Senator Jim Webb introduces legislation to bring back GI Bill

[Monkeyman]

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticleID=18689

Washington D.C. --- Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) launched his career in the United States Senate Thursday by introducing a sweeping expansion of the education and training benefits currently to the nation's 2.4 million active duty and reserve members of the armed forces.

The "Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2007" (S.22) is designed to provide veterans with a level of educational benefits identical to those provided to service members at the end of World War 2.

The New benefits package in Webb's legislation (S.22) WOULD INCLUDE COVERAGE OF TUITION,ROOM AND BOARD,and a Monthly stipend of $1,000. Existing law- known as the Montgomery GI Bill- provides financial support of up to $800 per month for veterans' educational expenses, but does not necessarily cover the full cost of higher education or career training. In addition, existing law requires participating service members to pay $1,200 in their first year of service in order to qualify for the benefits.

Way to go Senator first promise right out of the box.

[xultar]

1. WOO HOO! GREAT BILL!

[ProSense]

2. Excellent first bill.

Welcome back Monkeyman.

[Monkeyman]

3. Thanks

[IWantAChange]

4. Wake up America! See what a Dem brings to the table? Allen would

still have his head up Dubyha's butt looking for his car keys if he'd gotten re-elected.

[salin]

6. defying once again the idea 'there is no difference between the parties'.

Senator Webb, :thumbsup:

[WinkyDink]

21. Exactly.

[genie_weenie]

32. One man does not a party make.

Just saying.

[BOSSHOG]

5. This is nothing more then welfare

The next thing you know, soldiers who lost their legs in Iraq will be wanting wheelchairs. Thank God for the good christian fiscally responsible republicans in Washington who will fight this waste. First many vets fake their PTSD and then this socialist senator wants to help them out with a college education. Just outrageous. Let them pay their own tuition.

God Bless You Monkeyman.

[salin]

29. Its funny, I can't even begin to fathom how Rushetal will speak out

against this - just let them try... esp if theirs is a show carried on the military broadcasting system.

[Vidar]

99. Great first Bill. Kudos to Webb. Hope he tackles the VA.

[Ezlivin]

115. You are right - my wheelchair even has a VA ID sticker on it

So I am reminded that it is just a "loaner."

Or so they can identify me if they see me sitting on the side of the road begging. And we all know the best place to meet other veterans is on the streets. :mad:

[dogday]

7. My Son would benefit from this

Good to see you Monkeyman, thanks for this! :hi:

[Longhorn]

102. Mine, too, if it gets passed in time.

He gets out in October but is hoping to get an "early out" so that he can start school in the fall. He'll get out with no money, no car, no job, and no place to live except home, of course. He already feels like he's behind and catching up to all of his friends who have graduated from college and started their careers or grad school.

[flamin lib]

8. 'Bout fracking time! Before the Rummsfeld "lean & mean"

every function was filled by a soldier--cooks, sanitation, logistics and everything. A grunt could learn a life skill and find work after his stint. Now Halliburton and KBR does all that.

Not much call for "tearing things up and killing people"* in the civilian world.

*Col. Hack Hackworth's comment on a soldier's job description.

[frogcycle]

57. well lemme tell ya

the civilian world needs a whole lot more of the discipline, responsibility, and respect for authority that those kids learn while "tearing things up and killing people"

I'll take a vet any day. specific job skills can be taught easily enough; maturity, responsibility, accountability, leadership ability - those take a lot more training than private industry has time or inclination to do. American industry is staggering under the weight of a bunch of sesame-street whiny babies who need to be begged and wheedled to do their jobs, and then still don't do them

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

117. In my experience, a non-military life can yield discipline, responsibility, respect for authority

just fine, thank you.

And sometimes the third of those items comes out with a better fine-tuning.

[TexasLinda]

84. I miss Hack

He was a heck of a guy and he left us too soon.

[robbibaba]

9. Fantastic

The GI Bill is often cited as one of the most successful investments ever. Just the increased income tax revenues from all those new college grads way more than paid for the program costs. We could use some more educated folks.

[blondeatlast]

43. Exactly--see post #42. nt

[westerebus]

10. Makes me want to reenlist.

NOT! This is why so many of us supported him in Virginia.

[PADemD]

11. Link didn't work.

[Monkeyman]

13. Try This One

http://www.vawatchdog.org

[ProSense]

17. Here is the link:

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=18689

[Monkeyman]

26. Thanks

[Adelante]

12. Good job, Senator

[Armstead]

14. I'm confused by your headline

Just curious what you meant by "bring back" the GI Bill. Is this a return to what the GI Bill originally was or is it an expansion of the original bill?

Aside from that, great first move by Webb. The GI Bill helped to open the door to a major expansion of the middle class in the 1950's.

[Monkeyman]

22. GI bill needed to be updated badly

Webb promised to update it and he is

[tabasco]

15. Thank you Senator Webb!

Time to make it right for the people we have sacrificed in the illegal Iraq war.

[The Witch]

16. That's my Senator!!

:loveya:

[LostinVA]

19. And mine!

[lonestarnot]

18. Oh yeah baby! That's what I'm talk'n bout! These are the great things I was expecting!

How you doing Monkeyman? :hug:

[Monkeyman]

23. Hanging in there needed to post

[lonestarnot]

25. I have used posting as an excellent release in the past myself.

We are here for you. We love you Monkeyman! :loveya:

[Howardx]

34. My dad went to college and bought a home

with the original gi bill. great to see this, im going to be following its progress.

[blondeatlast]

44. And returned the tax revenue several fold, as did my father and uncles.

The GI Bill is a wildly successful public investment, just as Head Start has been until devastated by W.

[Bill McBlueState]

77. what about your mother and aunts?

Too bad people had to participate in the war to benefit. Imagine how large the middle class would be if everyone could go to college at free or low cost. The GI bill disproportionately helped men, given the makeup of the military at the time. Nobody seems to want to talk about that weakness.

[w4rma]

79. Nothing is capable of doing everything perfectly. (nt)

[frogcycle]

80. nooooo

the bill did not "disproportionately help men"

it helped those who served in the military, without discriminating as to sex, race, or religion

(insert ad hominem attack here)

[TexasLinda]

83. Perhaps a little disproportionate,

but it was great for women and minorities. I was the first kid in my family to graduate from high school; I doubt I'd have graduated from college if it wasn't for the GI Bill. And yes, I've paid back every penny and then some in taxes and was happy to do so (well, maybe not happy, but at least I wasn't whining about my tax bill). Even though I loved just about every day of the 20+ years I served, I know the military isn't for everybody and it would be nice if we had a civilian service equivalent to the GI Bill. It's money well invested in the future of this country.

[blondeatlast]

94. I went to college thanks to Pell Grants and federally funded student loans--all of which

are available to most everyone who makes the effort to apply. Now, I'm helping fund those programs.

My aunt also served, and she went to college on the GI Bill as well. Mind that my father's family was literally dirt poor--all raised as tenant farmers.

[juajen]

138. Not so

I have five brothers, who all used GI Bill for education and buying homes. Everyone of them had wives and daughters who benefited from their loved ones stint in the service.

[Straight Shooter]

20. Hahahahahahaha! Take *that*, you chickenhawks. Jim Webb is coming for ya!

Who supports the troops? Come on, tell the truth, you Republican weasels, you know it's the Dems.

Go ahead, Repubs, show your true colors and try to kill this bill. Bwahahahahaha! I'm loving it! :7

[flashlighter]

24. the original GI bill changed higher education

and by extension, the fabric of this country. It literally created the middle class. Regardless of how expensive this will be, it's worth it!

[IndyOp]

30. Welcome to DU, Flashlighter!

I agree with you completely! The GI Bill changed my life. My father went to college on the GI Bill after he returned from serving in the South Pacific in WWII. At college he met my mother. My middle class childhood was made possible by the GI Bill.

:hi:

[Retrograde]

31. One of the most significant events of the 20th century

Before the GI Bill, few people attended college, and most of those came from wealthier families. The GI Bill effectively provided higher education for the masses - and by extension for their children. None of my grandparents finished high school, but because of the GI Bill all their sons were college graduates in science and engineering. How many of the people who made up NASA in its heyday, or came up with innovative technologies at IBM and other companies in the 50s and 60s were beneficiaries of the GI Bill?

[Patiod]

110. My parents moved into the Middle Class b/c of the GI Bill

Son of a cop and daughter of a housemaid, my dad worked at a shipyard as a kid, and after a stint in the Navy and at an expensive college that would have been unthinkable 5 years before, they ended up living in a nice suburbs and sending their kids to college. Most of their friends and neighbors had similar stories: kids from orphanages and poor city rowhouses, people from the "working class" who became accountants, CEOs, and technology innovators at the companies that created the first computers.

[gkhouston]

126. a lot of 'em, I'd guess.

My dad grew up in Appalachia and although he went to high school, college wasn't even something he considered until the GI Bill came along. He was ten years out of high school by that time and college was a struggle but he stuck with it and became a sucessful engineer -- as did other mountain boys he'd grown up with who wouldn't have had a hope in hell of ever affording college before the GI Bill.

But it affected more than the people who couldn't afford a bachelor's degree. One of my profs in college was a guy named William Gordon. Before WWII, he taught junior high school. The GI Bill made it possible for him to go to grad school and get a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering. He's the driving force behind that big radio telescope at Arecibo in Puerto Rico.

[JohnnyLib2]

27. Great to see Monkeyman back--with good news.

Will need some guidance as to how to promote & support Webb, when the time comes.

[Benhurst]

28. That damn pinko! This will only reverse the trend of

getting rid of the middle class and do untold damage to the gated community movement.

[watercolors]

33. Its an idea whose time has come again!

Yes, yes! The GI BILL helped get my husband thru college, as well as many hundreds in his class. Bring it back!

[Monkeyman]

35. It sure paid for mine when I came home from Nam

[Hippo_Tron]

36. Yup, Democrats don't support our troops

[mzmolly]

37. Very important legislation! Here's a new working link.

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=18689

Webb stressed that the GI Bill of the World War II era is universally credited with sparking economic growth and expansion for a whole generation of Americans, and he predicted that his proposal holds similar promise for today’s modern economy.

“Our nation has never erred when it made sustained new investments in higher education and job training,” he said. “The bill I have introduced today is not only the right thing to do for our men and women in uniform, but it is also strong tonic for an economy plagued by growing disparities in wealth, stagnant wages, and the outsourcing of American jobs.”

[lies and propaganda]

38. why post 911 though?

was that shit neccessary?

[Monkeyman]

46. Right after then replugs changed why things where paid for

[hashibabba]

39. Webb is my senator, too. I'm so excited to have one Democratic

congressperson to write to now. It gets old trying to talk to those republics.

[ForrestGump]

40. Who's GI Bill?

Is he like GI Joe?


:shrug:









This is good news. Support the troops, for real...

[Monkeyman]

41. Funny thats how returning troops get Education and Benefits

GI Jane now hets them too

[blondeatlast]

42. My father's tenant farm family (7 males) all graduated college thanks to the GI Bill.

They returned the tax revenue in countless ways; most of them in public service.

I'm liking what I see from this bunch!

[ellisonz]

48. You have an incredible family...

:patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot:

[DeepModem Mom]

45. K&R!

[ellisonz]

47. K & R.

C'mon DU show the GOP who the real patriots are!

:patriot: to Jim Webb and the party.

[Irreverend IX]

49. I don't see how this bill could lose.

At last the Dems are returning to their populist roots. The Republicans will have a hard time explaining why this is a bad idea.

[Herman74]

50. Why those in the military deserve special benefits not...

...granted to others is something I cannot countenance. Mr. Webb's proposal if implemented would have the effect of encouraging individuals to sign up for the military, as if that endeavor is more noble than any other. The long-term effects of such thinking would further help bring about a more military-oriented society.

(Interestingly, one of the potential beneficiaries of Mr. Webb's bill would be his own son).

If you want to help people go to college in a fair manner, you help ALL people interested, not just those who, like you, Mr. Webb, chose to enter the military.

[Alamom]

51. Serving one's country is as NOBLE as it gets, sir. The problem is

the idiots in charge who send our military to invade or war for profit or wars of choice based on lies

[Herman74]

54. Of course, one need not be in the military to serve one's country

Martin Luther King was never in the military, yet he served his country, right? Mohandas Gandhi abhored the use of any armed militia, yet he served his country, didn't he? Susan B. Anthony served her country didn't she, but not as a soldier, right?

And would you say that the farmer who provides food for your table isn't serving his country? How about the doctor that keeps you healthy or the construction worker that builds your home?

And why the focus only on serving "one's country" rather than all of humanity? Are the lives of Americans more precious to you than the lives of other people? If so, could explain why?

One thing I would say is that those American soldiers in Iraq aren't doing anything for the U.S.; they're fighting Bush's war, not mine. You might admire these people, I in turn admire those who were in the military who fled the country or went underground rather than fight in Bush's war, a war in violation of international law.

[Monkeyman]

59. So you do not admire those of us who served

Then came home we are and where VVAW. Your Right this is Bush's war. But look at the kids who are now saying Sir No Sir. No its not your war but it is not theirs. Here I think if you went here you will see why the Military is turning against Bush

http://vawatchdog.org

[Herman74]

67. Well, let me ask you this...

How many adults AREN'T "serving" someone or another in some way or another? And before I can decide whether or not your "service" is/was admirable, I would need to know what exactly you did. In your own mind, was what you did more admirable than, say, joining the Peace Corps and teaching underprivileged children in subSaharan Africa?

[drfresh]

81. I think that Peace Corps volunteers

should get the same benefits as veterans would in this bill. I'd definitely join the Army or Navy if I wasn't against killing people. It'd be alright if it was just a giant game of laser tag.

[Lasher]

86. Sure, a lot of people don't want to do what has to be done when you are a soldier

That's one reason why the benefits of the GI bill are justified. Enlisted men and women sure don't get paid enough money to make it worth while. Another reason this is a proper reward for military service is due to the degree of risk of coming home with arms and legs blown off, or worse. And then there's that possibility that you might have to live the rest of your life with the horror of having had to take someone else's life.

I wish all Americans had healthcare and educational support up to 4 years of college. But we don't have these things and we're not going to anytime soon. I take your slippery slope as an argument that military vets should not get these benefits unless you get the same thing if you decide to serve in the Peace Corps. The Peace Corps provides an honorable service to our country. But it is not military service. Not the same thing at all.

[VelmaD]

103. you do understand...

that your opinion smacks very much of the same "I got mine so screw you" mentality we decry in the republicans. We can't all have good health care and education so YOU should get it first? What makes you think we can't afford to provide health care and a good education to all? We certainly could if we didn't give so much money away to the military-industrial complex.

It's not that I don't respect the service of many vets...hell my brother, most of my cousins, and many of my close friends served. But that doesn't somehow make them better than other people.

[Lasher]

113. I don't see it that way

I am encouraged by an opportunity to restore veterans' educational benefits to the level originally provided by the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944. That was the last piece of Roosevelt's New Deal legislation. But you seem to be opposed to Webb's proposed legislation. And you compare me to Republicans? Protection of our New Deal social programs has been one of the most basic goals of the Democratic party for over 50 years.

You attempt to dismiss my argument by labeling me as one who has a mentality of "I got mine so screw you". Although I am a veteran, neither I nor any member of my family would benefit if this legislation were passed into law. And since they are also being discussed, I don't really need VA medical benefits. You don't want these veterans to have these benefits unless everyone, including you, gets them also. And you accuse me of selfishness?

Since you asked, there is nothing that makes me think we can't afford to provide health care and a good education for all. And I am very much in favor of doing exactly that. But that's not going to happen any time soon. I see this legislation partly as a good step in promoting that goal.

Being a veteran does not necessarily make you a better person. But I do have a degree of respect for those who have served in the military and appreciate their sacrifices. And I do not resent them for the benefits that they have earned. You can have those same benefits if you join the military and serve honorably for 2 years or more.

[VelmaD]

118. you have a very strange view of what it means...

to be selfish. You want benefits to go first to a group of people that either includes you or people like you and you aren't selfish. I want benefits for everyone and I am selfish. Does not compute. *confused look*

Let me make my position perfectly clear, I in no way opose veteran's getting benefits. What I have a problem with is the attitude I seem to get from a lot of people that veteran's should get their benefits first. That they are somehow more deserving than other Americans. It smacks of a level of militarism and jingoism I find disturbing in fellow liberals. Plus as liberals I was under the impression we were supposed to care about everyone equally.

[Lasher]

119. "...people like you..."

Will you please define what you mean by "...people like you..."? I am a veteran, but there is no exclusive category of person that has achieved this status.

You really don't understand what's going on with Webb's proposed legislation, and don't seem receptive to input. I'm sure that *confused look* is well practiced. I'm not surprised to see that you encounter a lot of people who believe "...that veteran's (sic) should get their benefits first." This is because many people, myself included, believe veterans have earned these educational benefits. If you want the same benefits, go earn them by serving in the military. But you don't want to do that, do you?

[VelmaD]

121. you are apparently beyond input as well

You apparently think one has to earn health and educational benefits. I think they're something every citizen should get regardless of whether or not they're willing to sign up to possibly go shoot at someone.

"People like you" was meant as veterans in this case because you are a veteran and appear to think this makes you and other veteran's like you more deserving than others. What other groups do you belong to that you think make you better than other people, more deserving?

You're goddamn right I don't want to serve in the military. Because I am a pacifist in almost all cases. I don't believe in war or violence as a means of solving political problems. I think the US military-industrial complex has grown outside of all proportion. And this attitude that glorifies the miliatry is something I never thought I'd see in liberals. Frankly, I find it disturbing.

And get this into your head. I am not belittling your personal service or saying you deserve no benefits from your service. Just that it doesn't automatically make you more worthy than other people. My own brother, several of my cousins, and many of my closest friends served. And most of them do not reflect on it as an overwhelmingly positive experience. Most joined because they didn't have the grades or money for college or a trade school. If you really care about the military...then that should worry you. As a liberal that should worry you even more that our economy has been at the point for a couple of decades now where a significant number of people feel like the military is their only hope for rising out of poverty.

[Lasher]

128. Military service was not an overwhelmingly positive experience for me.

As a matter of fact it has highly negative. I hated every hour I served. I did not join because I didn't have the grades or money for college or trade school. I didn't join at all. I was drafted in 1969. I had just gotten married. My son was a month old before I saw him and I rarely saw him after that until he was 2 years old. I barely saw my partner during our first 2 years of marriage. That would have been the best 2 years of my life. The most I ever got paid was less than $100 a month. My wife and son had to live in poverty with her parents on their $100 a month.

But I was lucky. I was not a hero. By chance I didn't get orders to go to Vietnam. I was instead sent to South Korea. I didn't get wounded or experience the horrors of combat like Monkeyman did. I still have all my limbs attached, unlike thousands of others from those and these days. I don't wake up screaming in the night like some combat veterans do for the rest of their lives.

But you go ahead wishing for a killer amendment attached to Webb's legislation, one that will give GI Bill educational benefits to everyone who served in the Peace Corps or worked at Wal-mart. That will ensure that the bill is not passed, as you seem to want. If you are not belittling my personal service and the service of others who gave so much more than I, then I have a hard time imagining what it would look like if you were.

I would be so happy if I could exchange my VA medical and educational benefits to get those 2 years of my life back but that will never happen. You can have my crappy little 4 military medals and parade them around if you can help me find a way to recover from having started my civilian career 2 years late. But you can't. I only hope that when you are with your relatives who are veterans, that you refrain from sharing these views of yours with them.

If you really want to stand in opposition of the war in Iraq and our bloated military budget, attacking the victims is not a credible way to do it.

[VelmaD]

129. One would think....

given your story, that you wouldn't be making the comments you have made upthread about how people should join up and serve if they want benefits.

What was done to you was wrong. No one should be drafted...ever. No one should be forced to miss seeing their children and family. No job...military or otherwise...should leave a person's family living in poverty.

I wish you could grasp that this is not a zero-sum game. It is not a matter of giving benefits to service members OR to other people, but not both. It's a matter of our government using our tax dollars to help everyone. If you see wanting to see everyone taken care of as somehow harming you and/or other veterans...then we really don't have much else to talk about.

[Lasher]

141. You might be surprised if you realized how much we are in agreement.

But I think we've chewed this mouthful just about enough.

[Monkeyman]

101. I had to wait to respond

Yes I was proud to be a Staff Sgt in the Military. Was I proud of Vietnam why do you think I was VVAW. I served with good men. These Kids in Iraq are good people a few no just like Vietnam. When I was wounded a person who thinks a lot like you. Called my family and said "I am happy your son was wounded" We who serve do protect you and your rights. Yes Bush is taken those same rights I bled for away from you. That not the soldiers thats the government. These men and women have earned the right to be taken care of in their own blood.

[TexasLinda]

90. Susan B. Anthony would have made a great soldier!

Yes, there are other ways to serve one's country, but they're usually not as dangerous as military service -- and if they do get dangerous you're usually allowed to quit if you want to. I would say most people who served in the military take their education and training and what they learned about teamwork back to their civilian communities, where they work their farms, keep their neighbors healthy, and build homes. And yes, the lives of Americans are more precious to me than the lives of other people. My family and friends are most precious to me, then my fellow countrymen, then the rest of the world. I don't believe it's human nature to care for everybody equally. As for our troops in Iraq, they are serving their country. Their country's citizens have let them down by allowing somebody as corrupt as Bush be Commander in Chief.

[Herman74]

108. Doubtful that she would have ever served as a soldier...

...had Susan B. Anthony (raised as a Quaker, no less!!) had such an option. What say you, Linda?

Before answering, you might want to consider this:

"I really believe I shall explode if some of you young women don't wake up this nation upon the new islands it has clutched from other folks into the living present & work to save us from any more barbaric male governments." (Letter of Susan B. Anthony to Clara Bewick Colby, Dec. 17, 1898). Susan B. doesn't quite seem like the kind who would thoughtlessly traipse off as a soldier into an imperialistic war, does she now, Linda?

So, Linda, you "would say most people who served in the military take their education and training and what they learned about teamwork back to their civilian communities, where they work their farms, keep their neighbors healthy, and build homes." Do you have any reason to believe that former soldiers are more inclined than others to employ their education and training in the manner you describe?

You say that "the lives of Americans are more precious to me than the lives of other people." Undoubtedly, the right-wing American evangelicals, the so-called "followers of Christ" would proudly declare the same thing. Strange, though, I can't picture Jesus Christ himself declaring that the lives of Americans are more precious than the lives of others, but maybe you can, Linda. (Hey, I'm not religious!). Linda, you don't even know me and yet already I'm more precious to you (because I was born in Los Angeles) than someone born in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Heck even the lives of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are more precious to you than the life of the poor Bangladeshi. If not, then you are willing to concede that some Americans are more precious to you than Bangladeshis, and some Bangladeshis are more precious to you than some Americans.

Of course, if such a concession were to be made, maybe, just maybe, you could better relate to this quote, made by a fellow arguably more responsible than anyone else for the birth of your beloved United States:

“The world is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good is my religion.” - Thomas Paine

[TexasLinda]

112. Are you an idiot or a freeper?

Not that it matters, as I really don't have time to play with you.

[Herman74]

131. The name-calling suggests that right now isn't the time for you...

...to play anyway, as you need to ask your daddy and mommy for a lesson on how to speak to strangers, so that you can grow up to become a socially well-adjusted adult.

[Monkeyman]

52. I served my Country

Webb did too in Vietnam. He is looking out for all the men and women who are serving now. Promises where made the Republicans have broken everyone. By the way in Vietnam there was a draft. In Iraq most of this kids joined right after 9/11 to fight the people who killed 3000 Americans. Some have a back ground the only way to a education is the military.

[sanskritwarrior]

56. Yeah......

more people that are smart to the fact that the American military is one way to move up the socio economic ladder........just like college or trade school........Oh the horror....... :D

[frogcycle]

58. bullshit

it is fitting and proper to reward a contribution. they sure as hell aren't getting rich in the service. they ARE gaining invaluable experience and maturity that, with the addition of additional education, can be beneficial to the country.

or you could let them be homeless and let the whiney baby drunken fratboys run the country.

[Herman74]

69. Don't we all make "contributions" to society, so why just...

...reward those in the military? What exactly are the "contributions" that those in Iraq fighting on behalf of Bush made?

And if those in the military are already gaining this "invaluable experience" that you allude to, wouldn't others hitherto lacking such enriched training benefit from a college education even more?

[frogcycle]

70. ok, i generally avoid ad hominem attacks but

YOU D**B OBN*XI*US F**K!

Our military people in Iraq are NOT "fighting on behalf of bush"

they in large part signed up for love of country, many in response to an unprovoked attack that killed some 3000 civilians. Got that?

They get paid shit, their dependents struggle to pay the bills while they are deployed, many, many of them never dreamed they'ed be deployed as policemen or whatever the fuck it is they are now doing. Many, many of them do not approve of it. But they take orders, watch each others backs, take their lives in their hands every day to go out and try to fulfill a hopeless mission. They catch people planting bombs, arrest them, disarm the bombs, then go out the next day and do it all again. Every car they drive by going and coming is a threat. Every civilian they see along the way is a threat.

Then one day its their turn, and a bomb blows their vehicle to bits along with everyone in it. And the DoD releases a press release saying 3 or 4 more were killed, and I post it on my website, and wait for the names to be released, and post them, and wait for the pictures to be posted, and link to those. And I check three different sources, so if one doesn't have a photo but another does, I make sure its there as soon as I find it. Because it eats at me that these people are being treated this way, that their families are sacrificing so much while they are deployed, never knowing whether their son/daughter/husband/wife/father/mother's turn is coming today, and the majority of Americans are oblivious to it.

They signed up to protect this country. They get low pay and take risks, suffer hardship IN PEACETIME. Now they are on extended deployments, some on their fourth. The fact that many of us disapprove of this war and don't think it is protecting the country is not their doing.

You want a volunteer army to protect you? Then face up to it - you get what you pay for, a$$hole, and enlistments are plummeting.

[Bill McBlueState]

74. the reason you should avoid ad hominem attacks...

is that they're against the DU rules. It's a good policy to stick to, so maybe you should rethink your post.

[frogcycle]

76. ok, i went back and edited it nt

[Herman74]

100. Lacking the capacity to control your anger when confronted...

...with arguments you vehemently disagree with, you resort to vicious ad hominem attacks, your use of asterisks fooling no one. But be assured, Frogcycle, that I won't stoop to your level, okay?

According to you, Frogcycle, "Our military people in Iraq are NOT "fighting on behalf of bush" Gee, that would be news to our Chimp-in-Chief, who instructed them to go to Iraq, instructions they refused to disobey (unlike say, those brave former soldiers who chose to flee to Canada, go underground, or even face court-martial). In any case, they're NOT fighting on my behalf, nor are they fighting to defend my country!

You say they get paid "shit." Well, so too do minimum-wage janitors and housekeepers. You assert, "Many, many of them do not approve of it . But they take orders, watch each others backs, take their lives in their hands every day to go out and try to fulfill a hopeless mission." Why on earth should preferential treatment go to people who engage in activities they do not approve of, people who deliberately violate their own conscience? If people who engage in "hopeless missions" are not reproached but instead rewarded, what kind of world would that lead to? Finally, let's just say that unlike you, I am a tad skeptical about giving preferential treatment to those who have sent Iraqi children to the hospital with hideous wounds.

You claim that they "signed up to protect this country." Having no mindreading capability I am reluctant to readily agree; but in any case, those U.S. soldiers in Iraq clearly aren't protecting the country. Regarding the protection of this country, they're superfluous, so I welcome plummeting enlistment rates!

[frogcycle]

116. well

just keep on giving people like hannity and o'reilly more ammunition

I am glad the democratic party is a "big tent" - hopefully most of us can find an area where we needn't associate with those who share your views

while this war of aggression is a travesty, the anarchy you propose would leave us in even worse shambles

focus your resentment on the guilty, please. I lived through VN and watched people spitting on troops returning home. That some like Calley & co were bad is well documented and I so stipulate. Likewise today, but your cavalier "those who have sent Iraqi children to the hospital with hideous wounds"
as a general characterization is odious.

[Herman74]

132. Congratulations!!! You successfully avoided using any profanity!

Hey, it's a start.

I propose not "anarchy," only fairness, fairness in the distribution of federal funds for college education.

My phrase, "those who have sent Iraqi children to the hospital with hideous wounds" specifically referred to certain individuals, and hence was not a "general characterization." I would never post a statement indicating that "the U.S. Army napalmed Vietnamese children, thereby causing them to run through the streets naked and in extreme pain." No, I would be much more inclined to write something like, "those American soldiers who napalmed Vietnamese children deserve condemnation for either carelessness or malice, instead of, say for example, funding for college.

You exhort me to focus my resentment "on the guilty." Could the guilty possibly include those who, like Bush and Cheney, do not bother themselves with considerations of international law before they participate in invasions? Understanding that you lived through the Vietnam era, you may want to consider the words of a particular song that was quite popular back then before you answer:

He's a Universal Soldier, and he really is to blame. -- Donovan

[frogcycle]

135. don't get me wrong

it eats my guts out that this shit is going on and it is happening in my name as a citizen.

and yes, you correctly pointed out the guilty.

while people in the military, like in society as a whole, come in all types, including nefarious characters who slip through the screen, the simple fact is that those 140,000, in large part, are victims of our "leader's" fecklessness. The 3000 dead and 12000 (a guess) multiple amputees did not sign up to be referees in a civil war. Most signed up to "catch bin laden" or otherwise do something at least THOUGHT to be on behalf of the security of the US - including you.

had you opted to raise a question as to whether the tuition support should not also be extended to peace corps et al, I would not have been offended. But you made generalized attacks on the military as a whole. Go vist my website, why don't you, and take the time to look at the faces, click through to the obituaries, look at pictures of wives and babies. You needn't applaud the GI bill, but don't besmirch the character of the soldiers, marines, airmen, and sailors.

[Herman74]

133. In addition, Froggy, you may want to consider...

...this:

"The very essence of the Charter is that individuals have intentional duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience imposed by the individual state." -- Robert Jackson, U.S. Chief Prosecutor at Nuremburg, U.S. Supreme Court Justice

and this:

"In each case, military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ. The moral and legal obligation is to the U.S. Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders, especially if those orders are in direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ. -- The United States Uniform Code of Military Justice

[frogcycle]

136. get off your high horse

I have re-read that a dozen times in the past few months. If you read some of my other posts, you'd see my speculation as to when the top brass are going to wake up to that.

When my Dad was on the less-well-publicized War Crimes tribunals in Guam, he fought successfully to acquit one of the 23 accused - the lowest-ranking grunt from a remote corner of Japan who committed atrocities under threat of death from his superior officers. They hanged the top brass.

[frogcycle]

137. just to be perfectly clear...

the use of asterisks in response to someone objecting to my calling you a dumb fuck was a joke. it was funny! i bet a lot of people got a kick out of it. Only a d**b f**k would think I was trying to fool anyone.

[Hamlette]

107. thanks for the rant, frogcycle. I completely agree with you

and it needed saying.

Thanks on behalf of my dad and husband who got the GI bill for college. We need to attract peoplel like them as they were both served during Vietnam and were both against it.

Several countries have mandatory military service and the vast majority of those countries (Switzerland comes to mind) are far less aggressive than is the US. Respect for the military is different from starting wars.

[alarimer]

142. They are fighting for a fucking LIE

In a stupid fucking ILLEGAL war. So many are being brainwashed into believing this is somehow noble and good? As for 9/11, this administration ALLOWED it to happen because they refused to heed warnings. I am convinced they wanted to happen so they could send the poor idiots to go kill some "towel heads".

This war is a disgrace. I feel SORRY for people who have no choice but to be there but in no way shape or form do I owe them one thing. They are not defending this country; they are killing people and torturing people for a lie.

[frogcycle]

143. she was not torturing anyone

http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070109/NEWS/701090357/1006/NEWS

Argue all you want about whether any Americans should be there. Fact is, far, far more Iraqis are killed daily by other Iraqis than are killed by Americans, or than Americans are killed. Senior Airman Elizabeth A. Loncki and the other two killed in this incident last Sunday were attempting to disarm a car bomb. That's what they did the whole time they were there. They were all blown up when it went off while they were working it. Had she returned home 12 days from now, as scheduled, her boyfriend planned to propose to her.

Say what you wish about those who do wrong, and of course we all know that happens, but stick your generalizations where the sun don't shine.

[BlooInBloo]

62. LOLOL!!!! Best. Sarcastic. Post. EVER!

[Bill McBlueState]

73. I'm glad someone brought this up.

Great post.

This country's addiction to militarism isn't going to be fixed by providing educational benefits to those who participate in its wars.

I'll echo this: If you want to help people go to college in a fair manner, you help ALL who are interested.

[Lasher]

87. So if you can't get these benefits you don't want vets to have them either?

Is that it? Or are you saying we don't need to have an army, and giving benefits to veterans just encourages us to have one?

We spend way too much on defense but you argument does not hold up well to scrutiny.

[Herman74]

98. Well, supposing the benefit was given instead only to farmers...

...would you be asking the question, "If you can't have these benefits, you don't want farmers to have them either?"

There is a question of fairness, you see, an especially important question if taxpayer dollars are to be taken from the taxpayer for the purpose of furthering education. If money from taxes I pay is to be redistributed, I would rather it go to improve schools in the relatively impoverished, underfunded inner-city school districts, than go to those who have chosen to fight in Bush's War.

You agree with me that "we spend way too much on defense." Hence, many of those in the military are superfluous, their presence in the military only serving to encourage imperialistic ventures. (I suspect that our military would only need to be a fraction of its present size to meet self-defense needs). If taxpayer money is to be redistributed (a big "if" after Bush has led the country to a quarter-of-a-trillion dollar federal deficit that we're paying interest on), then I for one would elect to reward those not engaged in superfluous activity.

Perhaps just as we need farmers, doctors, electricians, and so on, we do need a military (although Costa Rica manages to thrive without one). But what we especially don't need is for our society to worship the military!!! Given that the capacity for federal funding of education is not unlimited, Webb's bill would make fewer federal grants available for college applicants who choose not to enter the military, and thereby induce people to join the military in order to receive funding for college. THAT IS NOT A ROAD I WANT THIS COUNTRY TO GO DOWN ON!

[Lasher]

120. Your argument is easily defeated.

Your assumption is that dissimilar contributions should be met with the same rewards. There are some who would agree with you but the majority of US citizens would not. And we are ultimately governed by majority rule, an arrangement for which you have no better alternative to seriously suggest.

I do not begrudge farmers, or anyone else, for the benefits they fairly earn. You won't see me demanding half the crops that a farmer raised in a given year. That's because the farmer earn those rewards. I won't ask a farmer give me half the 100 acres he inherited from his parents, and won't expect them to give me half the crop subsidy they receive from the federal government.

Likewise I don't think the farmer should expect to receive the same benefits that the veteran has earned, but has not himself earned. Everyone who can meet the physical and mental requirements has the same opportunity to enlist - and many farmers do. You have the privilege of receiving the same advantages the veteran enjoys. All you have to do, if you can satisfy physical and mental enlistment requirements, is join the military and serve honorably for a minimum of 2 years.

And while it is true to say that "...the capacity for federal funding of education is not unlimited..." (all things have limits) you have done nothing to support your false dilemma that suggests a choice must be made between veterans and others when accepting college applicants. And while you make clear you would not like to see veterans attending college in favor of others, you attempt to justify the sentiment only with an unsupported assertion that this would somehow perpetuate our current expenditures on defense.

[Herman74]

130. Maybe it is, maybe not, but, in any case, definitely not by you...

...nor by any majority, though majorities do seem to impress you. Bush got a majority of the vote in 2004, so, sir, does that add support to the argument that Bush was the best available candidate in 2004??? Got an answer??

And why do you suppose a farmer has "not earned" the right for college tuition, room, and board, but a veteran has? Who puts food on your table, thereby making it possible for you to go on living, the veteran or the farmer? You write: "Everyone who can meet the physical and mental requirements has the same opportunity to enlist," neglecting to point out that there are additional age restrictions. The fifty-year old farmer will go right on providing food for your table, but can't even quit his job to get that tuition payment, room, and board through military service, can he now? Nor can that blind teacher who teaches the blind, right? And, by the way, Lasher, your assertion to the contrary notwithstanding, I don't "have the privilege of receiving the same advantages the veteran enjoys," as I am ineligible for military service.

Now of course not all those enlisted in the U.S. military have broken international law by invading and Iraq and killing and maiming people there, but a fair amount have. Nonetheless, these people would be eligible for that juicy tuition, room, and board. But how about one "Lieutenant Ehren Watada"? You know, the courageous soldier who refused to fight in Bush's immoral, illegal Iraq war. Do you think Webb's bill is structured to exclude soldiers like him from benefiting? I don't know about you, but I'm guessing that the answer is "yes." (Just what type of discharge do you think the Lieutenant shall eventually receive?)

You write, Lasher, that I "have done nothing to support your false dilemma that suggests a choice must be made between veterans and others when accepting college applicants." (I shall assume that you meant "funding" rather than "accepting"). With the federal government suffering from a quarter-of-a-trillion-dollar deficit (due to Bush), don't you think that the politicians in Washington will be making some tough decisions on who to fund? Isn't there a chance, Lasher, just a chance, that if they tremendously increase college assistance for one group of people, that they'll try to cut it back for the rest? (College students are already under the gun in trying to finance their education). What say you, Lasher? I, for one, do not want any prospective college students to feel compelled to enter the military in order to get funding!!!

Let me leave you with a quote, Lasher.

An army of principles can penetrate where an army of soldiers cannot. ~Thomas Paine

Just what principles are you guided by?

[Lasher]

140. The majority is not always right

but the majority does rule. I didn't say the majority was always right. There are those who believe Junior didn't actually get the majority of votes in 2004. But for the sake of argument, let's say he did. I think he should therefore be our president on account of that, at least until he is impeached. But that is another function of majority rule. I did not say he was the best available candidate. My point is, we are a society governed by majority rule. It's the best possible arrangement.

The key point I sought to make in my previous response, one which you ignored in your reply, is that dissimilar contributions in our society are not always met with identical compensation. Most people believe this is fair.

Farmers have not earned the benefits in question in part because they are self-employed. Farmers don't get 401(k) savings accounts or defined benefit pension plans either. It's the same thing. Veterans get medical and educational benefits from their former employer, the US government. Doctors are also usually self-employed but they can usually expect to receive more for their efforts than the average farmer. Day laborers get less. That's the way it works. If you want it to work differently, all you have to do is get a majority of us to agree with you.

You are right, I did not mention being 50 years old or being blind as conditions that prohibit enlistment in the military. This is because I did mention physical requirements but didn't think it was necessary to list them all. I made it quite clear that there are physical and mental requirements for enlistment, a key point you ignored when you quoted me out of context.

A veteran is usually required to have received an honorable discharge in order to get these benefits, although there are some exceptions. I think that's appropriate. Your point about Lieutenant Ehren Watada brings into question the process of determining a soldier's discharge status. George W. Bush, as an example, received an honorable discharge but I don't believe he earned it. Should Watada be given an honorable discharge, even though he refused to obey an order? I'm going to avoid a protracted discussion about that but will say there are some cases that seem questionable. It might be a good topic for a separate OP.

You are right, I should have said "funding" instead of "accepting". Actually I was thinking at the time about our learning institutions' capacity to absorb more students but that was not an issue you raised. You are also correct to say that there is a chance that an increase in funding for higher education might result in a decrease of the same type of support for another segment of people. But this outcome is by no means a certainty.

Junior and his cronies hate all our New Deal social programs. They have intentionally created the deficits you mention so that they can use them as an excuse to reduce or eliminate funding for programs such as Social Security, VA benefits, and student loans. If we were to eliminate the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts that mostly benefited rich people and their corporations, and if we were to eliminate costs of Junior's adventure in Iraq, we would have a surplus again. But don't take my word for it. Try it yourself with the National Budget Simulation Game. This resource helps make it quite clear that there doesn't have to be an either/or scenario of either this group or that group gets support for higher education. Your dilemma is therefore false, just as I have charged.

We need more of this type of funding overall, and less waste on defense splurging like Junior's Maginot Line in the Sky and yet another monster aircraft carrier to name after yet another loser GOP president. We should not accept defeat by assuming an increase in educational assistance will result in funding cuts in any other social program. This needlessly promotes animosity among those of us who should be allies.

I don't want prospective college students or anyone else to feel compelled to enter the military for any reason. While there is an opportunity for many to further their education in this way, I don't think of that as "compelled". You want to know what "compelled" is? Getting drafted like I did in 1969, that's what "compelled" is. Victimizing veterans by cutting off educational benefits is not a proper way to encourage reduction in defense spending. We should instead focus on cuts in funding for the active military.

Since you asked about my guiding principles, I will tell you I am in favor of universal health care for all American citizens. I would like to see educational support we now receive up through high school extended to 4 years of college for all those who make good enough grades to be accepted. But I do not think this should include living expenses just because veterans get them. I believe we should all have opportunities that are as equal as we can make them. Support for basic human needs should be provided for everyone and anything more than that should be earned by the individual. I believe we should wage peace and not war. These are some of my beliefs that seem relevant to the discussion at hand.

[Midlodemocrat]

124. Couldn't disagree more.

My dad served in WWII and Korea and returned home to attend college on the GI Bill. It's a wonderful benefit to those who serve their country and I'm proud to say Jim Webb is my senator.

[Bridget Burke]

127. So start with the new GI Bill.....

Then work on offering benefits for non-military service. Or just generally making education easier to afford--working your way through used to be a real option.

[fishwax]

53. excellent

:thumbsup:

[Tekla West]

55. about time

People who claim to 'support the troops' are about to find out what its like to have to stand up for that. The GI Bill was about as good as America ever got. These young men and women deserve no less. Bush however, deserves to be hung as a traitor.

[stillrockin]

60. Thank you, Senator Webb!

What a contrast to our last senator.

:patriot:

[Hippo_Tron]

111. Yup, I'm sure Senator Macaca would be tackling the big issues that face our troops as well

Like those pesky flag burners

:eyes:

[BlooInBloo]

61. Gotta love those "conservative" Democrats, eh? (snicker)

[BlueAlert]

63. As a military person

How is this differ from the current GI Bill.

[sanskritwarrior]

64. Well

if you get the GI Bill and the Army College Fund is it still more than this new bill?

[Monkeyman]

65. It will make sure you are funded

Did you know that some of these kids are being denied. This Bill brings it to the level it should be. But not only that it insures these kids Education as promised. Cost have gone up this will raise the rate. NG troops have to be insured of a education . Under the old GI Bill they where not being covered. Last year the Democrats tried to pass the GI Bill For the 21ST Century Replugs voted no. Webb is and old vet just like me. He is stepping up.

[sanskritwarrior]

72. What reason

is being given for the denial?

[Monkeyman]

75. Not paying the bills

Schools are stopping them from classes. Hell they have been posting on VA watchdog for months

[nam78_two]

66. K&R

Hope you are doing okay Monkeyman :pals:.

[Recursion]

68. Holy crap! Is it retroactive??

I was mobilized to OEF in '02 and OIF in '03; would I get some bank here? Or is it just starting now?

[Monkeyman]

71. Yes I made sure of that Welcome Home

[Lasher]

82. Good to see ya back Monkeyman

I was wondering if you had posted anything lately. I didn't have to look far. :hi:

A couple of things some people don't know about VA healthcare:

All new Enrollment Priority 8 veteran applicants have been rejected if they applied on or after January 17, 2003. If you do not have a special qualifier such as having been awarded the purple heart, this is a result of means testing that is so stringent you have to be in absolute poverty before you qualify. This is the first time as far as I know that previously qualified vets have been turned away.

http://www.va.gov/healtheligibility/eligibility/epg_all.asp

http://www.vetsmow.com/index.html

Prescription copay increased from $2 to $7 in 2002, and from $7 to $8 in 2006.

http://democrats.senate.gov/dpc/dpc-new.cfm?doc_name=sr-108-2-56

http://www.va.gov/healtheligibility/DOCS/CoPays.doc

Thank you Republicans for supporting the troops.

[ellisonz]

93. The text is not out yet.

But I'd assume it's retroactive for all OEF and OIF vets and you'd be covered. This college boy thanks you for your service! Maybe I'll see you in the classroom.:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[Recursion]

109. Man, I hope so. I enlisted after undergrad

And it's amazing how hard it can be to get funding for grad school coming from somewhere other than an undergrad program.

[raysr]

78. How many here know that

the republicans tried to block the GI Bill in 1948. The Dems pushed it through. That's why it amazes me to see military repubs.

[GenDem]

85. Isn't it the least this country can do

for those that are willing to put their lives on the line? I applaud Senator Webb for initiating this bill. I believe that their sacrifice warrants huge benefits.

[Superman Returns]

88. very impressed by Webb's bill

but perhaps I sound stupid, wouldn't it have been logical for our congress (with both parties wanting to be seen as pro-troops) to have passed this awhile ago?

[Lasher]

89. Good question but the corporate media doesn't take Republicans to task

For example, did you know there's be a 300% increase in VA prescription copays while Junior's been in office? And that they started turning previously qualified applicants away from VA benefits for the first time ever in 2003?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=3057496&mesg_id=3061229

[midnight]

91. Can all veterans use this bill, or is it limited.

[ellisonz]

92. The text isn't out yet..

But from the title and announcement I think it's for Iraq II and Afghanistan vets only.

[Lasher]

95. Monkeyman said upthread it's retroactive

I didn't check further as I know him to be a reliable source.

[Monkeyman]

105. No it covers Iraq War 1 too

Its also will cover those who served since 1999 in 2000 the replugs stopped covering those who were not wounded. Like the old Veterans Chairman said Steve Buyer (R-IN) YOUR NOT A VETERAN UNLESS YOU WHERE WOUNDED. That why Webb's Bill is a blessing to all who served

[Lasher]

114. I think retroactivity would only go back 10 years.

If memory serves, vets only had a maximum of 10 years after separation from active duty to use educational benefits before they expired. Since the spirit of Webb's legislation seems to be restoral of benefits that have eroded over time, I'm guessing that limitation would apply.

[usregimechange]

96. k/r

[nuxvomica]

97. I'm all choked up right now

We can't possibly make up for the broken families or the shattered nerves or the lost limbs or the flag-draped coffins but this is, finally, a start. Besides paying down our debt to the veterans, this would have a profound positive impact on our nation's future just as the post-World War II bill did.

[madokie]

104. This here is a senator we all will be very proud of

[SHRED]

106. Link broken

[mvd]

122. Wooohooooooo!

That's someone who REALLY supports the troops.

[Initech]

123. Now THIS is how you support the troops!

[npincus]

125. Dems, the REAL American Patriots

instead of elective-war starting sloganeers.

[snowbear]

134. Senator Jim Webb ~~

Just the sound of that sounds so AWESOME! "Senator Jim Webb" ~~

Kudos to him for introducing the legislation!

[Clarkie1]

139. Great. nt