McCain Opposes New GI Bill

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Crabtownboy, Jul 8, 2008.

  1. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,619
    Likes Received:
    158
    John McCain's entire college educational costs, the Naval Academy, were paid for by tax payers and yet he is opposed to helping those who served in Iraq. I find this strange .... how about you?
     
  2. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,897
    Likes Received:
    294
    What I don't find strange at all is the dishonesty of your post.

    Any particular reason you left out your source?
     
  3. Palatka51

    Palatka51
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2007
    Messages:
    3,724
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG]What? Crabby did not include sources? [​IMG][​IMG]
     
  4. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,619
    Likes Received:
    158
  5. Palatka51

    Palatka51
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2007
    Messages:
    3,724
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think his main concern is the cost, not the fact that the veterans don't deserve it.
     
  6. exscentric

    exscentric
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,253
    Likes Received:
    16
    As far as education, many, it is my impression, received or have coming thousands of dollars in ed benefits already, just for signing up, not sure how much nor what this new bill has to offer, but maybe enough is enough and maybe McCain has the figures and has made a good decision.

    Do we know the figures on what they already have coming?

    And if we are going to concern ourselves with comparing what McCain got with today, why not say --- compare civil war vets to todays - apples and oranges?
     
  7. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,302
    Likes Received:
    784

    This is a blatant lie. Or maybe you just did not read the reports you created a thread on. :BangHead:
     
  8. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,619
    Likes Received:
    158
    "Blatant lie????" Well if you are so sure, show us some links where he supports the bill.
     
  9. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,302
    Likes Received:
    784
    Refusal to support this bill doesn't indicate that he doesn't want to help our veterans. And he expresses his concerns in the articles you posted. I will not vote for McCain. But the op is an outright lie.
     
  10. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,619
    Likes Received:
    158
    But isn't it a contridiction to have received a free education at tax payers expense and then to oppose the idea of giving the same to returning veterans?

    Didn't the original GI Bill at the end of WW II pay dividends far beyong the expense?

    Why is it we can spend 2 billion or more a week to kill people, but not several hundred million a year to educate our returning soldiers?

    Why support a tax break for big business, but not help our future generations?

    Again, show me a link showing that the Op is an outright lie. I understand you do not agree with the OP, show me references to support your opinion. Thanks.
     
    #10 Crabtownboy, Jul 8, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 8, 2008
  11. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,302
    Likes Received:
    784
    He doesn't oppose it. He does oppose this bill.


    No one spends money for the purpose of killing people. And the two are apples and oranges.

    Those tax breaks go to those who provide jobs. And the money otherwise would go to excessive programs that slow our economy.

    You read the op. You know why McCain doesn't support it. And you know your statement is false.
     
  12. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,897
    Likes Received:
    294
    Of course.

    Suggesting that McCain paid nothing for his education ignores the years he is bound to the service in payment for that education.

    It also ignores the price he paid in human sacrifice during that service.

    Dishonest is putting it mildly.
     
  13. hawg_427

    hawg_427
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2006
    Messages:
    260
    Likes Received:
    0
    You would think he would do anything possible for a service person as he was a POW for several years. War is war, you can't pick and choose which one the GI Bill will support. I just don't think I can vote for eith candidate this election.
     
  14. windcatcher

    windcatcher
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't plan on voting for John McCain, but I uphold his decision on this one.

    I think it is far more courageous and honest to exercise fiscal restraint and honesty against the ease of making a false promise and then failing to deliver, which has ocurred in times pasts, sometimes with tragic results: Just this weekend, I talked with my dad, 86y/o and a WW II vet, USN-retired about my granddad.....didn't he serve in WW I and is it true there was a march on Washington. It seemed to pain my dad to recall those times in his own youth but he told me that to his knowledge, the soldiers who signed up for WW I were promised a bonus after the war...... something he thought was about $300. When they returned from the war..... some with disabilities, all with hopes and promises, many to the hard times of facing a depression and already needing a period to recover in their work, businesses, or farms which they left behind to fight the war........ and in need of money which was promised. Daddy said some soldiers did march on Washington to demand that the government pay them as promised and our government ordered up other troops.... the state or national guard, he thought: There were scirmishes and shots fired and some veterans were wounded and some killed.

    Neither Sen. McCain nor any vet of his generation can be faulted for taking advantage of whatever was available to them: It was the decisions of those in Congress who divided the monies and committed the budget with promises into the future which created committments without the assurrances that revenue would be continuous or without debt to meet those promises.

    In order to have a 'volunteer' military and in attempts to prevent conscription.... enlisted men are being promised bonuses for signing up for the war in the East: Rumor has it, that some are failing to 'meet their obligation' as a direct result of the war, physical and psychological injuries which disable and make them unfit to complete the terms of service...... and their bonuses are being reclaimed. If there is any truth to this and this policy was not present at the time of enlistment OR was not clearly explained, then a fraud has been committed to which our government and the DOD should be accountable to provide that which it promised without reservations, to those who enlisted with such enticements.

    And, if we find ourselves hurt by obligations as the result of Congressional and DOD excesses, then perhaps it is right that we should suffer some so that obligations and promises are rightly fulfilled.....then perhaps we might learn the lesson of citizen ship..... to watch and discern when voting for our officials and beware of entitlements and promises which we think will benefit ourselves or others which we favor. And perhaps we can then bind together our generous desires with our reasoned acceptance of reality and restrain that liberal excess which inclines our leaders to exceed the limits upon the public purse.

    Until we acknowledge our limitations and enforce the reality upon our leadership..... we will continue to be victimized by the very programs we were led to believe would secure our properity and those with special needs and dependancies, into supporting debts which we cannot sustain.

    When the prophet attended the house of a widow-woman, and all she had left was a little oil and some ground grain for one last meal for her son and herself, she knew her own limitations and was straight forward in her honesty to the godly servant, yet she complied and graciously served him with her bread: The LORD repaid her for her faithfulness: The prophet did not go to a government bread line: Neither did the widow-woman. Her cruse of oil continued to be filled and she sold what God gave her.....providing for her own household...... and her richness towards offering for sale instead of hoarding aganist the necessity within her own community, returned upon her a blessing. She made an addition to her home, and the prophet visited, and, when her child was sick and dead, the LORD heard the prayer of the prophet and restored her son to her in life.

    Charity is most efficient on the local and community level. The farther the money goes from home for a benefit..... the more comes out of it on its circuit to the top.....though middle men and government tax agents.... and then from the top through middle men setting and changing policies and rules and agencies over agencies until it finally hits its destination. There is little emotional or compassionate connection between the giver and the receiver in such instances. The tax is given to avoid reprisal. The 'gift' is received based upon successfully meeting a criteria which 'entitles' one, as though they earned it (and some indeed DO earn it after having to jump through all the hoops to prove they qualify), so that responsibility towards the free flow of the entitlement is not tied in any way to the purpose and stewardship of the money, nor to the compassion which originated the program.

    The purpose of taxes is not to increase government jobs..... but to enforce our laws and provide security at our borders and of our nation against aggression, and enable a peaceable climate in which we and our industry can flourish and prosper to manage the needs of our own and assistance to our neighbors in need. Whether its a promise made to our soldiers, out of the grateful heart of a nation for their sacrifice and risk; or a promise made to a motherless child that he will be fed and sheltered and given a wholesome environment to develop until he is of age; or to a person drawing a social security pension from which he was promised it would be available as the result of his voluntary participation; or to a veteran or a disabled worker who was promised that certain risks and unforeseen casualties of responsible labor, and /or illness and accident are covered by the very act of his having participated in programs designed or promised to provide such coverage....... It is a corporate immorality to have made such promises and then be found unable to keep them......but such is the obligation upon our own generation and becomes an unjust lien upon all future generations who will find themselves bound by the obligations of their forebearers.
     
  15. exscentric

    exscentric
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,253
    Likes Received:
    16
    I think if you dig a little there were probably promises in wwii that failed to come about, and I know there were some for the cold war folks as well. I was promised full medical care for life and that is a laugh that would kill you. Not that the Lord has failed me :) He has supplied our needs but I like a man that says no to what might not be delivered -- not that I will vote for him necessarily.
     
  16. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is unpatriotic for him, or any other member of Congress, to be concerned about the cost of providing for our veterans. If anyone deserves taxpayers' money it is those who put their lives on the line on our behalf. Veterans' benefits is not an area for cost cutting. There are plenty of other places to keep costs in checks in the federal budget and use this money to provide for our veterans, such as the huge pension that Senator McCain, and other members, will receive when he retires from the U.S. Congress.
     
  17. windcatcher

    windcatcher
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, it is NOT unpatriotic to be concerned about the cost of providing for our veterans...... if that means being honest and not promising today what we will take back tomorrow.

    It is not unpatriotic to budget and run government within the means provided and to used the discretion of credit only for the most dire of emergencies and cause....and then with a plan to repay quickly.

    It is unpatriotic and borders on treason to have gone into so much debt for programs which were less than necessary for life and which burden us and future generations with the burden of repaying while the bankers get richer:

    It is immoral that we export our debt, which furnishes us a temporary ease and prosperity, to nations which already have their burdens of poverty, hungry and homeless and need, for the hope of our trade and favor.

    When our chickens come home to roost it will be at a price of the property of every free American which is the capital behind our country's debt.... and at the cost of our sovereignty, which is necessary to the preservation of our liberty. People who think they can loose [sic] [:) I meant lose.....KenH...iou 1] liberty and still remain free donot have an appreciation or knowledge of either. :tear:

    A man had two sons: To the first he gave an order, but the son refused: To the second he gave an order and the son accepted his assignment with no complaint. However, the second son became entangled and forgot his promise to his father: but the first thought carefully about his refusal and repented and did the task which was requested without complaint or fanfare..... Now who did the will of his father? The one who refused but then repented, or the one who accepted but later reneged?....... It is better that politicians not promise but then do what they can after they are elected than it is for them to carelessly promise but then forget their promises.
     
    #17 windcatcher, Jul 8, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 8, 2008
  18. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    I prefer that liberty be loose to the greatest extent feasible than to be tied up and restricted beyond what is necessary. :)
     
  19. windcatcher

    windcatcher
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    0
    :laugh: :wavey: I meant lose.....uh......I always get this word mixed up!....My bad.
     
  20. righteousdude2

    righteousdude2
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Messages:
    10,460
    Likes Received:
    136
    Shame on McCain????

    If it were not for the GI bill, I'd never have completed my secondary education. The Gi Bill is the greatest thing since baseball and apple pie.

    Of course, I can't help but wonder if the author of this quote may have pulled it out of context. I say this because I've heard John speak about the importance of updating and improving the current GI Bill. So shame on you CTB for trying to "smear" McCain by not posting the entire text [of which I too have been guilty, so I am humbled before your CBT].

    Pastor Paul
     
    #20 righteousdude2, Jul 8, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 8, 2008

Share This Page

Loading...