Republicans end 55 years of hearings for veterans groups. What a disgrace.
I wonder if the Republicans will also end hearings for Big Oil execs, special interests lobbying such as Halliburton and aerospace engineers, all of which entirely profit from the wars our soldiers fight and die in.
We can do better.
Tags:
Veterans Day, Bush Attacks
11.11.2005
Happy Veterans Day
Posted by Chris at 1:05 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
24 comments:
Glad you posted the Happy Vets Day.
We Can Do Better.
Ok, I am going to have to be picky here, but from what I read, it is a proposal, and has not been passed as of yet. One Republican has called for it, and to blame all at this time is a bit premature.
Maybe you could elaborate on why you think it is important for this to continue.
I hate to be picky, but I am going to be anyways. From what I have read, it seems that this in simply a proposal and not yet a final say. And as you know, oftentimes, a proposal is sometimes just a way of getting people to think.
You should not be so quick to point out an entire party when only one person is referenced. If a vote is held and you can show a overwhelming amount of Republicans voted for the proposal, where there you go.
Maybe you could elaborate for me the reasons why you feel it is important for such a hearing to continue to take place. It seems more like pomp and circumstance to be honest.
Sorry I did not read this earlier.
Obviously the symbolism , if nothing else, is a very poor example to the way our service people are treated and considered. That in a time when people are dying in a war began on lie. The old your good enough to go to war in place of my son but not good enough to listen to.
Sorry I missed the point the first time MJ I was clicking briefly through all my links.
businessman, thanks.
Craig, I really have no clue what you are talking about. It is not a proposal, and it does not have to be voted on. This is not a bill, there's no law here. There is nothing to pass, this is a hearing for veterans. The Republican House Committee on Veterans Affairs Chairman Rep. Steve Buyer (R-Ind) made the decision not to allow veterans lobby groups to testify their concerns before a joint Senate-House session. You can read about it here
This is a Republican leadership decision, thus it is a Republican decision plain and simple; yes an entire party.
All the time I go out of my way to distinguish between a person and a party, and lately I have quit doing that, but this is one instance where party leadership made a decision. This is not one person. I'm sure I can go onto your site and pick scores of instances where you do not distinguish between a person and a party. Careful what you point out.
And do I really have to elaborate on why veterans, people who do more than you or I for this country, should be allowed to testify their concerns to Congress just like every top money-donor Republican lobbyist gets to? Please.
Read the Disabled American Veterans' description of Bush's War on Veterans: http://www.dav.org/news/war_on_veterans.html
I think it's more than a proposal.
I agree that they should have a voice, but how are we certain that this is the best method. What is accomplished at these meetings? What is discussed? How does it relate on what is done from year to year? And I would be careful to put complete trust in a group, The DAV, which is only interested in their side of the story, the same goes for the people in charge of the proposal.
I have to feel that an administration that has rasied veteran benefits would not end a long standing event without reason.
In good faith, I read the DAV website and re-read the linked site and see the the first line I read concerning a proposal was mis-leading, and understand it was a elimination by the committee chairman. Sorry for the confusion, but I am not as knowledgable about all the procedures.
Could someone tell me if these groups still have a voice elsewhere, or is this the only way the word was passed on? I just want to think that there has to be a reason for such a blatant act upon the committee.
Craig, you're wrong buddy, just flat out wrong.
And the Bush administration has tried numerous times to cut veterans benefits.
The reason why the Republicans stopped the vets from testifying in Congress was because the vets were going to deliver negative news about the Bush administration and its funding for disabled vets and the situation in Iraq. These hearings are public and the information that would be presented in them would shed another negative light on the Bush administration and its total incompetence. This just isn't a good time for King George to be getting knocked from the military. But trust me, the vets will get their word out. Very bad move by the Republicans.
This is a travesty. It makes me ashamed of them and they should be ashamed of themselves.
They support vets as long as they don't cost them money or tell the truth when the truth makes them look bad. Complete unforgivable hypocrisy. I can't believe these people at times.
This is a travesty. It makes me ashamed of them and they should be ashamed of themselves.
They support vets as long as they don't cost them money or tell the truth when the truth makes them look bad. Complete unforgivable hypocrisy. I can't believe these people at times.
Complete and utter hypocrisy and as girl said a travesty.
Complete and utter travesty as girl has said. Yeah the word is out there.
forgive me mj i didn't know they wouldn't show up right away...i'm not really drunk. lol
Sorry everyone. I have this comment moderator turned on, so that's why comments don't show up right away. It's not what I thought it would be, so I'm going to turn off the moderator, plus it's a headache. But, I don't know Alice, I think you still might be drunk.
i am at a loss for words. this hurts. i can't believe they would deny veterans the opportunity to speak.
I have contacted my United States Representative about this out rage. The day before I heard about this I got his news letter telling all about the great things Congress had done for the Veterans. Now at least one member of Congress whats to send them a message, shut up. What a way to treat the people that put their lives on the line to protect their country.
God Bless America, God Save The Republic.
Um, yeah, I wrote a comment and it was never displayed...so, I will write my 2 cents again: shame on you MJ for just presenting this like the veterans have been taken away their voices before Congress. They have been asked to come forward earlier in the budgeting process, so that what they say may actually have some effect on the budget. There are always two sides to a story, although I agree that veterans get kicked around a lot, and need as much support as possible. SO I totally agree that this was the rug being pulled out form underneath them at this moment, if it is exactly how you present it...but I think I will have to go researching this to form an informed opinion, instead of just jumping on the band wagon here and trashing the evil Republicans.
CVG, thanks for the kind words. Yes there has been a rescheduling of sorts and I encourage you to research anything that you may question.
The vets have been denied a voice in the American Congress for this entire year. And the rescheduled hearings will not be before a joint session of Congress either. So starting in Feb. a very limited voice will return but not as effective as it has been for the past 55 years and in a much more limited state than the last 5 decades. Plus only certain VA groups will now be allowed to testify and the list of who can and cannot has not been released yet.
So is this good for the vets? So far the American Legion and the VFW and the major VA groups are extremely against this new "rescheduling." I'll take the word of the VA groups any day over that of the politicians.
By moving the reduced hearings to Feb., the Republican leadership claims that it will allow the VA to have a larger influence on the budget. In doing this, they have caused the VA to go an entire year and a half without any voice to the government that sends them to war. And also the Republicans have greatly reduced the scope of the hearings, as well as the funding to the VA's. Not to mention, the Republicans have yet to prove why not allowing the vets to testify for a year and a half and moving to a new limited hearing will have any positive effect on the budget process and their desires.
I wonder if the Republicans will do the same for all of its top money donor lobbyist groups?
Your answer here in the comments I found a lot more informative than the post.
Lol...I love your last comment.
I didn't realize all my posts had to be essays. And after thinking about it some more, I'm not sure even calling these hearings "rescheduled" is even accurate. The hearings in Feb. appear to be complete different altogether. But we will have to wait for the Republicans to give us more information about what they plan on doing and how many groups they will allow to testify. Plus, I am very curious to see how the Republicans will explain to the veterans why the let them go a year and a half without allowing them to address their concerns to Congress. Having worked on budgets for a few years now, I would think if the effectiveness of budgetary items is the concern, then hearings for April or May would make much more sense. Nevertheless, I think this is a bad move by the Republicans.
Thanks for reading and thanks for checking back.
I didn't mean that your posts have to be essays.
I have read up on this now, and I think they need to get rid of Delay's lapdog Buyer and get Chris Smith back. That might renew some faith. I mean, for the most part, the Republicans do promote and support a lot of measures benefitting soldiers, veterans and their survivors. Hopefully this will get cleared up.
Post a Comment