|
More 'Supporting The Troops'!
9.22.05,
from AP Wire Services: Protecting tax cuts, GOP proposes cuts to military health care In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, President Bush and Republicans in Congress have refused to consider rolling back the $336 billion in new tax cuts that the richest 1 percent are slated to get over the next five years. They say we need to pay for reconstruction not by asking the wealthiest to sacrifice just a little bit, but by massive cuts to spending. And now we see what that means: The Navy Times today reports that those cuts "include trimming military quality-of-life programs, including health care." This, while troops are in battle. ***** The Republicans have put their cutting efforts in military terms, calling it "Operation Offset" - a further insult to the men and women in uniform they are now trying to screw over. The specifics are ugly. They are, for instance, asking troops to "accept reduced health care benefits for their families." Additionally, "the stateside system of elementary and secondary schools for military family members could be closed." In the past, this idea "has faced strong opposition from parents of children attending the schools because public schools [in and around bases] are seen as offering lower-quality education." None of this, I suppose, is all that surprising. In the past, we've seen tax cuts put before making sure troops have adequate body armor heading into war - a tax/budget decision that very likely increased U.S. casualties. We've also seen Republicans vote down efforts to reduce tax cuts for the very wealthy in order to restore cuts to military family housing. And we've seen tax cuts come as the White House has refused to adequately fund a variety of other programs for troops. The truth is, the GOP has in moments of candor admitted that they care about cutting taxes for the wealthy far more than they care about the troops. As you may recall, it was Tom DeLay who said before the Iraq invasion "Nothing is more important in the face of a war than cutting taxes." Apparently to the Republicans, nothing is more important in the face of a war AND massive destruction to the homefront than cutting taxes either. |
Sacrifice?????
Sacrifice, 1600 Crew style!
Will the the people that Preznit Completely Corrupt calls his base be asked to sacrifice their tax-cuts to pay for The Mess O'Potamia and now the Katrina aftermath? No. Of course not! Will the people that Preznit Sippin' Whiskey regales with tales of strolling with First Responders to have photo-ops with be considered as candidates for sacrifice in "Operation Offset"? No. Surely you jest! Then who will be asked to (once again) shoulder the burden of paying to continue the feeding frenzy at the tax-cut trough? "A group of House Republicans have proposed a plan to offset the costs of relief and rebuilding after Hurricane Katrina that includes trimming military quality-of-life programs, including health care. Some sources of funding cuts to free up money for Katrina relief include reduced health benefits, consolidation of the three military exchange systems and the closure of the militarys stateside school system." Yup. The same people who he and all his Chickenhawk republican cronies so revere in their public pronouncements and chest-beating. The American Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines and their families who are already literally giving everything 24/7/365. It's against the law for many of them (our troops) to say anything about this in anyway but to vote "with their feet" when (and if) they can. But how unconscionable is it for the republicans to put these folks in Harm's Way and then blithely assert that they need to sacrifice further for other Americans, when the richest 1% , who will get over 300 Billion in tax-relief over the next five years are being asked to sacrifice nothing? One of the juiciest Canards of the Right is that we Democrats should not defend our opposition to American Soldiers being tossed into the meat grinder in Mess O'Potamia because they are all "volunteers". Well, no one joined the Army and "volunteered" to leave their family destitute, no one "voluneteered" to be treated as a Second-Class Citizen as the 1600 Crew does for the Guard and Reservists in terms of benefits, even though they serve on the frontlines in Iraq and Afghanistan with their regular Army counterparts. No one but the fiscally insane, rubber-stamping one-party Congress would have ceded all their responsibilities to the 1600 Crew under the guise of this "War" of choice and then had the balls to ask for more sacrifice in the one place it shouldn't ever be made, in the paycheck of our servicemen and women who are not "volunteering" to be part of the Great Social Experiment in Supply-Side Economics and Government Accounting Trickery. And they have the unmitigated GALL to call Democrats "UN-patriotic" and "traitors"???? These so called 'Compassionate Conservatives' are as sick & despicable as they can be! |
Sadly, Gimpy I gotta agree with you on this one. But, would the Dems be any better? Their policy is the more taxes the better...and you'd better believe the middle class would catch it right in the shorts before the rich would pay. Both parties eat from the same trough. They all talk the talk, but darn few walk the walk.
|
Well... this is roughly the 200th time I have posted this, but there are about 20,000,000 Vets, give or take, more or less.
That constitutes a substantial voting bloc. Vote. |
That's
part of the problem Blue!
A great deal of them have been voting for the WRONG candidates ! :cd: :cd: :cd: :( |
Re: That's
Quote:
|
When I see Democrat politicians vote down a pay raise for themselves in any state house or in the federal government I'll believe you Gimpy. I see no reason why I should share my hard earned money with some slug who has never worked, and will never work as long as welfare will give him my money to buy booze or dope. Why is it that second generation immigrants from just about everywhere in the world are on the top of the economic ladder and 30th generation blacks are still looking for "Free Money" 160 years after slavery was ended? Look to your "Compassionate" Party who created the welfare state to keep blacks at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder, give them subsistance welfare and make them beholden to the Democratic party and pay it back with votes. Don't blame the Republicans for keeping them down...blame folks like Louis Farrakhan, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton who make their living off other blacks by keeping the "Victimization" gambit going. As long as you Democrats tell them that they are "Victims" of the white man and entitled to be supported by them without worrying about getting an education so they can get a decent job they'll stay just where they are. I wonder if that's why the inner city blacks hate Koreans, Vietnamese, Chinese and other immigrants who have worked their butts off to get their kids into college and off to a sucessful start in life? Who'se fault is it that over 70% of blacks are born out of wedlock, who's fault is it that most blacks are raised without a father? Who's fault is it that they look to Rap stars as a role model and consider someone like Collin Powell or Bill Cosby to be an "Uncle Tom"? Yeah, Gimpy.....I know, it's Bush's fault along with the rest of the Neocon Republicans. We're deliberately keeping these folks down by not letting them go to school to get educated. We force them to play hookey, take drugs and we must be "Framing" them too as over 70% of the prison population is black. We must be forcing them to commit crimes as well. Did you notice that the percentages for the prison population and for children without fathers was the same? Wonder what the percentage of "Other Races" without a father to raise them is? I'll bet it's about 30% which would account for the other 30% of the prison population.
Gimpy...I blame the black leadership for keeping blacks at the bottom of the totem pole. Not Republicans and Not Democrats per-se. It just happens that all the black leaders are Democrats. |
Hmmmmmmmmmm.
I rest my case!
|
More
concrete and compelling evidence that the Republicans DO NOT suport the veterans of this country the way they should!
Looks like we lost again my fellow veterans. Had this amendment passed, the Veterans Health Care System would have been ASSURED that the funds necessary for continuing and improving our health care would be in place every year without having to go through the 'political' process of 'bugetary' calculations and appropriations. As you well know, this has always been subject to the political 'whims' and political infighting, especially in these recent years. The Republicans CONSISTENTLY have voted DOWN the funding requirements of the VA since they have been in control! The VA Budget for health care has come up 'short' every single year for the past few years with drastic ramifications for veterans who depend on the VA for their health care. The Disabled American Veterans web site has a 'pre-written' letter you can send your Senators to either thank them for voting 'Yay', or hopefully to express your anger and outrage at them for voting 'Nay'. ####### Senate Amendment 1937 Results of Stabenow Amendment, October 6, 2005 On October 5, 2005, Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) offered an amendment to H.R. 2863, the Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 2006. Senate amendment 1937 would have provided funds for VA medical care through a combination of discretionary and mandatory funds. Unlike the broken discretionary process, this would have provided a sufficient funding level in a timely manner. The amendment was defeated by a vote of 51-48. The roll call vote is posted on our web site, along with letters to your Senators, based on how they voted. Please take a moment to send the prepared e-mail to your Senators, either thanking them for their favorable vote or expressing your disappointment in their unfavorable vote. The correct letter or letters will come up when you enter your zip code. As always, thank you for your support. The vote 'TALLY' is below. ####### S.AMDT.1937 Amends: H.R.2863 Sponsor: Sen Stabenow, Debbie [MI] (submitted 10/3/2005) (proposed 10/5/2005) AMENDMENT PURPOSE: To ensure that future funding for health care for former members of the Armed Forces takes into account changes in population and inflation. Yea : 48 Members Akaka (D-HI) Baucus (D-MT) Bayh (D-IN) Biden (D-DE) Bingaman (D-NM) Boxer (D-CA) Byrd (D-WV) Cantwell (D-WA) Carper (D-DE) Chafee (R-RI) Clinton (D-NY) Collins (R-ME) Conrad (D-ND) Dayton (D-MN) Dodd (D-CT) Dorgan (D-ND) Durbin (D-IL) Feingold (D-WI) Feinstein (D-CA) Harkin (D-IA) Jeffords (I-VT) Johnson (D-SD) Kennedy (D-MA) Kerry (D-MA) Kohl (D-WI) Landrieu (D-LA) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) Lieberman (D-CT) Lincoln (D-AR) Mikulski (D-MD) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL) Nelson (D-NE) Obama (D-IL) Pryor (D-AR) Reed (D-RI) Reid (D-NV) Rockefeller (D-WV) Salazar (D-CO) Sarbanes (D-MD) Schumer (D-NY) Snowe (R-ME) Specter (R-PA) Stabenow (D-MI) Thune (R-SD) Wyden (D-OR) Nay: 51 members Alexander (R-TN) Allard (R-CO) Allen (R-VA) Bennett (R-UT) Bond (R-MO) Brownback (R-KS) Bunning (R-KY) Burns (R-MT) Burr (R-NC) Chambliss (R-GA) Coburn (R-OK) Cochran (R-MS) Coleman (R-MN) Cornyn (R-TX) Craig (R-ID) Crapo (R-ID) DeMint (R-SC) DeWine (R-OH) Dole (R-NC) Domenici (R-NM) Ensign (R-NV) Enzi (R-WY) Frist (R-TN) Graham (R-SC) Grassley (R-IA) Gregg (R-NH) Hagel (R-NE) Hatch (R-UT) Hutchison (R-TX) Inhofe (R-OK) Inouye (D-HI) Isakson (R-GA) Kyl (R-AZ) Lott (R-MS) Lugar (R-IN) Martinez (R-FL) McCain (R-AZ) McConnell (R-KY) Murkowski (R-AK) Roberts (R-KS) Santorum (R-PA) Sessions (R-AL) Shelby (R-AL) Smith (R-OR) Stevens (R-AK) Sununu (R-NH) Talent (R-MO) Thomas (R-WY) Vitter (R-LA) Voinovich (R-OH) Warner (R-VA) Not voting: 1 Corzine (D-NJ) ####END#### |
Does anyone know the reason(s) given for so many Republicans voting against the Stabenow proposal?
|
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:40 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.