This new GI Bill is an absolute must but it really just gets me peeved when those who use patriotism as a weapon refuse to back it up with legislation. So, all those who voted against this new GI Bill deserve to be called unpatriotic; it’s just disgusting. Hopefully a few people in the 6th will see this new ad that Americans United for Change is running:
(Note: this post has been published on a timer)
Post Tools: 
PrintThis
Related Posts: Hybachricy, Bachmann votes for identity theft, Bachmann Screws Up Again, Bachmann’s Energy Bill, Seriously?, Bachmann Picks Bush Over Sick Kids,
PrintThis
Related Posts: Hybachricy, Bachmann votes for identity theft, Bachmann Screws Up Again, Bachmann’s Energy Bill, Seriously?, Bachmann Picks Bush Over Sick Kids,
22 Responses to “TV Ad Targets Michele Bachmann on Lack of Support for GI Bill”
Comments are currently closed.
Loading ...
The GI Bill would devastate the reenlistment rates. It also does nt provide transferability of rewards to a service member’s family. The bill has much room for improvement, and it is absolutely unfair to call any legislator unpatriotic for opposing this garbage bill. But coming from a partisan hack, this is no surprise.
Add the transferability and increase the rewards heavier at the end to ensure that men and women of the military don’t opt out early.
“The GI Bill would devastate the reenlistment rates.”
How exactly do you know this? Sean
Sean2, I agree 100%,
Any bills written by Washington moonbats are bad. Everyone knows these Liberal dummocrats want to surrender to terrorists. Why they have the power to write Bills is beyond me.
The obvious Republican majority of Americans will oppose this bill, because it shows weakness in the war on terror.
Any legislation that is sponsored by weak people like Jim Webb is suspect, and is probably anti-American.
I don’t think anyone actually needs to examine the specifics of any bill written by these moonbats who hate America. Nobody is interested anyway.
Everyone knows when a story is published on a partisan hack website, it is a lie.
great Job!
Since when is a GI education bill SUPPOSED to help re-enlistment rates? It is supposed to help enlistment rates and reward soldiers for doing their duty and that is it. Just because you Republicans want endless war and keep sending soldiers in for multiple tours doesn’t mean the rest of us need to follow your misguided lead.
What a complete asshole way to look at a GI Education bill? On another subject ARE YOU OF MILITARY AGE? If so why haven’t you joined up if you are so concerned about re-enlistment rates?
Partisan hack?
You mean Webb? Former republican? Former assistant secretary of the navy? That partisan hack?
Matt is the partisan hack. I in no way intend to attack Sen Webb. Granted, I thought his resonse to Bush’s SOTU a few years back was laughable, but I still respect him.
@Sean - {Hope summer is treating you well. NJ has burnt me} I’ve listened to military experts discussing the bill since it reached cable news. There seems to be a clear consensus that the GI bill provides incentive for troops to take advantage of the benefits rather than re-enlist.
No one, Bachmann included, opposes providing benefits to the men and women of the military. But at minimum, why doeswn’t this bill allow benefits to be transferred to the family, as Bachmann to my knowledge wants.
@amuseinc - I never argued the intent of the GI bill was to encouragwe re-enlistment. But it should not disincentive it. That’s damaging to the military in a time of war. Please don’t question my decision not to join the military. This has nothing to do with me, so keep my personal life out of it.
Senator Webb has said he is open to the idea of allowing the transfer of benefits, but the whole issue is just a smoke-screen. It has been tried, on a limited basis, in the past, and fewer than 2% of those eligible took advantage of it.
Rep. Bachmann has stated that she objects to the benefits being too high. The transferability is just one point, and the one that does not make her soud like she is against veterans’ benefits. One of her odder claims is that more generous benefits will be a “disincentive” to keeping college tuition low.
Sean2 I Agree 100%,
As a large number of patriotic Republicans have stated over the last few years, they are fighting the war here at home against these moonbats who hate America and want to surrender to terrorists.
Great Job, Sean2!
Sean do you remember the kid on the schoolyard who used to say “Why don’t you and him fight?” A complete and utter a-hole… that’s you.
Posting about your concern for volunteer soldiers deciding to go to college and become productive citizens after putting their lives on the line in a completely useless war as a bad thing is the ultimate in selfish behavior. Do you expect them to die for you because they are soldiers? Do you expect them to not want a future outside the military? This is typical Republican claptrap BS writ large.
It is immoral to not reward the soldiers so misused by the Bush Republican administration simply because it will make it harder to turn them into cannon-fodder for another enlistment. We are talking about the sons and daughters of America not disposable nothings the Republicans seem to see.
Yo Chickenhawk Sean2!
You’re calling this a garbage bill because it actually might allow veterans to go to college without graduating with a small mortgage to pay off? Tell me, Sean2, what have you been doing while these young men and womewn have been serving their country? What have you done to serve your country? I think the earlier poster is right — if you’re of military age (42 and under I believe) and so concerned about re-enlistment rates, get your chickenhawk ass down to the recruiting station and sign up! And take Bachmann’s kids with you.
Amuseinc, you’re being a bit too harsh. Sean2 is typical in his disregard of the real human costs of war, but that’s that standard for neocons. I know it’s frustrating but when dealing with people who don’t factor in the real costs of war but it’s what you have to do. Like with Abu Gharib and Guantanamo and the real costs of torture. Ordering servicemen and women to commit those acts leaves permanent scars, as permanent as the lost of a limb. And what about the costs of innocent women and children whose only crime was to exist in Iraq. 1 million? 2 million? Only estimates here but if you think about it, it’s a staggering number. Sean2 is typical in his disregard of human life and that’s maybe what we have to deal with as a legacy of Bush the lesser.
Sean2’s limited credibility just pegged at zero. This chickenhawk neocon shows his true colors.
“This has nothing to do with me, so keep my personal life out of it.” says sean2.
Has nothing to do with you sean? Are you not a citizen of our great land? Are you so ready to toss other’s lives at the war on terrr, but it has nothing to do with you? Unfricken believable!!!
So, I’m confused, am I a partisan hack but have Sean2’s respect, or just a partisan hack? … ha.
You are the partisan hack. Sen. Webb is the man I respect. Granted, you are decent enough to warrant a response, which is more than can be said than the three previous commenters who all resorted to their typical personal attacks.
Sean, there is no personal attack when you refuse to take responsibility for your own political beliefs. You are criticized for callously telling other people to die for those beliefs and refusing to support those who do serve.
You think that Bush’s War in Iraq is just peachy keen… for other people. That makes your opinions about that war suspect. You want to be a warmonger then get in there and prove it. Don’t stand on the sidelines and tell others to die for your “patriotic” beliefs.
Sean2
You clearly express concern about enlistment rates…and you clearly express concern about affording service members benifits.
I think your fitness to serve, and whether or not you are willing to do so are indeed fair game.
http://buildourparty.blogspot.com/2008/05/on-new-gi-bill.html
Dude says 16% loss in retention is gained with a 16% increase in recruitment.
Maybe you should actually read these reports instead of spinning your one sided McCainisms.
This bill was a poison pill. The Democrat spin isn’t going to fool anyone but Democrat fools.
When a GI Bill is drafted that puts vet’s interests ahead of leftist political tactics it’ll get signed…as long as there is a GOP majority in place to make sure it happens.
You goofs really have to be nuts to think that any military veteran is going to take any Democrat’s word for anything that has to do with the military…nuts.
So dramatically increasing educational benefits for returning vets is a leftist political tactic? Of course, those diabolical bastards. I see what they’re doing. They’re trying to make military service more appealing to young poor men and women that find college and university costs too great. After one term of service, they will be able to get decent education and a higher paying job, all thanks to the Democratic party. Serving constituents, who would’ve ever thought that would work. The Republicans are going to have some serious swift boating smear and fear work to counter this one.
Swiftee, I agree 100%
Everyone knows that there is no Democrat anywhere in our cCountry who is qualified to make any important decision.
The proud track record of the Republicans these last 7 years has been impeccable, and proves to these moonbats who deserves to be in charge.
Everyone knows there are no military veterans who are Democrats.
Great Job!
Keep taking these moonbats down Swiftee.
By the way, what happened to the link to your blog? I like to read your storeies about taking down moonbats.
You goofs really have to be nuts to think that any military veteran is going to take any Democrat’s word for anything that has to do with the military…nuts.
The world is full of ‘goofs,’ and you’ll understand just how ‘nuts’ we are to think Democrats having clout on National Security, Military and Veterans’ issues in 159 days.
“@Sean - {Hope summer is treating you well. NJ has burnt me} I’ve listened to military experts discussing the bill since it reached cable news. There seems to be a clear consensus that the GI bill provides incentive for troops to take advantage of the benefits rather than re-enlist. “
Sean2, consider this:
“VFW Commander Discusses Veterans’ Issues with President
Support for new GI Bill is urged
WASHINGTON,May 21, 2008 – The national commander of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the U.S. met with President George W. Bush in the Oval Office this morning to discuss issues important to America’s veterans, servicemembers and their families.
George Lisicki thanked the president for his strong support of the troops and their families, and for personally hosting the VFW’s Voice of Democracy winners during his tenure, but the Vietnam veteran from Carteret, N.J., also used the opportunity to voice the VFW’s strong support of the new GI Bill for the 21st century that has been proposed by Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.).
“Creating a new GI Bill has been a long-standing national goal for the VFW,” said Lisicki, who discounts criticism by some in the administration who say an enhanced education package would result in a mass exodus of first-term enlistees.
“People are leaving after their first enlistment because they are tired of being shot at, and their families are tired of the frequent deployments,” he said. “Whether they stay in four years or 20, we owe this newest Greatest Generation the gift of education, and that’s why the VFW is solidly behind Webb’s bill.”
more, here:
http://www.vfw.org/index.cfm?fa=news.newsDtl&did=4571
republiCon opposition to the new GI Bill is the same opposition they have to everything: GreedOverPrinciples party members don’t want to pay for a (cheney)in’ thing. They will, however, consider borrowing the dough now, if they can pass the bill to the next generation.
The true cost of war - any war - is the cost of taking care of it’s veterans, often for more than sixty years.
And that’s a cost that ChickenHawks simply don’t want to pay.