NationStates Jolt Archive

Congressman Steve Buyer (R-IN), new chairman of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, is trying to redefine what it means to be a veteran. This is apparently an attempt to deny veterans' benefits to thousands, perhaps even millions of those who served honorably and well.

To say that this pisses me off is a classic understatement! These are my brothers and sisters we're talking about here. As far as I'm concerned, they earned whatever benefits this nation can grant them.

Congressman Buyer has stated that "the VA system should follow its core constituency and the intent of Congress." His interpretation of this congressional double-talk would limit VA benefits to "disabled and indigent veterans," thus elminating many, if not most veterans from any and all benefits. Even though, as a disabled veteran, I would probably not be affected by whatever changes Congressman Buyer proposes, I don't believe his would be the best approach for either the veteran or the Country.

I know many of you don't support the war in Iraq, and that some of you don't like the military, but blocking the elmination of benefits for those who served may be something you too can back.

If I have any credibility at all with you, please do me a favor ... call or write your congressperson as soon as possible and protest this dispicable proposal.

Read an article about this topic here. (http://www.military.com/Opinions/0,,Scott_032905-P1,00.html?ESRC=dod.nl)

List of Congressmen and how to contact them. (http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/)

That's really really shitty. In other words you can enlist and fight for your country (defending all those 'wonderful' congressmen), but if you don't get shot doing so, you're going to get jack shit when you get back home.
So much for compassionate conservatism. <shakes head>

That's really really shitty. In other words you can enlist and fight for your country (defending all those 'wonderful' congressmen), but if you don't get shot doing so, you're going to get jack shit when you get back home.
So much for compassionate conservatism. <shakes head>
I don't know what the current administration's postion is on this, but if they support it, I'll be pissed off at them too!

I know many of you don't support the war in Iraq, and that some of you don't like the military, but blocking the elmination of benefits for those who served may be something you too can back.
Cutting benefits for veterans is an insult to the service they have done for an admnistration that had led them to a war based on faulty intelligence. It is unfair to those who have suffered from Bush's policies. They have served their country, and they have paid their fare. They deserve benefits. After all, they put their lives on the lines to protect those who can't fight...

I think I can find some tar, if someone's got chicken-feathers, it's about a four day drive to Washington D.C. Figure half an hour to take the guards, nail Buyer to a rail, dip his ass in hot tar, and roll him in feathers.
I'm not disabled, I have never claimed disability, but I have too many friends who got out less-lucky than I did. Let's tar and feather the son of a bitch, then throw him in a sewage-retention pond.

Cutting benefits for veterans is an insult to the service they have done for an admnistration that had led them to a war based on faulty intelligence. It is unfair to those who have suffered from Bush's policies. They have served their country, and they have paid their fare. They deserve benefits. After all, they put their lives on the lines to protect those who can't fight...
I agree. If the administration supports this, I may have to become a democrat, instead of just being an independent. Heh!

This ain't about Bush, his policies are not the only ones that have left broken bodies behind. This Buyer bastard is going after everybody-your dad, your uncles, your granddad, anyone who's ever served. If we don't make some kind of example out of him, it'll tell congress that they can A******K every single joe who's ever worn the uniform, no-problem.

I understand that we are going to have to sacrifice and make deep budget cuts, but of all the programs that we support, veteran's benefits are one of the few that should never be touched. When these men and women enlist to serve they make a contract with the people of the US. They agree to serve and put away their own personal lives for the benefit of the country in exchange for a few benefits in later years. If we can't honor our contract with these patriotic citizens, how can we be expected to honor our word to anyone?

I used the link in your post to contact Rep. Chris Smith, Senator Corzine, Senator Lautenberg, and the prez. and vice prez. Thanks for bringing this to our attention and I hope this bill doesn't pass.

I don't really understand this. First of all, Congressman Buyer is a veteran of the Gulf War and has an active commission in the military (or did. It's been awhile since I checked), so I can't understand why he would want to deny veterans the treatment they deserve for their service.

Secondly, why? The VA isn't that expensive, and if they want to raise money to pay for it or whatever, raise taxes a little! Who in this country would oppose a miniscule tax raise to cover proper treatment for veterans? It would help pay for the program and help veterans, so I'd support it.

For a party that supposedly does (or did, at least) provide such strong support for the military, I can't believe that they would try to cut this service to the very men they support.

I agree. If the administration supports this, I may have to become a democrat, instead of just being an independent. Heh!
Either way, it is distasteful and disrespectful for any member of Congress, and the Senate to make such a suggestion. They will lose even more potential soldiers this way. If they can't treat their current soldiers with respect and dignity, what makes them think they'll get more volunteers?

I used the link in your post to contact Rep. Chris Smith, Senator Corzine, Senator Lautenberg, and the prez. and vice prez. Thanks for bringing this to our attention and I hope this bill doesn't pass.
THANK YOU!!! :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle:

I'll definitely be looking into this. If the proposal is as you say (not that I don't trust you, just that I like to look into things a little closer), it is a truly disturbing idea - and one I would fight tooth and nail.

I don't really understand this. First of all, Congressman Buyer is a veteran of the Gulf War and has an active commission in the military (or did. It's been awhile since I checked), so I can't understand why he would want to deny veterans the treatment they deserve for their service.

Secondly, why? The VA isn't that expensive, and if they want to raise money to pay for it or whatever, raise taxes a little! Who in this country would oppose a miniscule tax raise to cover proper treatment for veterans? It would help pay for the program and help veterans, so I'd support it.

For a party that supposedly does (or did, at least) provide such strong support for the military, I can't believe that they would try to cut this service to the very men they support.

Even a Vet can turn into a buddy f**ker, remember John Kerry?
As for 'Parties", I have yet to see a Political party, that, once in power, didn't try to back out on the joes. I think it might be the water or something in D.C.-or it might be that the atmosphere is so rarified near the Potomac that they start thinking that certain classes of people-the ones who don't wear shiny rank, or make headlines for them, aren't worth keeping honour with.

I think I can find some tar, if someone's got chicken-feathers, it's about a four day drive to Washington D.C. Figure half an hour to take the guards, nail Buyer to a rail, dip his ass in hot tar, and roll him in feathers.
I'm not disabled, I have never claimed disability, but I have too many friends who got out less-lucky than I did. Let's tar and feather the son of a bitch, then throw him in a sewage-retention pond.

I'd fly in to participate.
Sent my 2 cents to Delay. (I am embarrassed to admit he's my rep.)
I also passed on the message to several people.

Even a Vet can turn into a buddy f**ker, remember John Kerry?
As for 'Parties", I have yet to see a Political party, that, once in power, didn't try to back out on the joes. I think it might be the water or something in D.C.-or it might be that the atmosphere is so rarified near the Potomac that they start thinking that certain classes of people-the ones who don't wear shiny rank, or make headlines for them, aren't worth keeping honour with.

I think it's because there isn't really any accountability in Washington. Combine this with the lifer politicians, elitist attitudes of many, and the overall corruption that government brings and you have an environment where the average person doesn't matter. All that matters for a politician is that they gain a bloc of votes, and they would prefer that the individuals who can't help them win just piss off or shut up. This is a sad state of degeneration for our nation.

Eutrusca: I see this as a natural extension of Republican policy. They showed blatant disregard for active duty military by sending them into a war that had nothing to do with national defense, on the basis of poor intelligence, and then ignored all recommendations for the post-war scenario. Now that they've shafted the active members, they're going after former members. It makes sense, in a sick, Republican kind of way.

Even a Vet can turn into a buddy f**ker, remember John Kerry?

Wow. I didn't think there could possibly be anyone in America with internet access who still believed that swift boat lie.

Or perhaps you were talking about the speech to Congress? Maybe you should try reading it.

Eutrusca: I see this as a natural extension of Republican policy. They showed blatant disregard for active duty military by sending them into a war that had nothing to do with national defense, on the basis of poor intelligence, and then ignored all recommendations for the post-war scenario. Now that they've shafted the active members, they're going after former members. It makes sense, in a sick, Republican kind of way.



Wow. I didn't think there could possibly be anyone in America with internet access who still believed that swift boat lie.

Or perhaps you were talking about the speech to Congress? Maybe you should try reading it.

I did, I read the full text of John Kerry's Winter-soldier testimony. I have also examined his voting record from the time he first took office (This took several days), bills sponsored, etc. etc.

As for the Swift Boats thing-that only brought up the subject. If the bastard had just taken his early-out, and told only the truth, he'd be fine in my book-but he didn't do that. Calling my uncle, and my father War-Criminals and telling tall-tale war-stories under oath to slander guys that were sent to hell for not being richkids in college, oooh no. People make mistakes when they're young-sometimes it's being a F**ktard, and sometimes, it's being a drunk, but outright betrayal of your brothers, now, that's inexcuseable. I will not excuse John Kerry, and I will not excuse rep. Steve Buyer. NO amount of advantage is worth screwing over the vets, that needs to be a clear and precise message. It needs to be taught to these tax-fattened hyenae that you screw with the vets, you get your political balls kicked into your chin.

Even a Vet can turn into a buddy f**ker, remember John Kerry?
As for 'Parties", I have yet to see a Political party, that, once in power, didn't try to back out on the joes. I think it might be the water or something in D.C.-or it might be that the atmosphere is so rarified near the Potomac that they start thinking that certain classes of people-the ones who don't wear shiny rank, or make headlines for them, aren't worth keeping honour with.
Remember that little poem about "Tommy?"

"It's Tommy this, and Tommy that, And chuck him out the brute,
But it's 'Savior of his Country,' When the guns begin to shoot!
For God and the soldier we adore, In time of danger, not before!
The danger passed, and all things righted, God is forgotten and the soldier slighted."
- Rudyard Kipling

Sigh. :(

The thing about the Kerry speech to Congress is:

1) He placed all the blame on senior leadership, all the way to the president and Congress.
2) The things he described actually happened.
3) He was making an argument before Congress for getting all those guys who were sent to hell for not being rich kids back in America where they belonged.

As I said, if you actually took time to read it, you might have a different idea.
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/index.php?topic=Testimony

I think it's because there isn't really any accountability in Washington. Combine this with the lifer politicians, elitist attitudes of many, and the overall corruption that government brings and you have an environment where the average person doesn't matter. All that matters for a politician is that they gain a bloc of votes, and they would prefer that the individuals who can't help them win just piss off or shut up. This is a sad state of degeneration for our nation.

There are very few issues that are worthy of being active on-most issues are doubtful at best-Veterans Affairs is absolutely clear and plain. You treat your vets like dirt, you get shit soldiers-because like the man said, young people who think about going in, look at how their dad, or older brothers, are being treated, and that's going to influence not only whether there's an enlistment contract, but also what kind of service you get out of 'em.

Past that, it's deeper-because it's an honour thing. It's why deserters are lower than snakeshit. You put on the uniform, raise your right hand, and say, in effect, that you give up your rights as a citizen to protect this nation, that you will kill or die if necessary to protect your neighbours, your family, your friends, your Countrymen and their interests. In exchange, they're supposed to try and keep you in one piece, and failing that, help you out a bit as you get older-because you're going, and the people who sent you are not.

Out of all the groups that get 'special' benefits, VETERANS actually Earn those benefits-because once in that uniform, they can kill you. They can make you kill someone else, they can send you somewhere, and you can wind up being sent to your death, or to years of torture while the Dippmats try to get you back. They can send you to a place where you're walking around in a blue-beanie with an empty rifle while the rioters are firing AK-47's at you.

They can give SSI to illegal immigrants, or disability payments to junkies who've never served, they can goddamned take care of the men and women who've stood on the wall and kept the F**king Neobarbs outside the gates.

The Republican Party seems all to happy to send troops to war, and all too reluctant to reward those who make it home again. For shame. I've always seen them as waiting to be hostile to the veterans; that's why I was so surprised when the Swiftboat 'Patriots' sided with Bush on attacking Kerry for not getting shot by a Vietcong in Vietnam. If the administration supports it, then they'll get voted out in 2008 - it's a practical certainty.

There are very few issues that are worthy of being active on-most issues are doubtful at best-Veterans Affairs is absolutely clear and plain. You treat your vets like dirt, you get shit soldiers-because like the man said, young people who think about going in, look at how their dad, or older brothers, are being treated, and that's going to influence not only whether there's an enlistment contract, but also what kind of service you get out of 'em.

Past that, it's deeper-because it's an honour thing. It's why deserters are lower than snakeshit. You put on the uniform, raise your right hand, and say, in effect, that you give up your rights as a citizen to protect this nation, that you will kill or die if necessary to protect your neighbours, your family, your friends, your Countrymen and their interests. In exchange, they're supposed to try and keep you in one piece, and failing that, help you out a bit as you get older-because you're going, and the people who sent you are not.

Out of all the groups that get 'special' benefits, VETERANS actually Earn those benefits-because once in that uniform, they can kill you. They can make you kill someone else, they can send you somewhere, and you can wind up being sent to your death, or to years of torture while the Dippmats try to get you back. They can send you to a place where you're walking around in a blue-beanie with an empty rifle while the rioters are firing AK-47's at you.

They can give SSI to illegal immigrants, or disability payments to junkies who've never served, they can goddamned take care of the men and women who've stood on the wall and kept the F**king Neobarbs outside the gates.
Thank you, thank you, thank you! :)

The thing about the Kerry speech to Congress is:

1) He placed all the blame on senior leadership, all the way to the president and Congress.
2) The things he described actually happened.
3) He was making an argument before Congress for getting all those guys who were sent to hell for not being rich kids back in America where they belonged.

As I said, if you actually took time to read it, you might have a different idea.
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/index.php?topic=Testimony

Look, John Kerry is not the F**king topic here, okay? You want to defend that piece of shit, go ahead, I READ THE TESTIMONY. Not Excerpts, the whole thing. John Kerry is old news, he lost, he deserves his reputation, just like Massachusetts probably deserves him. (you get the Leaders you work for.)

Steve F**king Buyer is the topic here, and his 'new ideas' about redefining what definition is most 'convenient' to use with regard to Vet status.
This guy, this Buyer, needs to be made an example of, to the point where he hesitates to walk down the street for fear of being recognized and stoned.
"Driven from office in disgrace" might be nice, because a message needs to reach Washington D.C. that there are some groups you don't F**k with, and the biggest dog among them is the American Veteran.

I know many of you don't support the war in Iraq, and that some of you don't like the military, but blocking the elmination of benefits for those who served may be something you too can back.
Maybe you haven't noticed, Eutrusca, but it's the American liberals that have most vocally protested against cuts in veteran's benefits over the past 4 years.

Maybe you haven't noticed, Eutrusca, but it's the American liberals that have most vocally protested against cuts in veteran's benefits over the past 4 years.
You are correct ... I hadn't noticed.

Look, John Kerry is not the F**king topic here, okay? You want to defend that piece of shit, go ahead, I READ THE TESTIMONY. Not Excerpts, the whole thing. John Kerry is old news, he lost, he deserves his reputation, just like Massachusetts probably deserves him. (you get the Leaders you work for.)

Then why did you bring it up in the first place, ya "F**king" troll? :)

There are very few issues that are worthy of being active on-most issues are doubtful at best-Veterans Affairs is absolutely clear and plain. You treat your vets like dirt, you get shit soldiers-because like the man said, young people who think about going in, look at how their dad, or older brothers, are being treated, and that's going to influence not only whether there's an enlistment contract, but also what kind of service you get out of 'em.

Past that, it's deeper-because it's an honour thing. It's why deserters are lower than snakeshit. You put on the uniform, raise your right hand, and say, in effect, that you give up your rights as a citizen to protect this nation, that you will kill or die if necessary to protect your neighbours, your family, your friends, your Countrymen and their interests. In exchange, they're supposed to try and keep you in one piece, and failing that, help you out a bit as you get older-because you're going, and the people who sent you are not.

Out of all the groups that get 'special' benefits, VETERANS actually Earn those benefits-because once in that uniform, they can kill you. They can make you kill someone else, they can send you somewhere, and you can wind up being sent to your death, or to years of torture while the Dippmats try to get you back. They can send you to a place where you're walking around in a blue-beanie with an empty rifle while the rioters are firing AK-47's at you.

They can give SSI to illegal immigrants, or disability payments to junkies who've never served, they can goddamned take care of the men and women who've stood on the wall and kept the F**king Neobarbs outside the gates.


YES!!!! *Standing ovation for Cadillac-Gage*

NO amount of advantage is worth screwing over the vets, that needs to be a clear and precise message. It needs to be taught to these tax-fattened hyenae that you screw with the vets, you get your political balls kicked into your chin.
Hehehe! SIC 'em! :D

They can give SSI to illegal immigrants, or disability payments to junkies who've never served, they can goddamned take care of the men and women who've stood on the wall and kept the F**king Neobarbs outside the gates.

Agree 100%.

Then why did you bring it up in the first place, ya "F**king" troll? :)

Hmm... yeah, I used that word a bit too much.
Because, it's not "One Party" that has this kind of asswipe, but both-and both need to be reminded, from time to time, that just because the candidate has a DD214, doesn't mean he's immune if he wants to screw over the guys who have, and will, serve. Kerry got shredded in part because of his treatment of his fellow soldiers, sailors, and airmen. Now, I guess it's time to teach the other side of the aisle the same lesson.

Also, because I'm furious about the subject-absolutely furious. Trying to 'change the definition' of Veteran to something that is politically expedient if you're cutting back the VA, is pretty low. Not quite as low as, say, going to bat for the people shooting at and killing your guys, but close.

For a VET to be doing it, is damned near unforgiveable, the solution my great-grandfathers had of tar-and-feather 'em seems right and appropriate-but it's impractical, so settling for driving the guy from office in disgrace and ruining his name for the next ten generations sounds about right-it should carry about the same amount of intimidation factor for the rest of the spineless leeches in elected office.

I think I can find some tar, if someone's got chicken-feathers, it's about a four day drive to Washington D.C. Figure half an hour to take the guards, nail Buyer to a rail, dip his ass in hot tar, and roll him in feathers.
I'm not disabled, I have never claimed disability, but I have too many friends who got out less-lucky than I did. Let's tar and feather the son of a bitch, then throw him in a sewage-retention pond.
I'm with ya. Just let me get my act together here a bit.

[ Rummages around in various trunks looking for those chicken feathers he saved for just such an occasion!]

Actually, Eutrusca, I'm a little surprised that you didn't know this earlier. Granted, I don't know that much about you, but even I, who is a bloody Pacifist from Germany, did know (albeit not much) about the Republican plans to cut Veterans' health care and benefits, and I would've thought that this already would be an issue for you.

It's not like these plans are new, I think I read first about them a year or two ago. But back then it of course was only commie propaganda. ;)

Oh, and sorry, I'm not American, so I can't write to any Congressman/woman or Senator about it, but I would, if I could.

Fran

Oh, and sorry, I'm not American, so I can't write to any Congressman/woman or Senator about it, but I would, if I could.

Fran
Mucho thanks, anyway. Your heart seems to be in the right place. :fluffle:

Actually, Eutrusca, I'm a little surprised that you didn't know this earlier. Granted, I don't know that much about you, but even I, who is a bloody Pacifist from Germany, did know (albeit not much) about the Republican plans to cut Veterans' health care and benefits, and I would've thought that this already would be an issue for you.

It's not like these plans are new, I think I read first about them a year or two ago. But back then it of course was only commie propaganda. ;)

Oh, and sorry, I'm not American, so I can't write to any Congressman/woman or Senator about it, but I would, if I could.

Fran

You could always help out by starting collections for a "Tar and Feather" fund- you know, enough tar to dip several dozen congresscritters at a time, and a few truckloads of feathers... (The bastard wouldn't be in this position without help. Might as well get them while we're at it...)

Thank you for telling me about this bill. I emailed both my senators and my congressman and urged them to fight this bill.

Sent my message to Ted Kennedy...but he's friggin Jabba the Hutt so I'm not sure how much he can do to help. :p

He's huge!

Its good to know that its not good enough for me to be here (I am in Iraq right now writing this). Never mind I willingly left a preagnant fiance or or for that matter higher paying jobs for my enlistment, no I gotta get shot before it matters. Well shit, I better make sure if I get hurt, its worth it huh

Its good to know that its not good enough for me to be here (I am in Iraq right now writing this). Never mind I willingly left a preagnant fiance or or for that matter higher paying jobs for my enlistment, no I gotta get shot before it matters. Well shit, I better make sure if I get hurt, its worth it huh

No, don't get hurt. Come home healthy and whole. Just make sure that everyone you know is aware of this and get them motivated to protest to their representatives.

Even a Vet can turn into a buddy f**ker, remember John Kerry?
As for 'Parties", I have yet to see a Political party, that, once in power, didn't try to back out on the joes. I think it might be the water or something in D.C.-or it might be that the atmosphere is so rarified near the Potomac that they start thinking that certain classes of people-the ones who don't wear shiny rank, or make headlines for them, aren't worth keeping honour with.
Sore winner? Yes you are.

I mean, why would you include him? Why cuss too? What purpose other than showing you have such low vocabulary that you can't express yourself without cussing.
Plus you used way too many ors in your sentences. I count 4 in one sentences, I'm not sure what it is called when you use too many lol.

Kerry do nothing that deserves this today. Sheesh, some trolls.

Its good to know that its not good enough for me to be here (I am in Iraq right now writing this). Never mind I willingly left a preagnant fiance or or for that matter higher paying jobs for my enlistment, no I gotta get shot before it matters. Well shit, I better make sure if I get hurt, its worth it huh

Print it an' pass it around to the guys, make sure they jump their congresscritters and let the folks back home know (Sometimes it has to work that way-a lot of civilians walk around unaware of this kind of crap-until it hits them), One of the great things about the service, good news may travel, but bad news travels fast. (heh, if we could harness that...)
Remember to be respectful-until you're out, you can't call the congressman shit-for-brains, or impute your awareness of what he does with sheep,goats, or his mother, discuss his most likely position in the afterlife, or be especially graphic in describing what these actions reveal about his desire to engage in involuntary sodomy of military personnel.
Remember also that Congresscritters technically out-rank you, so don't directly impute your congresscritter's honour, however accurate the description might be.

A simple "You back this, and you won't be electable for the job of dog-catcher" should suffice.

Sore winner? Yes you are.

I mean, why would you include him? Why cuss too? What purpose other than showing you have such low vocabulary that you can't express yourself without cussing.
Plus you used way too many ors in your sentences. I count 4 in one sentences, I'm not sure what it is called when you use too many lol.

Kerry do nothing that deserves this today. Sheesh, some trolls.

"Kerry do nothing?" We can only hope this is so (especially nothing...). The man will have my personal contempt until the end of time, okay?


As for my language, there are times in life, when only the four-letter words can possibly articulate something so base. There are times when the beauty of proper grammar simply is wholly inappropriate.
There are times when the only correct term, is one based in vulgarity, that implies the vile, base, dirty, dishonourable nature of an action...or a person.

Oh...and no, it does not matter what party that person belongs to. The Election is over, but the contempt remains.

**laughs** If there was ever an effective way to commit political suicide its getting caught screwing over Vets.

I don't know what this man was thinking; in the midst of a war, with patriotic fervor still rather high, and given the political rhetoric of the last campaign...This is simple insanity...was he cleaning out his desk as he did it?

I doubt the Republican Party would be found within ten feet of this proposal, Eutrusca ;) They have way to much to lose publicly. Perhaps some people in Congress are nasty and stupid enough to support it privately; that much wouldn't surprise me, but publicly?

Sent emails to my rep and one of my senators.

Eutrusca - I e-mailed that article to everyone I know, and after I post this, I will be writing to Rep. Mark Green and Senators Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold.

*gets some feathers* :D

can any post a link to the VETERANS BENEFITS IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2004? having problems finding it.

Go here...

http://veterans.house.gov/legislation/

the fourth one down is the one you are looking for.

Thanks... The reason why I'm asking is that from the interview indicated in the 1st poster's link, it sounds like he isn't cutting anyone out, just prioritizing who gets the money and what amount. so, I need to see what changes are being put forth. after all, I kinda agree with his sentiment. A soldier who gets injured during combat should recieve more care than one who gets the same injury in a non-combat/non-duty incident. Just like a soldier going through combat will need different care than one who didn't. again, doing research to see if that is what he's planning.

after all, if he is correct that the VA funds is in a $3 billion dollar hole from legislation of less than 5 years... something is wrong...

First they cut taxes, then they say they need to make budget cuts...

Well, Bush, if you want money, don't cut taxes! Cut taxes if the State has all the money it needs, not when the Treasury's bankrupted and US debt is in the trillions and rising each damned day. :headbang: If anything, taxes should be reduced for the 1% of the poor people, not Bush's buddies in Microsoft and EnRon (you may say "but middle class businesses benefit, too!", but I don't hardly think that's who Bush has in mind).

Republicans want to cut veterans' benefits? We all knew that already, but thanks anyhow. :fluffle: