New law... vets to get education... help me find info please

New law... vets to get education... help me find info please (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Lockit -> New law... vets to get education... help me find info please (7/5/2008 3:36:03 PM)
Last night while watching the news, the channel I can't remember as I was flipping channels... they were talking about Bush signing in a new law that would change a few things for vets, mostly in education. They said that during world war 2 that there was a better grant for education after the military and that we were now going to be honoring that commitment. Military could go to any public college they wanted to go to for four years. If they chose to stay in the military as their career, the four years education could be passed to a spouse or children. I can't find anything on it and was wondering if any of you had seen anything on it.

DomKen -> RE: New law... vets to get education... help me find info please (7/5/2008 3:43:23 PM)
It's called the Webb GI Bill. It only applies to veterans who have served since 9/11/01. http://www.gibill2008.org/

Lockit -> RE: New law... vets to get education... help me find info please (7/5/2008 3:52:36 PM)
Thank you DomKen, After I posted this, I realized I might be able to find the info on a vet site... god... I so love my morning brain! Thank you!

Raechard -> RE: New law... vets to get education... help me find info please (7/5/2008 5:06:57 PM)
I was kind of wondering why veterinary practitioners were not educated enough.

Ozzfan1317 -> RE: New law... vets to get education... help me find info please (7/5/2008 8:27:05 PM)
They also have news articles and info on it at Military.com

Owner59 -> RE: New law... vets to get education... help me find info please (7/5/2008 10:46:23 PM)
http://www.collarchat.com/m_1977738/tm.htm

bipolarber -> RE: New law... vets to get education... help me find info please (7/6/2008 7:42:53 AM)
Yep. It passed. and it was somewhat sickening to see Bush and McCain, (both of whom opposed the bill and voted against it) suddenly take credit for it's passage. They thought it was going to be "too expensive"...

Mercnbeth -> RE: New law... vets to get education... help me find info please (7/6/2008 8:37:05 AM)
This has to be one of the greatest spin moves of all time. quote: THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. A few moments ago I signed legislation that funds our troops who are in harm's way. Our nation has no greater responsibility than supporting our men and women in uniform -- especially since we're at war. This is a responsibility all of us in Washington share -- not as Republicans or Democrats, but as Americans. And I want to thank leaders of the House and Senate for getting this bill to my office. Source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/06/20080630.html Yeah - everyone focuses on that paragraph and makes agenda based comments and pontifications. What seems to be forgotten is this paragraph: quote: I appreciate that Republicans and Democrats in Congress agreed to provide these vital funds without tying the hands of our commanders, and without an artificial timetable of withdrawal from Iraq. Our troops have driven the terrorists and extremists from many strongholds in Iraq; today violence is at the lowest level since March of 2004. As a result of this progress, some of our troops are coming home as result of our policy called "return on success." We welcome them home. And with this legislation we send a clear message to all that are servings [sic] on the front line that our nation continues to support them. Celebrating the passage of this Bill, celebrates the continuing war in Iraq. Hypocrisy or spin; what is the appropriate politically correct term? Yeah, all those bi-partisan votes. Bi-Partisan to a political party perhaps; but VERY partisan to the paying pack the PAC's and industries funding re-election campaigns. The fact that there are some who want to make political hay out of this from either side of the aisle speaks to the naiveté, (I really wanted to use stupidity there) of the electorate. There have been a dozen headlines about this bill. Pick and choose the one representing the cut of pork that suits your 'representative's' reelection campaign best and I'm sure you can find a local headline about it. But the attention given to the 'GI Bill' is the most ironic. Especially this part: quote: Providing Veterans with the benefits they have earned and deserve Ends the Disabled Veterans’ Tax. Reduces waiting times on disability claims and expands outreach to veterans. Ironic because this and the other billions of pork added to the mix served to mask the ultimate result. The Iraq was is funded for another 18 months, insuring another 18 months worth of dead and wounded soldiers. Those in favor can take a bow - but at the same time they should be also taking some blame for funding more flag laden coffins. quote: ORIGINAL: bipolarber Yep. It passed. and it was somewhat sickening to see Bush and McCain, (both of whom opposed the bill and voted against it) suddenly take credit for it's passage. They thought it was going to be "too expensive"... Regardless of the reason, based upon your previously expressed opinion on the Iraq War, Senator McCain's position to vote against this pork laden mandate to fund the war for the next 18 months would seem to point your vote to him.

DomKen -> RE: New law... vets to get education... help me find info please (7/6/2008 8:56:03 AM)
Merc, do you really think a funding bill not getting passed would actually end the occupation? Are you aware that GWB said he would order the Pentagon to divert funding from elsewhere if the funding wasn't provided? Do you really think the Democrats are so stupid as to do something so easily spun into "not supporting the troops?" Or is your outrage a false face for your partisan attcks?

Owner59 -> RE: New law... vets to get education... help me find info please (7/6/2008 8:56:45 AM)
Stop it Merc. The dems held up Bush`s war funding to make him sign a bill(the GI "Bill of Rights") that he was against. Your guy was the one who blinked. Did you think that congress was going withhold funding from our troops?Nope,but they were going to make Bush play ball,nicey nice. Who`s surprised that Bush would turn around and take credit for a bill that he didn`t support?That kind of stunt, defines Bush. You helped vote this guy in a 2nd time,Merc.Thanks. Please quit the fake outrage .

Mercnbeth -> RE: New law... vets to get education... help me find info please (7/6/2008 9:14:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Merc, do you really think a funding bill not getting passed would actually end the occupation? Are you aware that GWB said he would order the Pentagon to divert funding from elsewhere if the funding wasn't provided? Do you really think the Democrats are so stupid as to do something so easily spun into "not supporting the troops?" Or is your outrage a false face for your partisan attcks? Disagreeing with your rationalized hypocrisy isn't partisan. No funds - no war. Argue all you'd like. The same plurality would have served nicely and been veto proof. But instead the pork packers won. Taxpayers lost and soldiers will continue to die; albeit with another bone tossed to them. What was the chorus? Oh yeah; "Bush lied - soldiers died!" How about in this case "Congress voted - bodies floated!"? quote: Stop it Merc. The dems held up Bush`s war funding to make him sign a bill(the GI "Bill of Rights") that he was against. Your guy was the one who blinked. Did you think that congress was going withhold funding from our troops?Nope,but they were going to make Bush play ball,nicey nice. Who`s surprised that Bush would turn around and take credit for a bill that he didn`t support?That kind of stunt, defines Bush. Now hold one here - I thought you were advocating the bi-partisan nature of this Bill. Why when some light is being shined do you point to the "dems" holding up anything? I see - you're into the game playing brinkmanship and the resulting "blinked" from one side in order to claim victory. I on the other hand point to the pragmatic reality of the result. I stick to that and let you argue from a moving perspective. No - I didn't think Congress was going to withhold funding. Their bosses and paymasters won't let them. Feel free however to keep supporting them and think that a party label distinguishes the players. The "my guy" reference begins and ends with "my President". Like it or not - pragmatic reality, as it will be next January when it seems likely I will have not voted for whoever it is. A reasonable expectation since neither of the political party candidates will get my vote. quote: You helped vote this guy in a 2nd time,Merc.Thanks. Yup I did and considering the alternative - you're welcome. Really read the posts - who is being partisan and agenda based?

Owner59 -> RE: New law... vets to get education... help me find info please (7/6/2008 9:22:02 AM)
"Yup I did and considering the alternative - you're welcome." There was a third.Stay home. I still don`t understand why folks thought that they ~had~ to vote for Bush.Was there a gun to your head or something? The poor alternative excuse is just a lame cop-out for voting for the worst president in American history,again. Again,thanks. And anybody,I mean anybody ,would have done better that Bush has.

Mercnbeth -> RE: New law... vets to get education... help me find info please (7/6/2008 9:34:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 "Yup I did and considering the alternative - you're welcome." There was a third.Stay home. I still don`t understand why folks thought that they ~had~ to vote for Bush.Was there a gun to your head or something? The poor alternative excuse is just a lame cop-out for voting for the worst president in American history,again. Again,thanks And anybody,I mean anybody ,would have done better that Bush has. You are welcome again. Sorry - I'm active and did use my vote to vote against someone who would have been less competent; but then that is debatable although not the subject of this thread. Tangent and distract - is that now an officially recognized political response? Must be, and this Bill is a fine example. Celebrating the continuing war funding while running on a end the war stance. You have to be hypocritical and two faced to be a politician; it seems it requires the same persona to support one. No wonder I don't have a candidate to support and only vote against the incumbents regardless of party affiliation. That way I can still have mirrors in my house. Based upon that answer you couldn't agree with anything currently being discussed and need to bring up something 4 years in the past. Maybe you'll remember this going to vote this time - but I doubt it because like a broken clock you can be pointed to on those times when "Dems are right!" comes around. Hey it does happen; just about as much as "Republicans are right!" does. Neither rare occurrence matters so much to me.

Alumbrado -> RE: New law... vets to get education... help me find info please (7/7/2008 2:17:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bipolarber Yep. It passed. and it was somewhat sickening to see Bush and McCain, (both of whom opposed the bill and voted against it) suddenly take credit for it's passage. They thought it was going to be "too expensive"... Realy? And exactly when did Bush vote against it?

Alumbrado -> RE: New law... vets to get education... help me find info please (7/7/2008 2:26:47 AM)
quote: Celebrating the passage of this Bill, celebrates the continuing war in Iraq. Hypocrisy or spin; what is the appropriate politically correct term? Yeah, all those bi-partisan votes. Bi-Partisan to a political party perhaps; but VERY partisan to the paying pack the PAC's and industries funding re-election campaigns. The fact that there are some who want to make political hay out of this from either side of the aisle speaks to the naiveté, (I really wanted to use stupidity there) of the electorate. There have been a dozen headlines about this bill. Pick and choose the one representing the cut of pork that suits your 'representative's' reelection campaign best and I'm sure you can find a local headline about it. But the attention given to the 'GI Bill' is the most ironic. Especially this part: quote: Providing Veterans with the benefits they have earned and deserve Ends the Disabled Veterans’ Tax. Reduces waiting times on disability claims and expands outreach to veterans. Ironic because this and the other billions of pork added to the mix served to mask the ultimate result. The Iraq was is funded for another 18 months, insuring another 18 months worth of dead and wounded soldiers. Those in favor can take a bow - but at the same time they should be also taking some blame for funding more flag laden coffins. The same bill also provides relief for the victims of the Midwest flooding... are they also stupid, naive, or just hypocites?

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125