Does anyone else find this ludicrous? This from the administration that says that they are all about the military, that they are all about supporting the troops. Obviously, Republican support only goes as far as troops that are pulling triggers. Once they get wounded, they are considered dead weight and Republicans have left them hanging. Michael Kussman ignored problems with VA issues for years and Bush wants him to be in place permanently as the VA undersecretary for health? Again I ask, does anyone else find this Ludicrous?!?!?!?!
2007-04-20 16:08:53 · 9 answers · asked by Fin 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Nothing to back this up???? Do you live under a rock? Try reading a little bit before you mouth off. I'll give you a hint where to start... Google Walter Reed Army Medical Center and Michael Kussman's name. Typical Republican... blame Clinton 7 years later... sheesh! I hear Republicans are blaming Clinton for Bush's cocaine abuse too.
2007-04-20 16:22:24 · update #1
Not the current administrations responsibility???? That sir, is a blatant lie.
2007-04-20 16:36:25 · update #2
That's hypocracy at its worst. With all the unnecessary waste hidden by the rhetoric of war, we find the money to pay off wealthy corporate stockholders, but we cannot find the money to compensate injured US military personnel and Iraqi civilians who are brutally murdered and maimed for the greed of a few.
2007-04-20 16:18:31 · answer #1 · answered by Skeptic 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
While I was not in support of invading Iraq from the beginning, I strongly believe in supporting our troops. I think we should bring things back up to where they were plus an additional kicker for inflation. It shouldn't cost us a penny. Lets take it out of the retirements of elected officials and from the estates of Presidents Bush. Our troops have risked their lives, health, and futures. Asking the good ole boys from the hill to pitch in only seems fair.
2007-04-20 23:21:59 · answer #2 · answered by Olde Spy 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's an outrage. More high tech medical advances and more survivors of attacks YET disability awards are down?
That's probably because Bush is staying the course and thinks this is 1969.
2007-04-20 23:22:14 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I find your remarks unbelievable because there is no reference to back up your statements. As far as the Veterans Administration goes - there are four new hospitals being built around Los Angeles as we speak. Republican support? It is the democrats that do not want funding for the military. Wasn't it Clinton that cut our military in half and then said that he had helped bolster the economy?
2007-04-20 23:13:42 · answer #4 · answered by Terrie 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
It is one big pie, ok? here is how it works.
Before the war in Iraq there were a lot fewer disabled verterans so every one got a nice size piece. ( mind you, it still wasn't what they deserved)
Now we have a war going on and a lot more disabled veterans. They can't take money from the war effert to pay everyone the same amount so they have to cut everyone a smaller slice of the pie.
Hey, sometimes things just work out that way.
2007-04-20 23:17:31 · answer #5 · answered by nana4dakids 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
The budget was set in 1997. It is about to expire and they will have to make a new one. It has nothing to do with the current administration.
2007-04-20 23:19:24 · answer #6 · answered by sarpedons 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
This is bullsh!t and sadly true!! There are service members hurt in action and when they get out they get a low disability rating..but cant work!!!
2007-04-20 23:12:04 · answer #7 · answered by jp8 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Got to pay for those tax cuts somehow bub!
Amirite?
2007-04-20 23:11:55 · answer #8 · answered by truthspeaker10 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
yeah this world is just ****** up
2007-04-20 23:14:49 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋