What if Bush did this?

[lil mike]

Since you brought up Bush, seems like he was all for raising Tricare fees as well as lots more things that hurt the troops. During wartime.

That's just one year, his last. Want me to look up the rest?

Well I remember your reaction to that, so I was curious as to your reaction now that Obama's doing it.

care to respond?

[lil mike]

from what I read earlier on another site, he's going to ask them to pay $200 a year for tricare? I don't know if that's 'trashing' it..but you guys are the ones demanding debt reduction, so you had to know that meant some things would get cut..



so why exactly do you guys whine when he makes cuts?

I wasn't editorializing on them.  I was just making a point to Howey.

[Howey]

Well I remember your reaction to that, so I was curious as to your reaction now that Obama's doing it.

Do tell!

I wasn't editorializing on them.  I was just making a point to Howey.

Which was what?

[ekg]

I wasn't editorializing on them.  I was just making a point to Howey.

sure  you weren't..

[Howey]

sure  you weren't..

I think it's safe to say this is another thread where he's painted himself in a corner and won't return. Seems like those threads are pretty common lately. 

[lil mike]

Do tell!

Which was what?

Merely the hypocrisy of your reaction to the news of cutting benefits for active military and retirees.  I was particularly curious given your status as a retiree.   Oh the outrage about tricare when their was a Bush in the White House!

sure  you weren't..

What was my editorial position then?

I think it's safe to say this is another thread where he's painted himself in a corner and won't return. Seems like those threads are pretty common lately. 

I wonder if we are thinking the same thing by the statement, “painted himself in a corner?”  How exactly have I painted myself  in a corner in this thread?

And what other threads have I painted myself “in a corner?”  I may have missed some responses!

[Howey]

Merely the hypocrisy of your reaction to the news of cutting benefits for active military and retirees.  I was particularly curious given your status as a retiree.   Oh the outrage about tricare when their was a Bush in the White House!

It's called "shared sacrifice". Remember last year when your comrades raised all that hell about the debt ceiling? You reap what you sow...


Of course, nowadays, the Republicans aren't paying any attention to that agreement either.

[ekg]

What was my editorial position then?
!

Look  up, up... a little more... yeah, right there... "What if Bush did this?" This is your 'editorializing thread' you started to complain that if Bush did 'this' the left would all over it.. you don't even have to say a word when you post stories on something Obama does, the title explains exactly what this thread is about..

IF you were just showing this to Howie... well, you'd have started your own thread saying "Hey, Howie".. since you didn't and because of where you put it, your editorializing is perfectly clear..

[lil mike]

It's called "shared sacrifice". Remember last year when your comrades raised all that hell about the debt ceiling? You reap what you sow...


Of course, nowadays, the Republicans aren't paying any attention to that agreement either.

I'm sorry, but I'm not seeing the comparison  to the debt ceiling.  Maybe you should break it down for me.

[lil mike]

Look  up, up... a little more... yeah, right there... "What if Bush did this?" This is your 'editorializing thread' you started to complain that if Bush did 'this' the left would all over it.. you don't even have to say a word when you post stories on something Obama does, the title explains exactly what this thread is about..

IF you were just showing this to Howie... well, you'd have started your own thread saying "Hey, Howie".. since you didn't and because of where you put it, your editorializing is perfectly clear..

For once, you actually understood my point.  However I was not editorializing about the pro or con of the Tricare cuts, only that Howey was in red alert mode over much more minor issues during the Bush administration.  The key of course, is that it was the Bush administration.   That was the real issue to him.   Who was offering the cuts, not what the cuts were.

[Howey]

I'm sorry, but I'm not seeing the comparison  to the debt ceiling.  Maybe you should break it down for me.

Ahhh...I see. Republican Amnesia setting in...

Military pay raises, funding for veterans health care and the Post-9/11 GI Bill could be sacrificed to new fiscal realities as the result of the deal signed by President Obama on Tuesday to raise the federal debt ceiling, according to the Military Officers Association and veterans groups. The law requires the federal budget be cut $2.1 trillion over 10 years.

The White House said it plans to cut $350 billion from the Defense Department budget (excluding war funding) over the next decade. Retired Air Force Col. Michael Hayden, the association's deputy director for government relations, said this means "everything is on the table," including military pay.

While Congress historically has been reluctant to freeze military pay, the 2011 Budget Control Act signed by Obama on Tuesday makes it clear upfront that military pay is no longer off-limits in budget discussions. If the administration and Congress fail to make the required reductions, then across-the-board cuts in discretionary funding will be triggered through a procedure known as sequestration. The law gives the president "authority to exempt any [military] personnel account from sequestration," but only if "savings are achieved through across-the-board reductions in the remainder of the Department of Defense budget," states a House Rules Committee analysis of the bill.

Hayden said, "This leaves pay raises up for grabs," as Defense crafts a new budget to meet cuts planned by the White House. He also expressed concern that cost-of-living increases for military retirees could end up sacrificed in the Pentagon budget-cutting process, although by law they are protected from sequestration.

This was what your comrades agreed to to pass the compromise. Funny how y'all can forget all about it but remember every move Bush made, huh?

[Howey]

For once, you actually understood my point.  However I was not editorializing about the pro or con of the Tricare cuts, only that Howey was in red alert mode over much more minor issues during the Bush administration.  The key of course, is that it was the Bush administration.   That was the real issue to him.   Who was offering the cuts, not what the cuts were.

Was I? What were the "much more minor" issues during that time I was in "red alert mode" over? Because what with all the possibilities agreed to in the above-mentioned deficit agreement, I'd say we (retired military members) made out pretty damn good with our small sacrifice. Especially when some, not me because mine are all free, will be saving money on medications in the new budget, plus more.

[ekg]

For once, you actually understood my point.  However I was not editorializing about the pro or con of the Tricare cuts, only that Howey was in red alert mode over much more minor issues during the Bush administration.  The key of course, is that it was the Bush administration.   That was the real issue to him.   Who was offering the cuts, not what the cuts were.

you're giving your opinion, not just reporting the news by posting something in this thread. This thread is your catch all where you can dump news stories without saying a word, but where we know you're commenting on 'if this was Bush, you guys would be screaming' opinion.. .hence the "sure  you weren't."... had you been solely "I was just making a point to Howey." you would have put it somewhere else that didn't have the 'editorialized' headline..

why are you making such a big deal over this? It's obvious what this thread is for, why are you backing away from it?

hell, if we can't even agree to what your purpose was to post in this thread, how can we move on to whether you agree or disagree with the posted story.. I'm betting you disagree, but would agree if Obama had an (R) after his name..

[Howey]

Was I? What were the "much more minor" issues during that time I was in "red alert mode" over? Because what with all the possibilities agreed to in the above-mentioned deficit agreement, I'd say we (retired military members) made out pretty damn good with our small sacrifice. Especially when some, not me because mine are all free, will be saving money on medications in the new budget, plus more.

Looks like I'm right again!

I guess by mimicking Mittens, lilMike is a full-fledged minion now...

In an effort to mislead Americans about President Obama’s proposal for the TRICARE program for military retirees, Mitt Romney falsely accused the President of slashing benefits for military retirees. “He’s going after TRICARE,” Romney said. “Saying, ‘Ok, we’re going to raise the co-pays. We’re going to cut the benefits.’ Why is it we go after military families?”

Romney is completely mischaracterizing the President’s proposal while ignoring the reasons why such a policy is necessary. TRICARE spending has more than doubled since 1999, with military personnel costs making up approximately 34% of the Defense Department’s annual base budget. A moderate increase in premiums would help maintain the TRICARE program’s sustainability while still making sure that military retirees pay significantly less for their coverage than comparable private or public sector options.

That’s why the Joint Chiefs and senior enlisted military leaders support the proposal, as well as quite a few Republicans. Senator Lindsey Graham said, “It’s hard to ask those who’ve done the most to secure our freedom to give more, but I’m willing to do it,” noting that “if we don’t do something in terms of health care growth and entitlement retiree benefits, you’re going to compete the retired force with operational needs and that’s just not where we want to go. Senator John McCain also supported similar cost-saving changes to TRICARE, noting that “national health care costs have risen significantly.”

To say that the President is cutting benefits for veterans and military families before all else is wholly untrue. President Obama believes we have a sacred trust with those who wear the uniform of the United States of America and that “it’s a commitment that begins at enlistment and must never end.” Here are just a few of the ways President Obama has put veterans’ health care and well-being first:

    President Obama boosted the Veterans Affairs budget to ensure veterans receive timely access to necessary benefits and services they’ve earned. By signing the Veterans Health Care Budget Reform and Transparency Act, the President secured funding for veterans’ medical care a year in advance so that the VA can operate with sufficient and predictable funding. His policies will help make sure that over 500,000 veterans who were previously denied care will be eligible for VA health care by 2013. Looking forward, President Obama has also requested a 10.5% increase in funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs in his budget for 2013.

    The President also put in place and improved the most generous educational benefit for veterans since the original G.I. Bill of 1944. The maximum benefit under this bill will allow veterans, service members, Reservists and National Guard members to receive an in-state, undergraduate education at a public institution at no cost.

    Under the VOW to Hire Heroes Act signed by President Obama, businesses will receive a maximum $9,600 tax credit for hiring veterans with service connected disabilities who have been unemployed for six months or longer. The President has also proposed a Veterans Jobs Corp to put up to 20,000 veterans back to work over the next five years and has challenged businesses to hire or train 100,000 unemployed veterans or their spouses by the end of 2013.

In contrast to President Obama’s plan for veterans, Romney said his plan would be to privatize veterans’ benefits by “creating a voucher system.” Like the vouchers in his Medicare privatization plan, these vouchers, as the New York Times’ Paul Krugman points out, would “be inadequate, and become more so over time, so that veterans who don’t make enough money to top them up would fail to receive essential care.”

Romney’s plan to cut spending would force the same difficult choices that Republicans like Sen. Graham warned against. If Romney spared entitlements like Social Security and cut all other programs equally, he would have to slash veterans’ benefits by $456 billion over the next decade.

Wow. So I guess lilMittens supports this too? THAT would put me in "red alert mode"!