippling! They kiss babies, visit hospitals and suchlike too you know. Stalin was a great man for that sort of thing.

 

[O.S.T]

wow, \/\/0RF is on owning-spree

 

[W0RF]

Doesn't a publicity stunt require... erm... publicity? Where are the "welcome to last week" posters, considering how long ago this took place?

 

[ubersoldier87]

I can't believe I didn't realize this sooner.

Worf, the Veterans Benefits Act of 2003, which you keep repeating, has become the target of Bush and his budget. He proposed cutting $844 million from their health care, and every republican on the House Budget comitee proposed the same. It passed, and now the veterans are yet again being screwed, regardless what what was supposedly granted to them in that bill of yours. So, today veterans are in the same type of situation that they were prior to that bill, if not worse.

So the outdated bill you keep showing has no importance here. Whats happening, not a year ago, but NOW, is this budget. And that is why Bush is screwing over the veterans. hence my point abaout 10 threads back, that he is a hypocrite. So you can waive that bill at me all you want, it doesn't prove anything.

 

[Sam_The_Man]

If you're looking for an intelligent dictator/President...you might as well just revolt.

Blair is intelligent, though rather confused between socialism and liberalism. Chirac is intelligent, though fanatical in his pursuit of French glory on the world stage. Berlusconi is intelligent, though corrupt to the hilt. Saddam was intelligent, though insane. Bush is not intelligent.

 

[O.S.T]

Berlusconi is intelligent

really?

 

[W0RF]

Worf, the Veterans Benefits Act of 2003, which you keep repeating, has become the target of Bush and his budget. He proposed cutting $844 million from their health care, and every republican on the House Budget comitee proposed the same. It passed, and now the veterans are yet again being screwed, regardless what what was supposedly granted to them in that bill of yours.

Can you source that? Or am I supposed to verify this using your 18-month-old news items?

Can you believe you didn't realize THAT sooner?

(and yet again, assuming it's correct, increasing not-as-much equals a cut. Some things never change)


/off to research

:edit: never mind, I found the $844 million figure here:

The Bush administration sent to the House its proposal for cutting $844 million from veterans’ health care from the 2004 budget. Over a 10-year period the cuts would total approximately $10 billion.

No, wait, that's the 2004 budget, we're STILL in the spring of 2003.

Time to hit factcheck.org:

In Bush’s first three years funding for the Veterans Administration increased 27%. And if Bush's 2005 budget is approved, funding for his full four-year term will amount to an increase of 37.6%.

In the eight years of the Clinton administration the increase was 31.7%

OMG LOOK AT THOSE CUTS