Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

Owner59 -> Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/20/2008 8:49:53 PM)

 
Isn`t McCain the pro-military,pro-soldier, pro-veteran guy?

I heard that somewhere....

http://www.marine-corps-news.com/2008/05/historic_gi_bill_vote_tomorrow.htm

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/05/15/1025436.aspx


A Vote Vets advert.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcDMD0B7r88



cyberdude611 -> RE: Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/20/2008 9:37:53 PM)

There is all sorts of junk loaded in this bill....some things not even related to the war. And that's the type of stuff McCain is promising to get rid of if he's elected president. He's tired of pork being tacked on to every bill just so it can pass. And if you did a poll of Americans, most would agree. This is a bad way for any legislature to do business and was the primary reason that the GOP ended up out of Congress. This type of politics leads to corruption.



popeye1250 -> RE: Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/20/2008 9:45:25 PM)

I say give it to them!
Raise my taxes for that.
McCain is looking like a curmudgion on this.
And I agree that they shouldn't be "tacking on" other stuff to Bills.



Irishknight -> RE: Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/20/2008 9:51:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

There is all sorts of junk loaded in this bill....some things not even related to the war. And that's the type of stuff McCain is promising to get rid of if he's elected president. He's tired of pork being tacked on to every bill just so it can pass. And if you did a poll of Americans, most would agree. This is a bad way for any legislature to do business and was the primary reason that the GOP ended up out of Congress. This type of politics leads to corruption.

Actually, I think it is corruption that leads to this kind of politics.  I hate all of the garbage these assbags tack onto otherwise good bills.  If someone supports it they blame them for the crap they put on.  If someone opposes it they whine about how they didn't support a good bill.  Its a way to always make the people hate the other party and it usually works.  Its easier to make someone hate the other party for something than to earn their confidence by doing the right thing.



DomKen -> RE: Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/20/2008 10:19:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

There is all sorts of junk loaded in this bill....some things not even related to the war. And that's the type of stuff McCain is promising to get rid of if he's elected president. He's tired of pork being tacked on to every bill just so it can pass. And if you did a poll of Americans, most would agree. This is a bad way for any legislature to do business and was the primary reason that the GOP ended up out of Congress. This type of politics leads to corruption.

McCain is on the record opposing the bill because it would affect retention. Nothing about pork or anything else.

He's basically opposed to having enlisted servicemen being able to improve themselves.



Irishknight -> RE: Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/20/2008 10:27:33 PM)

That is a quote I'd have to see to believe.  Otherwise, I'm gonna have to put it in the "Obama's a Muslim" file.



cyberdude611 -> RE: Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/20/2008 11:12:43 PM)

Yeah, there is more to it than McCain "not supporting servicemen." That sounds like typical DNC spin from the Obama campaign.

I am not a McCain fan and I disagree with him on many things. But McCain was a POW who has already had one of his sons fight in Anbar Province in Iraq. You have to be a fool if you actually think McCain doesn't support the military, our vets, and our soldiers on active duty.

There is something else obviously wrong with the bill. The Dems must have tacked something on it.



Alumbrado -> RE: Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/21/2008 4:48:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Irishknight

That is a quote I'd have to see to believe.  Otherwise, I'm gonna have to put it in the "Obama's a Muslim" file.



Or in the 'You have to have a private pilot's license to join the military' file...[8|]



DomKen -> RE: Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/21/2008 6:05:35 AM)

Will McCain's own words suffice?:
quote:


The Administration sided with McCain, arguing benefits that were too generous and too early in active duty service would hurt reenlistments -- and would lure service members off of military bases and onto college campuses. "My job is to get people to stay in the military, not only to join, but to stay as well," McCain said from the campaign trail in Ohio Wednesday.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/05/15/1025436.aspx

quote:

His bill offers the same benefits whether you stay three years or longer. We want to have a sliding scale to increase retention.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/30/politics/politico/main4057552.shtml

Retention is the only consistent complaint he has against the Webb GI bill. It is shameful and every vet should think long and hard about what this issue shows about McCain.



Irishknight -> RE: Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/21/2008 6:46:03 AM)

So they might get bigger benefits by staying in longer?  Wow.  Thats something I can never support.  I like the sliding scale idea.



Sanity -> RE: Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/21/2008 6:59:01 AM)


Why should we spend billions training them then spend billions more to purposely entice them to walk out right after they're trained. The military isn't purely an entitlement program, as you seem to think, and Democrats offering legislation giving soldiers pie-in-the-sky benefits in exchange for votes (and for leaving the service) is stupid, and it's deplorable.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Retention is the only consistent complaint he has against the Webb GI bill. It is shameful and every vet should think long and hard about what this issue shows about McCain.



Irishknight -> RE: Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/21/2008 8:03:37 AM)

I have thought about it.  DAMN McCain for wanting to keep qualified people in the military longer by not offering them the world after only a few years.  CURSE him for trying to keep our military strength up.



DomKen -> RE: Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/21/2008 8:38:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Irishknight

I have thought about it.  DAMN McCain for wanting to keep qualified people in the military longer by not offering them the world after only a few years.  CURSE him for trying to keep our military strength up.

First you claimed you didn't belive he'd said it. I proved he did but now suddenly it's a great idea?

Since you're obviously not a vet I'll try and explain this to you. Very few people join the military with the intent of making it a career and the military cannot have every enlistee become a career soldier. The military needs lots more people in the lower ranks and not so many in the higher ranks. Individuals with skills we want to keep in the military are already given strong incentives to reenlist, five figure reenlistment bonuses plus other perks. What we have had trouble with is recruiting quality servicepeople in the first place. The military has long used college tuition money as the incentive to bring in smart young people looking to better themselves. Now the fact is well known the GI Bill does not provide anywhere near enough money which combines poorly with the facts of troops returning from Iraq missing chunks of themselves. A functional GI Bill that does what it promises is a recruitment tool and will have no worse effect on retention than it did all those years when we did have a GI Bill that would completely pay for college.



Irishknight -> RE: Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/21/2008 8:52:08 AM)

Since I served in 2 branches of the service (Army and Navy) I think I qualify as a vet.  How many times do I have to put my life on the line for a bunch of ingrates before I can be considered a vet in you EXPERT opinion?  I think I remember how the military works.  And since you showed a statement that said he was in favor of a system that had yet to be mentioned, I thought about it and liked the idea.  I actually READ what you posted and the idea made some sense to me.
If the current GI Bill sucks so much and a 2 year reenlistment would double it then it sounds like a good idea to me.  We save training time.  We save money spent on training and we keep quality people.  You showed where an alternative idea was presented and it sounded good to me.  You shouldn't show where someone offers a viable alternative plan if you don't want people to think about it.



popeye1250 -> RE: Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/21/2008 8:55:17 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Irishknight

I have thought about it.  DAMN McCain for wanting to keep qualified people in the military longer by not offering them the world after only a few years.  CURSE him for trying to keep our military strength up.


Well, this Bill would be very similar to the one fashioned for WW2 Veterans for spending a, "few years" in military service.
And those Veterans and the country benefitted greatly from it.
What does McCain want to do, keep them all poor like indentured servants?
Want to keep qualified people in the military? Pay them!
Just like in the D.P.S.! ("Dreaded Private Sector")
In a capitalist country if you can't get labor at a certain rate of pay and benefits you raise that pay and benefits until you can.
And if they say that ,"we can't afford it," then that means that we, "can't afford" the policies that we have.
Having Troops spread out all over the world is tremendously expensive!
And why do we still have Troops in Japan and Korea for some 50-60 years now?
McCain had no problem signing onto that last foreign aid bill of $34.6 B!
But he doesn't want to spend money on our Troops?
And the other idiot Obama wants to get the U.S. involved in "genocides in Africa!"



OrionTheWolf -> RE: Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/21/2008 9:19:36 AM)

~FR~

I do not like the bill for some of the reasons McCain does not like them. As far as retention goes, I feel the best way to attract and retain in the military is to give them great benefits while active duty and retirement. Just like any profession, if you offer better benefits while in a position and great benefits when you retire, then you will attract them and keep them.

Losing veterans (those with more than 8 years in), is a problem that can be solved by not putting troops in harms way for no good reasons, and allowing them to have a clear mission and objectives, with the freedom to go after them. There are many things that need to be repaired because of the Iraq and "terrorism" fiascos.



Irishknight -> RE: Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/21/2008 9:31:54 AM)

What if those GIs benefit more from staying an extra 2 or 3 years?  Is that not paying them?  The quote above said a sliding system.  If I serve 4 years, I get the minimum.  If I serve 10, I get even more.  How is that not paying them for their time?



popeye1250 -> RE: Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/21/2008 9:37:38 AM)

Orion, I agree.
If we consider them "proffessionals" and I think they are, then we need to pay them like proffessionals!
How many proffessionals in the "D.P.S." would go over to Iraq for $40k per year, live like an animal and get shot at?
It's rediculous!



Irishknight -> RE: Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/21/2008 9:48:09 AM)

Someone once priced all of the things I was given while on active duty and it startled me.  My room in the barracks wasn't something to brag about but it took me over 500 a month to replace it after I moved out.  My food wasn't always the best but look at what groceries cost.  I could have been eating Ramen every meal like I had to when I was laid off from a manufacturing plant.  Add lights, water, heating costs, and everything else we got, I was doing pretty damned good. 
I have a lot of friends anf family over there and none of them are "living like animals."  I'm not sure where you came up with that.  In fact, some of them are going back for the 3rd time soon and they have no problem with going. 
Even though it sucks, getting shot at is a part of what we all signed up to deal with as soldiers.  Anyone who says that they didn't know they could be shot at in the army is either a liar or an idiot. 



DomKen -> RE: Senate to vote on new GI Bill despite McCain's auspicious opposition ?!?. (5/21/2008 9:51:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

Orion, I agree.
If we consider them "proffessionals" and I think they are, then we need to pay them like proffessionals!
How many proffessionals in the "D.P.S." would go over to Iraq for $40k per year, live like an animal and get shot at?
It's rediculous!

40k/year? You've got to be an E-7 to get anywhere near that much. An E-5 with over 4 years in is only making 27k/year base pay and add in $2700 a year combat pay so under 30k a year for a Sergeant under fire.



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625