All of these personal attacks are distracting from the issues at hand, He served the country and no matter what position he served in he gave up his free will to be a tool for our country. It is a bit more than just a nine to five job. Your boss normally can't tell you to run through a mine field and honestly expect you to do it. His had the ability to do so. That potential deserves some compensation.
Regardless of how he feels about certain other aspects of society, all of the abuse heaped upon him does not further the conversation here.
To answer how does "service" to the country differ from someone being born in the right place and time, that would be choice. He chose to serve, you did not choose to be born.
That said, basic healthcare, or in my opinion all healthcare, if it given to society as a whole would further society as a whole. If I get ill the sooner I get better the sooner I can continue to contribute to society. If I don't have access to healthcare, or if healthcare is so expensive that I am dissuaded from seeking it, then I will stay sick longer and contribute to society less. If the illness is not completely purged from me and I go back to work early because financially I can not afford to not be at work then I get my coworkers sick and further decrease the contribution to society at large.
Over all there is good financial incentive to provide healthcare for everyone. Even businesses realize this, with even the small business I work(<100 employees) for handing out flu shots. One could expand this argument to all vaccines.
He served the country and no matter what position he served in he gave up his free will to be a tool for our country. It is a bit more than just a nine to five job. Your boss normally can't tell you to run through a mine field and honestly expect you to do it. His had the ability to do so. That potential deserves some compensation.
That's a good answer. It shows some thought about actual value conferred upon society other than mere status. However, should there be compensation for the mere potential for being placed in harm's way? It would be really easy to distinguish between service members who actually were in combat and those who were just killing time. Should benefits be limited to those who actually did something dangerous or were stationed someplace dangerous? If this limitation doesn't exist, doesn't service become a gamble to see if you can reap lots of benefits with little risk?
Repubs are going to cut VA benefits? Please post links to what Repubs have said not links to what someone else thinks they said. (The pledge specifically exempted veteran benfits from the pledge to return to 2009 spending levels).
How is Steve's "service" different from someone who was simply born in the right place at the right time?
I have often thought the same thing, and this is coming from someone who spent 8 years in the active army. I didn't join the army to "serve" at first, I was 18 and it seemed like something fun to do at the time. But having said that, the few "benefits" I got from my years of service I earned. And to be honest it has benefited the country. The money I got to go to and pay for collage after I got out has probably at least doubled if not tripled my income over the years, which has meant more taxes that I pay. But I don't see a difference in my VA benefits and unemployment, social security, or any other "benefit". They were all earned in one way or the other.
I am just so fucking sick and tired of this "I got mine, but you can't get yours" attitude. It mostly seems to be from the conservative side too. Like the teabag couple someone mentioned earlier, the husband was a tax assessor, and the wife was in a one of those hoverounds that medicare paid for. So both of them are living off of the government tit. But of course they didn't want to pay for some poor bastard to get basic medical care.
And fuck the republicans on what they have done for Veterans, they only thing they are good at is sending the military to die. I am so fucking tired of them and these teabaggers waving the fucking flag, when I'll bet most of them never served day in the military, much more put their life on the line. And all of this is coming from someone who probably more conservative than most of the people on this board.
And finally, Steve don't you get tired of banging your face against Joe fist.
If this limitation doesn't exist, doesn't service become a gamble to see if you can reap lots of benefits with little risk?
I suppose you could look at it that way. One should look at how our military how our military service has evolved over time. It used to be by draft. For the longest time we had almost no standing military and drafted people when we had a war (personally I wish we could go bad to this however i must give a nod to current political realities and modern security needs). Those people, for whom the G.I. Bill and other veterans benefits were designed for, were for those who volunteered for, and were forced into, service with the very real expectation of seeing active war.
I would argue that the potential of being put into harms way for your country is enough to give the benefits that they receive. Is it a gamble, yes one could look at it that way, but to me it is more of a gamble that you won't see action. Even during peace time we still manage to put our military personal into harms way.
An article from 2003 and another from Pelosi? Sorry, you fail. Try again.
Both articles show were republicans have already been slashing your benefits. Here's a reminder of what they did with Walter Reed. The republicans don't like your benefits, and they have been doing their level best to undermine them for years.
I would argue that the potential of being put into harms way for your country is enough to give the benefits that they receive.
Is there a difference between the service of someone who lost her limbs to an IED and someone who spent all of his time at home, never hearing a shot fired in anger?
Moving the goal posts Joe? Again, the article you posted stated that the Republican pledge to America includes language cutting VA benefits. Put up or admit you linked to a factually innacurate opinion piece. See you don't even have to admit you are wrong just that the article is wrong
Is there a difference between the service of someone who lost her limbs to an IED and someone who spent all of his time at home, never hearing a shot fired in anger?
The depends, did the person who is sitting home, sitting home knowing that at any second be told to grab his bag get onto a plane and go who-know-where to do who-knows-what? If so then no.
I sat home knowing that it would take an act of Congress in order for that to happen. A friend of mine sat home knowing that he can get a phone call, day or night, telling him to get on a plane.
We as just private citizens are privileged in that no one can tell us what to do, with the exception if we harm or damage society at large. Any one in the military does not have that luxury. They do not have any freedom, except, perhaps, to refuse to execute an illegal/immoral order.
Last week, at a conservative conference in DC, the chairman of the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee said the same thing. Rep. Lynn Westmoreland wanted to be sure that "the folks" knew how much pain we could expect if his colleagues in the GOP win in November:
"We gotta have you because later on you all will call us and say, 'Look I didn't get my check,' 'Daddy can't go to the VA,' you know, 'National Parks are closed.' We need to be sure that you are with us because let me tell you, this is what all Americans need to understand."
Link. Seems to me that anyone who is not a millionaire and who wants to continue receiving any type of benefit should not be voting for the republicans.
Is there a difference between the service of someone who lost her limbs to an IED and someone who spent all of his time at home, never hearing a shot fired in anger?
The depends, did the person who is sitting home, sitting home knowing that at any second be told to grab his bag get onto a plane and go who-know-where to do who-knows-what? If so then no.
I sat home knowing that it would take an act of Congress in order for that to happen. A friend of mine sat home knowing that he can get a phone call, day or night, telling him to get on a plane.
We as just private citizens are privileged in that no one can tell us what to do, with the exception if we harm or damage society at large. Any one in the military does not have that luxury. They do not have any freedom, except, perhaps, to refuse to execute an illegal/immoral order.
Now this is what I wanted to hear - an actual reason for benefits that goes beyond mere status.
Link.Seems to me that anyone who is not a millionaire and who wants to continue receiving any type of benefit should not be voting for the republicans.
Link.Seems to me that anyone who is not a millionaire and who wants to continue receiving any type of benefit should not be voting for the republicans.
The realization I reached about 2 years ago.
Actually, I had my own dalliance with republicanism until I saw the light. It's a seductive path, like the Dark Side, but it's also a lot like a cargo cult. Cult members think, "Hey, maybe if I talk and act like a rich guy, and subvert my own interests by supporting policies that benefit the rich and that are harmful to me, maybe one day I'll be rich and get to play all the rich guy games." Sadly, it doesn't work that way. The rich guys don't like to let anyone new into their club, they won't play with you, and they won't share their money with you. They like it very much when they fool normal people into doing their best to subvert their own interests in the name of republican ideology, e.g. the unemployed teabaggers protesting against health care and unemployment insurance, but they're gonna drop those same people like Hall dropped Oates when their goals have been acheived.
Joe, your progressive bloggers are taking things out of context and using selective editing to warp what Republicans are saying. You cry foul when Fox does this yet you blindly regurgitate the message when it comes from liberals.
Before you post links and quotes from opinion writers please take the time to investigate the context and accuracy of the piece you are quoting from. Look for the source material and take some time to digest it.
It's entirely possible to go from a large deficit one year to a surplus in the next, or vice versa, so the comment doesn't make sense with respect to deficit.
Comments
Regardless of how he feels about certain other aspects of society, all of the abuse heaped upon him does not further the conversation here.
To answer how does "service" to the country differ from someone being born in the right place and time, that would be choice. He chose to serve, you did not choose to be born.
That said, basic healthcare, or in my opinion all healthcare, if it given to society as a whole would further society as a whole. If I get ill the sooner I get better the sooner I can continue to contribute to society. If I don't have access to healthcare, or if healthcare is so expensive that I am dissuaded from seeking it, then I will stay sick longer and contribute to society less. If the illness is not completely purged from me and I go back to work early because financially I can not afford to not be at work then I get my coworkers sick and further decrease the contribution to society at large.
Over all there is good financial incentive to provide healthcare for everyone. Even businesses realize this, with even the small business I work(<100 employees) for handing out flu shots. One could expand this argument to all vaccines.
Here's a list of times that republicans have recently voted against such benefits.
I am just so fucking sick and tired of this "I got mine, but you can't get yours" attitude. It mostly seems to be from the conservative side too. Like the teabag couple someone mentioned earlier, the husband was a tax assessor, and the wife was in a one of those hoverounds that medicare paid for. So both of them are living off of the government tit. But of course they didn't want to pay for some poor bastard to get basic medical care.
And fuck the republicans on what they have done for Veterans, they only thing they are good at is sending the military to die. I am so fucking tired of them and these teabaggers waving the fucking flag, when I'll bet most of them never served day in the military, much more put their life on the line. And all of this is coming from someone who probably more conservative than most of the people on this board.
And finally, Steve don't you get tired of banging your face against Joe fist.
The article you originally linked was about the recent Republiccan pledge to America. Please show where in the pledge VA benefits are being targeted.
I would argue that the potential of being put into harms way for your country is enough to give the benefits that they receive. Is it a gamble, yes one could look at it that way, but to me it is more of a gamble that you won't see action. Even during peace time we still manage to put our military personal into harms way.
I sat home knowing that it would take an act of Congress in order for that to happen. A friend of mine sat home knowing that he can get a phone call, day or night, telling him to get on a plane.
We as just private citizens are privileged in that no one can tell us what to do, with the exception if we harm or damage society at large. Any one in the military does not have that luxury. They do not have any freedom, except, perhaps, to refuse to execute an illegal/immoral order.
Before you post links and quotes from opinion writers please take the time to investigate the context and accuracy of the piece you are quoting from. Look for the source material and take some time to digest it.
But still, it did happen.