[PatrickHenry]

Originally posted by PhanthomOps, Hey - what's up????? Aren't there any out there who want to get in on this??

Thanks for bringing it to the top again. This agenda is from the overlords, who want to use young men's bodies and lives for their own purposes, but don't wish to support them, financially. VA hospitals are underfunded and denial of military obligations to vets health care is an outrage. I also note that other VA benefits are under siege.

Am I mistaken or has combat pay been denied after the President's May 1 "victory in Iraq" speech? Conservative military people should be looking for other options, but the Democrats are no better.

From the Constitution Party Platform at:
http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_pla...orm.php#vetrans
Excerpt

Veterans The Constitution Party appreciates the contributions of our servicemen and veterans to the preservation of American freedom. We shall continue to recognize their contributions to the national welfare by providing equitable pay and benefits to our men and women on active duty, and generous health, education, and other benefits to veterans. We vigorously resist the attempt by any government agency to nullify or reduce earned benefits to veterans and their survivors, including but not limited to, compensation, pensions, education, and health care.

Since those in charge in Washington DC cite budget shortfalls, here is an option, from the same platform: Excerpt

Cost of Big Government The only legitimate purpose of civil government is to safeguard the God-given rights of its citizens; namely, life, liberty, and property. Only those duties, functions, and programs specifically assigned to the federal government by the Constitution should be funded. We call upon Congress and the President to stop all federal expenditures which are not specifically authorized by the U. S. Constitution, and to restore to the states those powers, programs, and sources of revenue that the federal government has usurped. We call upon the President to use his Constitutional veto power to stop irresponsible and unconstitutional appropriations, and use his Constitutional authority to refuse to spend any money appropriated by Congress for unconstitutional programs or in excess of Constitutionally imposed tax revenue. We call for the systematic reduction of the federal debt through, but not limited to, the elimination of further borrowing and the elimination of unconstitutional programs and agencies. We reject the misleading use of the terms surplus and balanced budget as long as public debt remains. We oppose dishonest accounting practices such as "off-budget items" used to hide unconstitutional spending practices. Until the Social Security and Medicare functions are privatized, we call for an end to the raiding of their funds. We call for the abolition of the Civil Service system, which is perceived to confer on government employees a "property right" regarding their jobs.

Furthermore as to the agenda that I allege above, regarding the "men in the shadows", Constitution Party says this:Excerpt

New World Order (One World Government) We say "No!" to the so-called New World Order; and "Yes!" to the national sovereignty of the United States of America. The Constitution Party opposes any alliance or participation in any treaty or agreement which compromises our independence as a nation, or which subverts our Constitution by improperly committing us to participation in foreign conflicts or intervention in foreign wars. We join with other American patriots to oppose the surrender of American liberty and autonomy to any form of world government or any organization which works toward that end. We call upon the president and Congress to terminate the membership of the United States in the United Nations and its subsidiary and affiliated organizations. All treaties must be subordinate to the Constitution because the Constitution is the only instrument which empowers and limits the federal government. No treaties (even if signed by the president or one of his agents on behalf of the United States) lacking the Constitutionally required two-thirds concurrence of the Senate may be implemented, in whole or part, by Congressional act, Executive Order, or bureaucratic regulation(s). The Framers assumed, as a matter of course, that treaties would be subordinate. In fact, the stated reason for the particular wording of the Constitution concerning treaties was to make sure pre-existing treaties, including post-Revolutionary peace treaties concluded after the Articles of Confederation, would remain valid. Thomas Jefferson, addressing the question directly, had this to say: "...surely the President and Senate cannot do by treaty what the whole government is interdicted from doing in any way."

How long will conservative military and vets continue to back the Republican Party, considering its obvious lack of regard for them?