What The Hell??

Bush praises McCain for the GI Bill? The bill that McCain opposed? The same bill that McCain didn't even show up to vote for?

This is rank dishonesty by Bush and maybe the straight talker will correct the record for Bush. You know, since he’s such a straight talker.

[ 6:36 ]

On Passage Of The 21st Century GI Bill

Sen. Jim Webb on White House's Embrace of his 21st Century GI Bill:

"For the past 17 months, I and my staff have been working every day to provide first-class educational benefits to those who have served since 9/11. I am delighted that after having opposed this legislation, the President has now pledged that he will not veto it when it comes before him as part of this year's supplemental appropriations package.

"The bill being sent to the President contains every provision in S. 22, which has received meticulous scrutiny and the full support of every major veterans' organization. It will pay for a veteran's tuition, books, and a monthly stipend, along the lines of the benefits given to those who returned from World War II. As such, it fulfills the pledge I made on my first day of office to provide today's veterans with the opportunity to move forward into an absolutely first-class future.

"I would like to again express my appreciation to the veterans' service organizations, many of whom communicated their support of this bill directly to a skeptical White House, and to the 58 Senate and 302 House cosponsors of this landmark legislation. This bipartisan coalition consistently rejected the allegations of this Administration, and of Senators McCain, Burr and Graham, among others, who claimed that the bill was too generous to our veterans, too difficult to administer and would hurt retention.

"It has now been nearly seven years since 9/11 -- seven years since those who have been serving in our military began earning the right for a proper wartime GI Bill. I am looking forward to the President living up to his word, and signing this legislation at his earliest opportunity."

Sen. Jim Webb on the passage of 21st Century GI Bill:

“Today, the Senate took a final historic step toward a modern and fair educational benefit for the men and women who have served honorably since 9/11. This bill properly responds to the needs of those who answered the call of duty to our country—those who moved toward the sound of the guns—often at great sacrifice.

“Eighteen months ago, we began with the simple concept that those who have been serving since 9/11 should have the same opportunity for a first class educational future as those who served during World War II. Today, we have accomplished that goal.

McSame No Show:

As if trying to steal credit for Webb’s GI Bill wasn’t bad enough, McCain yesterday skipped the Senate vote on the legislation, which passed 92-6. The only other senator not present for the vote was Ted Kennedy (D-MA), who is battling a brain tumor. [snip]

McCain has not voted in the Senate since April 8 and has missed 367 votes (61.4 percent) during the current Congress.

McSame Flip Flop Pandering

McCain's Straight Talk & Support For the Military

BarbinMD, KOS:

...Throughout the course of this presidential campaign season, we’ve watched McCain pander for the evangelical vote, contradict himself on issues ranging from tax cuts to immigration, call himself the anti-lobbyist candidate while surrounding himself with lobbyists, vilify special interests despite his history of brokering deals for big-money contributors, denouncing 527 groups as he parrots their message, all while running as fast as he can from George Bush even as he embraces a stay the course X 100 Iraq policy.

The bottom line is, associating the words "straight talker" with John McCain is nothing short of laughable. Volumes could be written on the issues that he has flip flopped on, or the positions he has embraced in an effort to pander to a particular voting bloc, but today let’s focus on the John McCain whose devotion to the men and women of the military is unquestionable. [snip]

Time and again we are told that his support for the men and women serving in our military is unwavering and unquestionable, and that as someone who has sacrificed for his country, to question him somehow dishonors his own service. But as the saying goes, "facts are pesky things," so instead of relying on McCain's rhetoric, let's look at some of those facts:

• McCain has repeatedly voted against amendments in the Senate that would have...covered such important services as improving care at veterans’ hospitals, providing mental health services to soldiers with post-traumatic stress disorder and substance abuse problems. [2006 Senate Vote #7, 2/2/2006]
  
  
• In 2006, McCain voted against the Kerry amendment that would eliminate increased fees and co-payments for veterans in the TRICARE health care program by raising the discretionary spending limit by approximately $10 billion. The provisions would have been fully offset by eliminating creating corporate tax breaks. [2006 Senate Vote #67, 3/16/2006]
  
  
• McCain was one of only 13 Republicans to vote against an amendment that added over $400 million for inpatient and outpatient care for veterans. [2006 Senate Vote #98, 4/26/2006]
  
  
• McCain voted against increasing funding for veterans health care by $2.8 billion in 2006. [2005 Senate Vote #55, 3/16/2005]
  
  
• McCain joined his Republican Senate cohorts in opposing exempting all military personnel and veterans from means testing in bankruptcy cases. [2005 Senate Vote #13, 3/1/2005]
  
  
• McCain opposed an amendment that would reduce from 60 to 55 the age at which certain members of the National Guard and Army reserves could receive retirement benefits. [2004 Senate Vote #136, 6/23/2004]
  
  
• Senator McCain opposed $322 million in funding for "battlefield clearance and safety equipment for U.S. troops in Iraq." A reduction in Iraqi reconstruction funds would have funded the additional protection for troops in the battlefield. [2003 Senate Vote #376, 10/2/2003]
  
  
• McCain voted against an amendment that would increase spending on the veterans health care program TRICARE by $20.3 billion over 10 years to members of the National Guard and Reserves. The increase would be offset by a reduction in tax cuts. [2003 Senate Vote #81, 3/25/2003]
  
  

• McCain opposed an amendment that would have increased veterans spending by $13 billion from 1997-2002 to be offset by closing corporate tax preferences and reinstating expired taxes. [1996 Senate Vote #115, 5/16/1996]
  

The reality and the rhetoric of John McCain are at complete odds, yet the fact that McCain is a champion of the military is the unchallenged, conventional wisdom in the traditional media. Which brings us to McCain’s more recent opposition to Senator Jim Webb’s G.I. Bill of Rights (pdf), a bill that provides real educational benefits for veterans and that enjoys overwhelming bipartisan support. McCain’s objection? That providing the men and women who have risked their lives in Afghanistan and Iraq with the means to attend college when their service is complete might hurt retention rates in the military. All of this cuts right to the heart the problem with the media’s unwillingness to meaningfully challenge McCain on his issue...Iraq and his alleged support for the troops.

Air Force Association Endorses GI Bill

But McSame Still Does Not Support The Troops

Think Progress:

Air Force Association Endorses Webb’s GI Bill

...McCain’s record on veterans issues may have given the AFA pause. McCain has been a vocal opponent of the Sen. Jim Webb’s (D-VA) 21st Century GI Bill. He offered his own watered-down version of the bill but shut out most veterans groups from the crafting of the legislation. Now the AFA and McCain have officially parted ways, with the AFA endorsing Webb’s bill, S.22:

Updating the bill to tie it to the current costs as proposed in S. 22 will help Airmen achieve a complete four-year education and thus a better quality of life after serving, while bolstering recruitment efforts throughout the military and helping lower post-military unemployment rates of veterans.

The AFA specifically urged providing “the full benefit to anyone who has served three years active duty,” a component of Webb’s bill McCain has rejected and the Pentagon has mocked.

McCain has claimed he has the support of “literally every veterans organization in America.” Yet the AFA is just one of many groups who object to McCain’s opposition to the GI Bill — a bill he found so unimportant he skipped the vote on it:

Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America

American Legion

Military Officers Association of America

Student Veterans of America

Veterans of Foreign Wars

This is only a partial list of the 15 veterans groups — not to mention the 30 governors — who have endorsed Webb’s bill.

MOAA Endorses GI Bill

Military Officers Association of America endorses Webb’s GI Bill

Think Progress:

The Military Officers Association of America (MOAA) has announced that it “strongly supports” Sen. Jim Webb’s (D-VA) 21st Century GI Bill. MOAA said they “understand the concerns of those who would prefer to see enhanced GI Bill benefits tied to extended military service” but “the GI Bill has always been a veterans’ benefit, not a military retention benefit“:

MOAA is, indeed, concerned about the serious potential for a retention downturn among today’s forces, but believes strongly that any such downturn will be due to too-frequent extended combat tours and family separations that have been imposed on a too-small force.

Defending The G. I. Bill

Putting the Republicans on Defense Over G.I. Bill

Carl Hulse, NYT:

As John Adler, a promising Democratic congressional candidate in New Jersey, ended an appearance at a fund-raiser on Thursday with Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, one guest posed a question: Would Congress override any presidential veto of a new plan to pay the college costs of post-Sept. 11 veterans?

* * * * *

The measure not only reminds voters of the human costs of the war in Iraq, they say, but it gets them thinking about the nation’s colossal investment there during difficult economic times here. And it can reinforce the sense that the Bush administration has sometimes dropped the ball when it comes to caring for returning members of the armed forces, i.e. Walter Reed.

* * * * *

Mr. Webb, a veteran and former Navy secretary, made the bill his calling card after arriving in the Senate in 2007. At times, he seems uncomfortable with the way it is being used to draw a political dividing line, with him on one side and Senator John McCain, the Republican presidential candidate and fellow Vietnam veteran, on the other. And some Democrats were initially skeptical. But Speaker Nancy Pelosi seized on the idea and Democrats moved ahead.

Under the Webb plan, anyone who has served at least three years on active duty would be eligible for what amounts to four years at a state college along with help with housing and books. The overall cost is estimated at $52 billion over 10 years.

Republicans recognize the political dangers posed by the bill. Before leaving for Memorial Day, 25 Republican senators broke with the White House and their leadership to back the proposal as part of a larger spending package. Thirty-two House Republicans supported it as well, even though the House version was paid for by a new income tax on very affluent Americans.

In addition, Congressional Republicans have come up with an alternative to the Webb measure that has the blessing of President Bush, the Pentagon and Mr. McCain. It is less expansive than the Webb plan, would be more generous to those who stay in the military longer and would allow those who do their duty to share the education rewards with spouses and children – a concept known as transferability. Supporters of the alternative fear the Webb plan is so enticing it will hurt their efforts to retain experienced military personnel they have invested in through training.

* * * * *

Yet many Republicans concede they feel boxed in by the veterans proposal. They say it is hard to explain why they are not willing to invest $50 billion in college aid for returning combat troops when the nation is spending at least that much rebuilding Iraq. House Republicans also feel their brethren in the Senate hung them out to dry by embracing the measure after so many in the House rejected it, leaving them open to charges that they are standing in the way of new help for veterans.

Democrats jumped at the opportunity.

* * * * *Republican groups are pushing back.

* * * * *

But Democrats have managed to confound the opposition on what is typically a signature Republican issue. In what already looms as a tough year, it should be doubly troubling for Republicans to find themselves on defense over defense.

Article cross-posted* at HuffPo.

Read/download No Where to Go But Back
and other songs *by Max And The Marginalized:

There’s an upward trajectory that they promised
But to be frankly honest, I must’ve misunderstood
‘Cause they’re taking double the years that they’re giving
Waving around yellow ribbons, but they’re not making good
So, can you help me figure it out?
I can’t tell which side they’re on
when they talk out of either side of their mouths

So pay no attention to the signals they send
It’s not what you do, it’s what you spend
If you intend to hold up your end of the pact
And I know there’s a carrot stuck on a stick
It keeps getting longer they keep getting sick
A hundred or so world’s away from the inside track
Because there’s nowhere to go but back

Stabilize America first

Billings Outpost News:

Let’s see if I have it right.

Middle class families can’t send their kids to college because federal loans are cut. Our bridges are collapsing, roads and schools are crumbling, 50 million Americans are without healthcare. Horrendous numbers of home mortgages are in foreclosure, our three very biggest banks failed but for taxpayer bailouts. More to go! Bush administration told us “deficits don’t matter. President Reagan proved that!” Try that on your budget!

Republicans cut our Veterans Administration budget so up to 15,000 permanently maimed vets have been discharged with no benefits or medical care Our surging military is paying $24 million weekly to Iraqi insurgents if they point out other insurgents.

The Bush administration said oil revenues would pay for Iraqi reconstruction but so far it’s Uncle Sam. Seventy-seven percent of Americans disapprove of Bush’s war, but the $3 billion a week war just goes on and on. Are we nuts?

Sen. John McCain, who wants to be president, says we may need to be there 100 years to stabilize Iraq. I say, stabilize America first.

We are edging into the very black abyss of Depression. Get out of personal debt quickly if you can. You may have less than a year. Hurry!

Senate Passes GI Bill

Via Think Progress:

By a veto-proof 75-22 vote, the Senate has approved Sen. Jim Webb's 21st Century GI Bill.

Sen. John McCain, fundraising instead in California, didn't bother to show his support for the troops.

President Bush says he will veto the bill.

Vets and Missions Not Accomplished

Now Begins Month 61 Since 'Mission Accomplished'

Meteor Blades, KOS:

Whatever the number, it is horrendous. All the more so because the deaths of the Americans, of the Iraqis, of the other members of the coalition, have all resulted from a war of choice, an unnecessary war, a war of the new imperialism. A war founded and continued to this day on exaggerations, distortions, fabrications, concoctions and lies. A war which a smirking, strutting, absurdity of a president told us 60 months ago was Mission Accomplished.

Progressives should never declare our mission accomplished until justice is delivered to those who lied us into this war. Justice for the 52 Americans who died last month, for the 4065 who have died since March 2003, for the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who have also died. Without justice, they truly will have died in vain.

Webb calls out McCain on GI Bill: ‘He’s so full of it’

Steve Benen, C & L:

A couple of weeks ago, John McCain talked about the importance of increasing the size of the U.S. military. To entice more volunteers, he said, the government should focus on incentives: “[O]ne of the things we ought to do is provide [the troops with] significant educational benefits in return for serving.”

A few days later, McCain announced that he’ll oppose a bipartisan measure to renew and expand the GI Bill for a new generation of veterans.

Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), the leading proponent of the modernized GI Bill, is calling McCain out and creating an interesting battle.

* * *

McCain concedes he hasn’t tended to his day job in a while, but said his Senate office staff told him that Webb “has not been eager to negotiate.”

“He’s so full of it,” Webb said in response. “I have personally talked to John three times. I made a personal call to [McCain aide] Mark Salter months ago asking that they look at this.”

For Webb, this seems to have far less to do with campaign politics, and far more to do with a deep desire to get a bill through the chamber: “I don’t want this to become a political issue. I want to get a bill done.”

For the troops’ sake, it’d be great if McCain agreed.

Worst Persons Awards

SilentPatriot, C & L, has the clips:

John McCain takes home the silver after getting called out by Senator Webb for dragging his feet on the bipartisan GI bill and claiming Webb hasn’t reached out to him. And after five years of admitting the United States “invaded” Iraq, Bill O’Reilly takes home the gold for changing his mind by now saying we didn’t. Oh, Bill.

Vets say they feel misled about GI benefits

CNN:

Cheated. Baited and switched. That's how veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan say they feel about military recruiters who sold them on how the GI Bill would benefit them.

Soldiers, Marines and airmen, speaking at a Capitol Hill rally Tuesday, said they are not given enough funds from the bill to cover college expenses as they were promised.

* * *

One of the early beneficiaries of the GI Bill was Petty Officer 3rd Class John Warner, who served in the Navy in WWII and went on to earn undergraduate and law degrees. The GI Bill covered both degrees in full at that time.

Warner is a U.S. senator from Virginia, and he spoke to the veterans at Tuesday's rally.

"I would not be privileged to have served now these 30 years in the United States Senate, and at one time chairman of the Armed Services Committee, had it not been this great nation giving me the opportunity through the GI Bill to receive that education, preparation and training," he said.

Warner is one of 58 senators co-sponsoring Sen. Jim Webb's Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act.

* * *

Webb's proposal is designed to dramatically expand educational benefits for military veterans. A version of the bill in the House has 241 co-sponsors. Covering active-duty National Guard troops and reservists, as well as other service members, it aims to cover the cost of the most expensive public in-state universities and a monthly housing stipend. Those who served on active duty for three or more months after September 11, 2001, would be eligible.

* * *

"This is not a difficult concept. For all the people saying this is the new Greatest Generation, this is not a difficult thing. This is the easiest way to prove that," said Webb, a Virginia Democrat and Vietnam veteran.

* * *

President Bush warned Tuesday at a Rose Garden news conference that he would veto any additions to the bill.

Vets Get Weak Brain Treatment, Report Says

Associated Press:

Many Iraq war veterans with traumatic brain injury are not getting adequate health care and job assistance for their long-term recovery despite years of government pledges to do so, Veterans Affairs Department investigators say.

"Significant needs remain unmet," according to the report released Thursday by the VA's inspector general. It is the first to examine the Bush administration's long-term efforts in supporting veterans with traumatic brain injury, a leading problem among soldiers struck by roadside bombs that often causes lasting emotional and behavioral difficulties.

* * *

The VA pledged to coordinate the necessary follow-up care with the Pentagon, but the latest audit concludes that efforts are still falling short for roughly one in four patients.

21st Century GI Bill

Senator Jim Webb (D - VA) joined representatives of the nation's leading veterans groups to advocate comprehensive educational benefits for post-9/11 veterans in the fiscal year 2009 budget. The groups unveiled their Independent Budget to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs earlier in the day, advocating a "21st Century GI Bill," similar to the Webb-Hagel bill (S.22) that enjoys widespread support.

"This independent budget represents the voices of our nations' veterans' service organizations who truly understand the costs of war," said Senator Webb. "These advocates have called for a '21st Century GI Bill' that provides returning Iraq and Afghanistan veterans with benefits that respect their service and reward their sacrifice like the WWII veterans that came before them."

* * * * *

For any of those who claim that it is too expensive, consider this: The estimated yearly cost for this program is $2 billion - equivalent to one week of spending on this war.

Democratic SOTU Response

UPDATE:

A YouTube version of the response by Sen. Webb.

The joint statement released by Pelosi and Reid.

Some facts debunking parts of the 2007 State Of The Union.

_ _ _ _ _

Here is the text of the Democratic response (as prepared for delivery) to the State of the Union address given by Senator Jim Webb.

Good evening.

I'm Senator Jim Webb, from Virginia, where this year we will celebrate the 400th anniversary of the settlement of Jamestown – an event that marked the first step in the long journey that has made us the greatest and most prosperous nation on earth.

It would not be possible in this short amount of time to actually rebut the President's message, nor would it be useful. Let me simply say that we in the Democratic Party hope that this administration is serious about improving education and healthcare for all Americans, and addressing such domestic priorities as restoring the vitality of New Orleans.

Further, this is the seventh time the President has mentioned energy independence in his state of the union message, but for the first time this exchange is taking place in a Congress led by the Democratic Party. We are looking for affirmative solutions that will strengthen our nation by freeing us from our dependence on foreign oil, and spurring a wave of entrepreneurial growth in the form of alternate energy programs. We look forward to working with the President and his party to bring about these changes.

There are two areas where our respective parties have largely stood in contradiction, and I want to take a few minutes to address them tonight. The first relates to how we see the health of our economy – how we measure it, and how we ensure that its benefits are properly shared among all Americans. The second regards our foreign policy – how we might bring the war in Iraq to a proper conclusion that will also allow us to continue to fight the war against international terrorism, and to address other strategic concerns that our country faces around the world.

When one looks at the health of our economy, it's almost as if we are living in two different countries. Some say that things have never been better. The stock market is at an all-time high, and so are corporate profits. But these benefits are not being fairly shared. When I graduated from college, the average corporate CEO made 20 times what the average worker did; today, it's nearly 400 times. In other words, it takes the average worker more than a year to make the money that his or her boss makes in one day.

Wages and salaries for our workers are at all-time lows as a percentage of national wealth, even though the productivity of American workers is the highest in the world. Medical costs have skyrocketed. College tuition rates are off the charts. Our manufacturing base is being dismantled and sent overseas. Good American jobs are being sent along with them.

In short, the middle class of this country, our historic backbone and our best hope for a strong society in the future, is losing its place at the table. Our workers know this, through painful experience. Our white-collar professionals are beginning to understand it, as their jobs start disappearing also. And they expect, rightly, that in this age of globalization, their government has a duty to insist that their concerns be dealt with fairly in the international marketplace.

In the early days of our republic, President Andrew Jackson established an important principle of American-style democracy – that we should measure the health of our society not at its apex, but at its base. Not with the numbers that come out of Wall Street, but with the living conditions that exist on Main Street. We must recapture that spirit today.

And under the leadership of the new Democratic Congress, we are on our way to doing so. The House just passed a minimum wage increase, the first in ten years, and the Senate will soon follow. We've introduced a broad legislative package designed to regain the trust of the American people. We've established a tone of cooperation and consensus that extends beyond party lines. We're working to get the right things done, for the right people and for the right reasons.

With respect to foreign policy, this country has patiently endured a mismanaged war for nearly four years. Many, including myself, warned even before the war began that it was unnecessary, that it would take our energy and attention away from the larger war against terrorism, and that invading and occupying Iraq would leave us strategically vulnerable in the most violent and turbulent corner of the world.

I want to share with all of you a picture that I have carried with me for more than 50 years. This is my father, when he was a young Air Force captain, flying cargo planes during the Berlin Airlift. He sent us the picture from Germany, as we waited for him, back here at home. When I was a small boy, I used to take the picture to bed with me every night, because for more than three years my father was deployed, unable to live with us full-time, serving overseas or in bases where there was no family housing. I still keep it, to remind me of the sacrifices that my mother and others had to make, over and over again, as my father gladly served our country. I was proud to follow in his footsteps, serving as a Marine in Vietnam. My brother did as well, serving as a Marine helicopter pilot. My son has joined the tradition, now serving as an infantry Marine in Iraq.

Like so many other Americans, today and throughout our history, we serve and have served, not for political reasons, but because we love our country. On the political issues – those matters of war and peace, and in some cases of life and death – we trusted the judgment of our national leaders. We hoped that they would be right, that they would measure with accuracy the value of our lives against the enormity of the national interest that might call upon us to go into harm's way.

We owed them our loyalty, as Americans, and we gave it. But they owed us – sound judgment, clear thinking, concern for our welfare, a guarantee that the threat to our country was equal to the price we might be called upon to pay in defending it.

The President took us into this war recklessly. He disregarded warnings from the national security adviser during the first Gulf War, the chief of staff of the army, two former commanding generals of the Central Command, whose jurisdiction includes Iraq, the director of operations on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many, many others with great integrity and long experience in national security affairs. We are now, as a nation, held hostage to the predictable – and predicted – disarray that has followed.

The war's costs to our nation have been staggering.

Financially.

The damage to our reputation around the world.

The lost opportunities to defeat the forces of international terrorism.

And especially the precious blood of our citizens who have stepped forward to serve.

The majority of the nation no longer supports the way this war is being fought; nor does the majority of our military. We need a new direction. Not one step back from the war against international terrorism. Not a precipitous withdrawal that ignores the possibility of further chaos. But an immediate shift toward strong regionally-based diplomacy, a policy that takes our soldiers off the streets of Iraq's cities, and a formula that will in short order allow our combat forces to leave Iraq.

On both of these vital issues, our economy and our national security, it falls upon those of us in elected office to take action.

Regarding the economic imbalance in our country, I am reminded of the situation President Theodore Roosevelt faced in the early days of the 20th century. America was then, as now, drifting apart along class lines. The so-called robber barons were unapologetically raking in a huge percentage of the national wealth. The dispossessed workers at the bottom were threatening revolt.

Roosevelt spoke strongly against these divisions. He told his fellow Republicans that they must set themselves "as resolutely against improper corporate influence on the one hand as against demagogy and mob rule on the other." And he did something about it.

As I look at Iraq, I recall the words of former general and soon-to-be President Dwight Eisenhower during the dark days of the Korean War, which had fallen into a bloody stalemate. "When comes the end?" asked the General who had commanded our forces in Europe during World War Two. And as soon as he became President, he brought the Korean War to an end.

These Presidents took the right kind of action, for the benefit of the American people and for the health of our relations around the world. Tonight we are calling on this President to take similar action, in both areas. If he does, we will join him. If he does not, we will be showing him the way.

Thank you for listening. And God bless America.