Disabled American Veterans

[PhanthomOps]

As a Disabled American Veteran (70% USAF), I am appauled at the manner in which our so-called "servants of the people", our elected officials deny us Health Care.

At present, the Veterans Administration receives money through "Discrenary Funding" This means that if there is a shortfall in government meeting other designated projects, the money needed can be taken from the VA. This is atrocious and not to say "Thank You" to the Veterans many of whome have life-long disabilities and can only go to the VA for medical care.

The VA needs to receive "Mandatory Funding". Only in this way can they;
1) refirbush the existing medical centers,
2) purchase critically needed and updated equipment and supplies,
3) ensure that there is enough medical staff available to meet the ever growing need
4) be able to schedule appointments in a timely manner instead of 3 to 4 months in the future.

President Lincoln stated in his Second Inaugural Address, March 4,1865, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan.

President (General) George Washington also stated "The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional as to how they perceive the veterans of earlier wars were treated and appreciated by their Nation."

General Colin Powell, while Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff remarked "We must not forget the past. We must not forget those who sacrificed, but we must also remember the reason for their sacrifice. They died so tyranny would die. They died to create a better world for those of us who followed them. Their sacrifice was not in vain".

General Douglas Mac Arthur said "And what sort of soldiers are those you are to lead? Are they reliable, are they brave, are they capable of victory? Their story is known to all of you; it is the story of the American man-at-arms. My estimate of him was formed on the battlefield many, many years ago, and has never changed. I regarded him then as I regard him now--as one of the world’s noblest figures, not only as one of the finest military characters but also as one of the most stainless. His name and fame are the birthright of every American citizen. In his youth and strength, his love and loyalty he gave--all that mortality can give. He needs no eulogy from me or from any other man. He has written his own history and written it in red on his enemy’s breast. But then I think of his patience under adversity, of his courage under fire, and of his modesty in victory, I am filled with an emotion of admiration I cannot put into words. He belongs to history as furnishing one of the greatest examples of successful patriotism; he belongs to posterity as the instructor of future generations in the principles of liberty and freedom; he belongs to the present, to us, by his virtues and by his achievements. In 20 campaigns, on a hundred battlefields, around a thousand campfires, I have witnessed that enduring fortitude, that patriotic self-abnegation, and that invincible determination which have carved his statue in the hearts of his people. From one end of the world to the other he has drained deep the chalice of courage".

In-as-much as 90%+ of our Armed Forces are volunteers (which makes for a better service as opposed to the draft), we need to say to those now serving and those who have served and are still alive "We appreciate your service and sacrifice", because without it we would not have our freedoms and way of life.

We need to our elected officials (who have medical coverage for themselves and family which is second to none)to stop filling their stupid "pork-barrels" and get down to the business of taking care America's Veterans.

[Paavo]

I have nothing to come with, more than;

I think you're absolutely right to be pissed off. I can't understand how people are so "for the troops" and "thankful" for what the veterans have done for them - but do not seem to even think about the veterans themselves. It seems as if people care for soldiers as long as they won't cost them anything. It's sick.
Not to try and make this another bush-bashing reply, but he's got some nerve cutting benefits from veterans while starting a new war creating a whole new "generation" of disabled veterans.

[PhanthomOps]

To Paavo:

Thank you for your response.

President Bush can only go as far as Congress will let him. The House of Representatives must have the Senate's support before anything can be done.

So in reality, it is up to us the voters to tell our Congressmen and Senators what it is that we want them to do on our behalf. Especially since many of them are facing reelection this year. At the last count there was between $11 Billion to $15 Billion dollars in the "pork-barrel" spending initatives. One was for a "Rain Forest" in Iowa. Go figure.

There are many blaring issues to contend with, especially for our Veterans, however, as important as these may be, unless we the people unite and lay down the law to our elected officials this crap will continue.

Regretfully, these "servants of the people" say and promise much during elections, however, once many of them get into office they forget about America and start pushing their personal agendas, seeking notority, become obstructionists, plan and conive, whine and complain about the most assinine subjects.

During World War II, this country came together and showed partiotism that had not been seen since the War of Independance, politicians put their partisan ideals aside, and we as a people sacrificed greatly in order to fight a two-front war.

We are Americans first, and our politicians need to understand that the survival of our Country transends any personal gain.

How can we expect our Service men and women to put their lives in harms way and on the line if we fail to care for them and their families when they come home disabled, many for life.

We must unmistakenly drive this point home to our politicians, or else vote them out of office.

[PhanthomOps]

Hey - what's up?????

Aren't there any out there who want to get in on this??

[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?

[commonsense]

Its a disgrace.
The one area that the federal govt legitimately should be increasing (VA benefits) is getting the shaft (I wanted to say AHEAD of every other area, but in reality it seems they're the ONLY ones getting short-changed!)

I hope all our long-illegitimate government's future young mercenaries ('cuz that's all I was, even under the great Ronald Reagan) somehow get Washington's message and prepare to take up arms AGAINST our ruling yahoo's, whether they be from Texas like Bush or Moscow like Kerry!

[PhanthomOps]

Hey, PatrickHenry:

Boy you really went all out on this one. Combat pay has been increased.

And commonsense:

A little flawed.

Let's take a look at a few quick facts:

1) President Bush can only accomplish what Congress allows him to do
2) the current members of Senate is the biggest blockade
2) the Democrats had full control of Congress for 33 years.
3) the "I didn't have sex with that woman" creap unconscienably allowed the entire military to deterioate during his 8 years - and that includes VA benefits.
4) And no administration will be able to do everything right.

The only way we as a people can really take the bull by the horns is to constantly besiege our elected officials with emails, mail, phone calls, and visits when possible and let them know in no uncertain terms that the Veterans of our Country deserve better.

[PatrickHenry]

Originally posted by PhanthomOps, Hey, PatrickHenry: Boy you really went all out on this one. Combat pay has been increased. President Bush can only accomplish what Congress allows him to do the current members of Senate is the biggest blockade the Democrats had full control of Congress for 33 years. the "I didn't have sex with that woman" creap unconscienably allowed the entire military to deterioate during his 8 years - and that includes VA benefits. And no administration will be able to do everything right. The only way we as a people can really take the bull by the horns is to constantly besiege our elected officials with emails, mail, phone calls, and visits when possible and let them know in no uncertain terms that the Veterans of our Country deserve better.

Sorry PO, my mistake. You are correct. I shoulda done my homework:
http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinf...lcombatzone.htm

A member assigned to or deployed to a combat zone receives "combat pay" (officially called "immiment danger pay") at the rate of $150.00 per month (temporarily increased by Congress to $225 per month until December 31, 2004).

I was remembering this story:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/135...3_troops15.html

Friday, August 15, 2003 Troops could lose raise in combat pay Sparking outrage, military says increase is too costly SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER NEWS SERVICES WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon wants to cut the pay of its 148,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, who already are contending with guerrilla-style attacks, homesickness and 120-degree-plus heat. Unless Congress and President Bush take quick action when Congress returns after Labor Day, the uniformed Americans in Iraq and the 9,000 troops in Afghanistan will lose a pay increase approved in April of $75 a month in "imminent-danger pay" and $150 a month in "family separation allowances." The Defense Department says its budget can't sustain the higher payments amid a host of other priorities. But the proposed cuts have stirred anger among military families and veterans' groups and even prompted an editorial attack in the Army Times, a weekly newspaper for military personnel and their families that is seldom so outspoken.

And I did not follow closely enough to know that the troops are getting combat pay. Sorry...

But your assertions need support:

President Bush can only accomplish what Congress allows him to do

Not so, the POTUS can do whtever he wants: http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?tit...y&printable=yes

the current members of Senate is the biggest blockade

Aren't the majorities from the President's own Party? Why would they be blocking VA benefits if Bush wants better for Vets?

the Democrats had full control of Congress for 33 years

"Full control" ended when? 1994? Are the "Democrats" anti-VA? I don't defend the Democratic Party, rather I accuse the New World Order(see my post above).

the "I didn't have sex with that woman" creap unconscienably allowed the entire military to deterioate during his 8 years - and that includes VA benefits.

Your source for this accusation of Clinton's neglect?

And no administration will be able to do everything right.

So, Clinton's admin is horrible, but Bush's(your party) gets an excuse because, "no administration will be able to do everything right?"

[PhanthomOps]

Okay PartickHenry:

Do you have a suntan or sunburn - Joke, Ha Ha =:) =:))

Keeping me honest - I like it

1) "President Bush can only accomplish what Congress allows him to do"
"the current members of Senate is the biggest blockade"

one example for now - who has held up the judicial nonimations demanding answers to questions not put to previous candidates?? the Senate which does not have an overwhelming Republican majority as the House of Representatives.

2) "the "I didn't have sex with that woman" creap unconscienably allowed the entire military to deterioate during his 8 years - and that includes VA benefits."

It was all over television on a regular basis, which is one of the reasons for the attempt to impeach him. It is also a matter of public record.

3) "And no administration will be able to do everything right."

No excuses, however, Regretfully, there is too much partisan politics (on both sides), too many politicians trying to make a name for themselves by attempting to disgrace their opponents, a lot of talk with no substance.

At least Bush, regardless of the results - public and/or political, spits it out and does everything he can to accomplish it, and not hide behind Monica's skirts.


Ta Ta for now Brother

[PhanthomOps]

Wow this is disapointing. 52 views and only 8 replies, 5 of which by me.

I thought with all you guys and girls out there that have so much to say on other subjects, there would have been a much higher response.

Oh well, I guess Disabled American Veterans is not interesting enough for more of you to express your views.

[PatrickHenry]

PhanthomOps, this is mostly a college age crowd and the concerns of the elderly are nearly off the radar screen. Maybe you can still remember being so young.
It's getting to be more and more of a problem for me...

[PhanthomOps]

Hey PatrickHenry:

This maybe mainly a college crowd, however, some how some way they had to take history classes.

Okay, perhaps they are too young to relate to WW II, Korea and Vietnam, however, Afganistan and Iraq are current, and quite a hefty number of our service men and women are in that general age group.

Additionally, I'm sure that there are those on volconov who have relatives in the service and on the fron lines. That in-and-of itself should invoke some response.

I would venture a guess that since they are not personally involved they just don't care.

[white rice]

PhantomOps,
I think everyone agrees it's mostly been underfunded. Not a lot to debate about with a general consensus....

In fairness to Clinton, he did have a Republican controlled Congress who blocked whatever he did. If their influence was stronger as you've stated, shouldn't have benefits risen?

Who are you voting this election, if I may ask?
For all the objectionable qualities of Kerry, he did serve, while Bush did some questionable National Guard obligations.

Kerry hasn't proposed a lot on his platform, but he has come out for Veteran Benefits.

http://www.aarp.org/bulletin/yourlife/Arti...27-vetvote.html

Something to chew on....

[PatrickHenry]

PhanthomOps, what do you think of this from the article white rice posted?
Excerpt from: http://www.aarp.org/bulletin/yourlif...7-vetvote.html

The 'disabled veterans tax' Many disabled veterans see their retirement benefits reduced, on a dollar-for-dollar basis, by the VA disability benefits they receive. The Bush administration considers the Retired Pay Restoration Act of 2003, which would abolish the "tax," to be a budget-buster. More than 84 percent of all Capitol Hill lawmakers are co-sponsors of the measure—including Kerry, who says he would "grant full concurrent receipt to disabled veterans."

Would this affect you?

[Mia]

PO - I couldn't agree with you more that this is outrageous. What I find troubling is your insistance on leaving Bush and the republican-controlled congress innocent just because of your political affiliation.

I'm sorry if you don't want to believe that your own have made it worse under THIS administration during war-time, no less, but they simply have.

If you're going to be mad about it, put the blame on ALL the people that deserve it, not just Democrats who you don't like anyway...

[GreatWyrm of Babylon]

What do you expect? People are too worried about what the high profile people ar doing and ignoring the lower profile people that are taking away human rights one at a time.

[PhanthomOps]

Mia,

Your last statement:
"PO - I couldn't agree with you more that this is outrageous. What I find troubling is your insistance on leaving Bush and the republican-controlled congress innocent just because of your political affiliation.

I'm sorry if you don't want to believe that your own have made it worse under THIS administration during war-time, no less, but they simply have.

If you're going to be mad about it, put the blame on ALL the people that deserve it, not just Democrats who you don't like anyway..."

Absolutely no one is free from blame in the game of politics. While my father was alive, we used to get into "HOT" political debates. At that time I was a registered Democrat, who after doing some research voted for the one I felt at the time was the best candidate. Even if that meant voting for a Republican or Independant. That got my father furious.

I switched 5 years ago when I moved. Why? I got sick and tired of the Democratic reterick and failure to act. As Al Sharpton (whom I personally detest) said during the Democratic debates (not exactly in these words, but the basis of his remark)- You bring us to the party, wine and dine us, and don't bother to take us home with you" Although his remarks pertained to the "minorities", they speak of all politicians in general.

Bush by no means is perfect, or even close - however, he attempts to do what he said he will do irrespective of the political fallout. Additionally, he gets out in public to stress his point.

To: white rice:

1) Clinton failed to push the subject by not going to the public with his allegded plan. If he had, more likely than not, the Republicans and Independants would have joined forces in support. However, I guess he was too busy with Whitewated, and of course that woman he never had sex with.

2) Yes Kerry was in Vietnam, and I personally feel he deserves whatever decorations the authority at that time decided he was worthy of. That is not the case - It is what he did when he came home that counts. A couple of my friends (since deceased) who were in the Hanoi Hilton at the time told me that the guards would taunt them day and night with Kerry's statements, and that this broke the spirit of some of the prisoners. They stated "I'll not seek Kerry out, however, if I should ever run into him on the street, I'll break every bone in his body for what he did".

Also, take a look at Kerry's voting record - shades of Kennedy, and even more so in some instances. One day he'll run into the fence he likes to jump back and forth over in an attempt to say what the crowd at that time wants to hear. enough said.

[damnrad]

Originally posted by PhanthomOps, As a Disabled American Veteran (70% USAF), I am appauled at the manner in which our so-called "servants of the people", our elected officials deny us Health Care. At present, the Veterans Administration receives money through "Discrenary Funding" This means that if there is a shortfall in government meeting other designated projects, the money needed can be taken from the VA. This is atrocious and not to say "Thank You" to the Veterans many of whome have life-long disabilities and can only go to the VA for medical care. The VA needs to receive "Mandatory Funding". Only in this way can they; 1) refirbush the existing medical centers, 2) purchase critically needed and updated equipment and supplies, 3) ensure that there is enough medical staff available to meet the ever growing need 4) be able to schedule appointments in a timely manner instead of 3 to 4 months in the future. President Lincoln stated in his Second Inaugural Address, March 4,1865, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan. President (General) George Washington also stated "The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional as to how they perceive the veterans of earlier wars were treated and appreciated by their Nation." General Colin Powell, while Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff remarked "We must not forget the past. We must not forget those who sacrificed, but we must also remember the reason for their sacrifice. They died so tyranny would die. They died to create a better world for those of us who followed them. Their sacrifice was not in vain". General Douglas Mac Arthur said "And what sort of soldiers are those you are to lead? Are they reliable, are they brave, are they capable of victory? Their story is known to all of you; it is the story of the American man-at-arms. My estimate of him was formed on the battlefield many, many years ago, and has never changed. I regarded him then as I regard him now--as one of the world’s noblest figures, not only as one of the finest military characters but also as one of the most stainless. His name and fame are the birthright of every American citizen. In his youth and strength, his love and loyalty he gave--all that mortality can give. He needs no eulogy from me or from any other man. He has written his own history and written it in red on his enemy’s breast. But then I think of his patience under adversity, of his courage under fire, and of his modesty in victory, I am filled with an emotion of admiration I cannot put into words. He belongs to history as furnishing one of the greatest examples of successful patriotism; he belongs to posterity as the instructor of future generations in the principles of liberty and freedom; he belongs to the present, to us, by his virtues and by his achievements. In 20 campaigns, on a hundred battlefields, around a thousand campfires, I have witnessed that enduring fortitude, that patriotic self-abnegation, and that invincible determination which have carved his statue in the hearts of his people. From one end of the world to the other he has drained deep the chalice of courage". In-as-much as 90%+ of our Armed Forces are volunteers (which makes for a better service as opposed to the draft), we need to say to those now serving and those who have served and are still alive "We appreciate your service and sacrifice", because without it we would not have our freedoms and way of life. We need to our elected officials (who have medical coverage for themselves and family which is second to none)to stop filling their stupid "pork-barrels" and get down to the business of taking care America's Veterans.

It is indecent how veterans are treated -- and for that matter, how the families of serving soldiers are treated. The chickenhawks in this Administration care nothing for veterans, for serving soldiers, nor, as we have seen recently, for those who have given their lives in that service. Whatever one thinks about Iraq, or about war in general, it is unconscionable to refuse to keep our word to those who have served in the military that we would provide for basic healthcare needs.

[Mia]

If a person were hurt on the job in the private sector, he'd be taken care of nicely!

Too bad you guys can't sue the government and get your 50 mil...

[PhanthomOps]

To: Damnrad:

Thank you for your kind and considerate reply. Regretfully, both the Democrats and Republicans must share the blame for this detestable situation.

Hi Mia,

Thanks, I like your idea - Know of a lawyer?