just got this from "militarycity.com" where army/navy etc times subscribers go.
here:
http://www.militarycity.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1-292259-1989240&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15you have to logon/register to read it, but can i just say i'm shocked to read this kind of writing...my bad! all of you who've been badmouthing the military *really* need to take a look at this.
(this is on an article about VA and military cuts in AirForceTimes)
"...all of you liberal weenies out there, that article was a typical left wing piece of crap. All of you folks must have forgot what it was like to serve in the military under Carter and Clinton"
I served under Nixon, Ford, and Carter. No difference between them. The Navy ran the same way, regardless. The pay sucked just as much from one to another. Are you sure it was the Clinton presidency and not the Republican House and Senate that was the problem?
"The Democrats are for the most part liberals, and for the most part 'liberals don't like the military'"
You see, that kind of ideological garbage has no place in a rational discussion of the issues. It may make you feel good to rant and rave about how you think things are, but it doesn't jive with facts. Ask any veteran in Minnesota that had to deal with health or benefit issues up until last October and they'll tell you that nobody helped them more than Paul Wellstone. How could that be, though? He was not only a liberal, he was a Liberal and damn proud of it. The thing is, he didn't have anything against people serving in the military. AND, he didn't forget about them when they got out. Unlike a number of people in the White House, it wasn't about what the military could do for him. It was about what he could do for them.
You know, cinngary, you really need to look around a bit and check out some different sources of information. It's not as cut and dried as you think. Those chickenhawks in the White House are not real fond of servicemen. They like to rattle sabres and talk tough , but they always thought of themselves as too important to actually serve in the military with us lowlifes. marrdcheez left you a link to Bush's service record. I think you should go read it and find out what kind of guy you're fawning over. While you're at it, think about Max Cleland and think about the kind of people who would accuse him of being unpatriotic just so they could beat him in an election.
_________________
Support the troops.
Love my country.
Can't stand Bush!
Back to top
nighthawksh_forums
Joined: 06 Jul 2003
Posts: 4
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2003 2:45 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would like to echo the two previous entries, plus add a few more comments. The hard right seems to always relate a high DoD budget with "taking care of the troops". That is not always the case. It just means more $$$ are being spent on the big ticket items, some of which the military does not even want.
Regarding past Presidents, one of the biggest pay increases for the military was under Carter. Also, the FIRST document Reagen signed after taking office was a freeze on military pay. He stopped an approved raise, but that same year, he also proposed one of the biggest DoD budgets since WWII.
Regarding concurrent receipt and other "promises made" it was said; "that ain't going to happen",, well, guess what? It sure ain't if we all do as suggested and lay back and trust GWB and the other politicians in D.C. to do what is right by our veterans. If we can afford to give Filipino veterans of WWII health benifits, we can damn sure take care of our own first!
As to Gore vs Bush, we have no way to decern how Al Gore would or would not have reacted to 9/11.
_________________
Stan Hutchison
MSG, US Army (Ret.)