Bush administration vs veterans

Bush Administration cuts $1.5 billion from military family housing. The Bush Administration cut $1.5 billion for military family housing, despite Department of Defense statistics showing that in 83,000 barracks and 128,860 family housing units across the country are below standard. ("Nothing But Lip Service," Army Times, June 30, 2003; "House Appropriations Committee Approves $59.2 Million for Ft. Hood," U.S. Rep. Chet Edwards Press Release, June 17, 2003)

Bush Administration underfunded veterans' health care by $2 billion. The Bush Administration's 2004 budget underfunded veterans' health care by nearly $2 billion. ("Vets Health Low on Bush's Priority List," The Hill, September 17, 2003; "Support for Troops Questioned," Washington Post, June 17, 2003; U.S. Department of Veterans' Affairs, September 2002)

Bush Administration proposal would end health care benefits for 173,000 veterans. More than 173,000 veterans across the country would be cut off from health care because of Bush Administration proposed budget cuts and its plan requiring enrollment fees and higher out-of-pocket costs. ("Support for Troops Questioned," Washington Post, June 17, 2003)

Bush Administration budget cuts force more than 200,000 veterans to wait for health care. Over 200,000 United States veterans have to wait more than six months for a medical visit because of health care shortages. ("VA Health Care Funding Alert," Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States Press Release, January 31, 2003)

Bush Administration opposed plan to give National Guard and Reserve Members access to health insurance. Despite the war efforts of America's National Guard and Reserve Members, the Bush Administration announced in October 2003 its formal opposition to give the 1.2 million Guard and Reserve members the right to buy health care coverage through the Pentagon's health plan. One out of every five Guard members lacks health insurance. ("Bush Opposes Health Plan for National Guard," Gannett News Service, October 23, 2003)

Bush Administration cuts $172 million allotted for educating the children of military personnel. The Bush Administration's 2004 budget cut $172 million of impact aid funding. Impact aid funding assists school districts by making up for lost local tax revenue from tax-exempt property, such as military bases. These education cuts will especially affect school-age children of troops serving in Iraq who reside on military bases. ("Support for Troops Questioned," Washington Post, June 17, 2003)

The Bulk of Federal Welfare Spending Is Not Going to the People Who Need It Most

It seems that the government really can't do anything right. Why is it that those who make more money get more assistance? Hmmmm.

Link to article at Mother Jones

Republicans to raise funds using Benghazi

The republican candidates running for office in 2014 have started to use the latest Benghazi investigation in the House of Representatives to raise funds for their campaigns. This is wrong on so many levels.

You should not be profiting off of dead Americans. The republican party is going to be seen for the vile people they are by using this investigation to make money to get elected.

We have already had several investigations into what happened in Benghazi. The outcome is still the same.

The republican politicians voted against funding for more security at the American embassies. There wasn't good security.
Terrorists attacked the embassy in Benghazi and killed several people. Others were rescued by a CIA team sent in to help.
The military did not have assets that could have done anything to help them.
There was never a stand down order given by the White House or State Department. If anything, they discussed what could be done and the military said they didn't have resources available but the CIA did. So something was done to help those people in Benghazi.
Afterwards there was a lot of information coming in.
The president plainly stated the very next day it was an act of terrorism and an investigation was ongoing.
People were giving the intel they had available at the time to the public, who wanted to know what was going on.
The military and other intelligence agencies are still searching for the people responsible fot the attack.

The republican party and Fox news has made a huge issue out of a tragedy that they themselves contributed to by not funding extra security that the democrats had requested.

So they are trying to blame Obama and Hillary Clinton for some kind of political wrongdoing, but there's no evidence of political wrongdoing at all.

Every investigation they have launched into that has proven the same things. They're wasting our time and taxpayers money going into this yet again.

And then they have the audacity to also try to fundraise on the issue. They're not going to find anything and they know it. That's why they're trying to capitalize on the issue now -- before the entire country realizes how ridiculous their attempts to hurt Obama actually are and turns on them.

Because that's eventually what's going to happen. They have lost on Obamacare. They are going to lose on climate change. They'll eventually lose on gay marriage and marijuana legalization. They're going to lose of Benghazi too.

Their positions on so many things continue to be on the wrong side of history, and people should not forget how this party does. Capitalizing on something like this is deplorable.

Read the article on Politico

A different view on Ukraine

Taking a unique view of the foreign policy of the United States, and the situation in Ukraine. Maybe we are doing things that don't make sense and seem a tad hypocritical. Why do we continue to involve ourselves? Maybe we should stay out of things a little bit more or explain to people why we are doing some of the things we do. Sometimes it's not easy to always trust your government.

This is a very interesting article and argument on how American foreign policy is different now than it used to be.

Link on Salon.com