McCain Opposes New GI Bill

Pure baloney.

Being a veteran doesn't qualify one for a free ride for life.

Never has. It's not going to start now.

 

I could never have afforded the electronics education I recieved in the Navy, and I was getting paid to do it. I haven't asked for much else. I would guess that puts me in the majority.

 

In fact, they pay for their education by serving 5 years active duty, minimum.

Your suggestion that it is "free" is dishonest.

How many years active duty is a veteran required to serve in order to receive education benefits?

That was one of McCain's problems with the proposed GI Bill. As well as the fact that many receive specialized training while active duty and they are paid while being trained, just like midshipmen are.

 

Your point is lost, so now you dissemble into unrelated...logic?

You may not like it or appreciate it, but MCCain honored his military committment to justify the cost of his education.

You seem to think that 3 years of active duty is now enough for a full ride scholarship when MCCain had to serve 5 years, as do current military academy appointees.

Your "logic" is mostly your bias against McCain coming through. I doubt you care at all about the GI Bill unless you can use it to Bash McCain.

As has been evident from your very first post.

 

It's not evident from your posts.

You have spent almost every post in this thread trying to make it sound like McCain got something from the government he doesn't want others to have, instead of actually addressing the GI Bill and it's provisions.

In failing to make your case of bias against McCain, it appears you also fail to understand the issue in it's entirety.

 

Let's put this in the proper perspective.

The Montgomery G.I. Bill, up to this point, required that each service member pay $100 a month for 12 months. For your $1,200 "buy-in," you received $10,000. McCain, on the other hand, fell under a previous educational bill, so I can't speak to what educational benefits he actually received, or how he "qualified" for them - although, being a POW should count for something.

Current educational benefits are: 100% tuition; you pay for books. Sometimes not even that.

For the academies, and I'm only familiar with the Air Force academy: You get selected to attend, you get everything paid for, and a small stipend. You incur an active duty service commitment; i.e., you finish, you agree to stay with the Air Force a minimum number of years.

If you don't finish, or decide to opt out of the service commitment, you pay the Air Force back.

With all that said, I haven't looked at this new $80,000 G.I. bill thing. I'd have to agree: Either a minimum service requirement is needed, or some kind of "buy-in" like we've been doing previously. To provide $80,000 just for signing up, with no clause for forfeiture due for, say, other than honorable discharge or failure to complete a service commitment - well, that's just a welfare system that'll encourage many people to sign up and immediately work on getting out.

HOWEVER, like I said, I haven't examined this new one yet for the details.

BTW: Out of my $10,000, I've used maybe $2,000. While on active duty, you don't get your full amount. Fortunately, it's also now been enacted that I can transfer some of this money to my children. Seeing as how I'm working on re-flooring the dining room, instead of working on a second degree, and have no desire to spend another 3-4 years working on a PhD, I'm thinking being able to use it for my kids, instead of it going to waste, is a huge blessing.

 

Theres that lie again. He doesn't oppose helping vets. He simply opposes this bill. Of course libs need to attack McCain with anything military related. Media Matters has given their marching orders.

 

In McCain's case, his service committment to pay for his college education was five years. He served longer.

The suggestion by cbt that he got a "free" education and doesn't want other military personnel to get what he got is simply dishonest.

 

Oh I read it and this is what you said. He opposes the bill he does not oppose helping returning vets from Iraq.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by carpro
In McCain's case, his service committment to pay for his college education was five years. He served longer.

The suggestion by cbt that he got a "free" education and doesn't want other
military personnel to get what he got is simply dishonest.

[Personal attack snipped]

Then there is this idiotic gem. :BangHead:

 

No...you said he was against helping the returning vets from Iraq which is a lie.

 

Fiscal constraint? Gimme a break. We're spending trillions of dollars on an unnecessary we we started. The current Republican administration has been fiscally far left, anything but conservative. Maybe it is correct to say that we should batten down the hatches because the Bush economy has just about brought our economy to its knees. The stock market is just about to crash and we're cutting Medicare already BEFORE the large numbers of Boomers start to retire.

So maybe we shouldn't support benefits for our returning troops. Just maybe we should get out of this senseless war and spend what little money Bush has left us with to provide medical care for the country rated just slightly better than Cuba by the World Health Organization. I'll go along with that program.