Ron 10 #51 April 23, 2004 QuoteSo you don't mind that they're claiming something that you dispute to make their point? What I think you're saying is that it's not a valid comparison. So why do they make the comparison, and while doing that, claim that the level of care is horrendous? Or don't you mind as long as it supports your position? 1. My care has been fine. That does not mean the guy next to me is treated well. How can I tell? I'm not him. 2. Comparing one persons experience to project the possible affect of a NATIONAL system is impossible. I live in FL in a high retirment area..There are plenty of ex military here...In Podunk, OK. there may not be the same level of care. I have no idea the level of health care for anyone but me, in my area, with my health issues is like.....How can I claim to know what it is like for someone else, somewhere else, with other health problems. I would bet that somewhere there is a guy that is very unhappy with the care he has gotten from the VA. Quotehttp://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/s_132703.htmlA thousand veterans from the Pittsburgh area must wait a year before they can get an appointment with a government physician at one of three hospitals operated by the Veterans Administration, says the national commander of the American Legion. Ronald F. Conley, of Pittsburgh, said the waiting list in the Pittsburgh area has forced 2,000 other western Pennsylvania veterans to seek treatment at a VA hospital in West Virginia where the wait isn't as long. This region's veterans are among an estimated 200,000 to 300,000 veterans nationwide who can't get an appointment to see a VA physician, according to congressional reports. In Maine, 1,800 veterans have been waiting two years for an appointment. At one medical center in Florida, 16,000 veterans wait for a year. In Ashville, N.C., 10,000 are on the waiting list, he said. Conley said the wait for ill veterans -- or those who simply need prescriptions filled -- is intolerable even though VA policy requires an initial appointment within 30 days. There are 500,000 veterans with pending claims before the VA, reports the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress. About 100,000 claims are more than a year old. The Veterans Claims Benefit Reduction Act of 2003 would allow the National Association of Veteran Service Officers to partner with the VA in reducing the backlog by allowing the service officers to review applications. "A lot of these guys will be dead before the claims are adjudicated," Conley said. I had to wait a year to get in...But I HAD health care from my employer..so I didn't care. I have no doubt that the system is messed up....It is the largest and that is going to cause problems...If it was made even larger...guess what? More problems. Also I am service connected, so I get faster service than some guy that is not. And that makes a big difference."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #52 April 23, 2004 So when you said "I have found the VA hospitals run very well. " You meant: I have found the VA hospitals run very well after waiting a year to get in despite my connections and the guy next to me may not be very happy with the level of care and I don't doubt the system is really messed up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,116 #53 April 23, 2004 >I have found the VA hospitals run very well. And when I worked for the Air Force while Clinton was in office, things worked very well. Therefore Clinton did not cut military funding. (And I worked there and you didn't, so don't try any tricks mister!) Seriously, both Amy and Molly have worked at VA hospitals, and they are feeling the pinch. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #54 April 23, 2004 Quote>It's not an improvement if people's short term thinking restricts the >options of the Commander in Chief. It doesn't. If he can't get approval to engage his forces, it certainly restricts the options. Same applies if he would have to spend all his political capital to do what he thinks is in the best interests of the US. You look at Clinton in 1993- he had the White House and both sides of Congress, but 3 votes short of fillibuster protection. He could have rammed in gay rights in the military or a comprehensive health care change, but backed down when faces with that sort of choice. Quote >Do you believe all military conflicts by the last several Presidents > were wrong? I don't think any would get the support of a thousands > of $$ a year tax. WE WILL PAY IT ANYWAY. In fact, we will pay more due to interest. I prefer to pay for what we spend rather than passing the costs onto our children. So again it's really more a matter of controlling deficit spending. So if a new sudden expense hits (a war, a new homeland security, whatever) that can't be part of the budget planning in prior years, the population should be tasked with choosing how they will pay for it. This can be done at the next regularly scheduled election. Give em 3 choices: 1) temporary (specified) period with an increased fed w/h rate. 2) reduction in their SS payments - if they're still working their wage entry for that year will be discounted 3) reduction or elimination of some other benefit. Of course if you're going to have the citizens making these choices, what do we need Congress and the President for? Instead we want a combination of a nearly balanced budget requirement coupled with a rainy day reserve. You say you'd prefer to pay for it now rather than pass it on. I'm sure most would say the same in a poll, but do they mean it? Of course not. Some of this thread misses the difference between what is right and what is possible. Quote >The fact that instead some resort to guerilla bombings suggests that > a minority is instead trying to impose their will on the rest of the > people. What will do you figure they are trying to impose? They would be the ones that were living high on life in the old days, and would prefer to stay with a system where they continue to live better than the rest of their fellow citizens. I'm sure the Kurds like it better now. Quote Agreed. He is to blame. If you hire a security force to protect your house, and your house is broken into anyway, the one responsible is the person breaking in. However, to say the security force bears no responsibility at all is silly. [/reply[ Is it 0%? No. But it is remotely close to 50%? Hell no. Quote >Not all rebels are noble and righteous - the Contras come to mind. Now that is an odd example to use! Why? I think they map quite well to the Iraqi rebels. I believe the majority of Iraq looks forward to a peaceful nation without a ruler like Saddam, or an occupation by the US. But the minority would like something else and have no reluctance to kill and terrorize to get it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Ron 10 #55 April 24, 2004 QuoteSo when you said "I have found the VA hospitals run very well. " You meant: I have found the VA hospitals run very well after waiting a year to get in despite my connections and the guy next to me may not be very happy with the level of care and I don't doubt the system is really messed up. No, Im saying I found them run very well. And it took me a year to get in. I don't know how the guy next to me feels since I'm not him. And yes I think they are messed up...But given the scope of the job they have to do I would say they are better run than I would expect."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Ron 10 #56 April 24, 2004 QuoteSeriously, both Amy and Molly have worked at VA hospitals, and they are feeling the pinch. And you think it would be better if we had National Health care?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,116 #57 April 24, 2004 >If he can't get approval to engage his forces, it certainly restricts the >options. He doesn't need approval now to do what he wants. He commands the armed forces. If he wants to declare war, he needs the approval of Congress, but declaring war is uncool nowadays so at most we pass a resolution. > Same applies if he would have to spend all his political capital to do > what he thinks is in the best interests of the US. So you say he might have to make a hard decision? That he might be fine with 1000 US soldiers dying, but hesitate because he might become unpopular? I see that as a good thing. It's not an easy job; he has to make the hard decisions. Sending thousands of americans to their deaths (and killing thousands of innocent people) SHOULD be the hardest decision he has to make. And if he makes that decision in error, he should risk losing his position. He is, after all, in a position where such an error could kill millions, if not billions, of people. >So again it's really more a matter of controlling deficit spending. So > if a new sudden expense hits (a war, a new homeland security, > whatever) that can't be part of the budget planning in prior years, > the population should be tasked with choosing how they will pay for \ > it. Given the choice they will choose not to. "Reducing taxes" is something that every politician promises and every taxpayer wants. >>However, to say the security force bears no responsibility at all is silly. >Is it 0%? No. But it is remotely close to 50%? Hell no. OK, call it 25%. Like I said, we bear some responsibility to the people we promised to liberate. >>Now that is an odd example to use! >Why? I think they map quite well to the Iraqi rebels. Because we bankrolled them to do the violence they did. If we did the same in Iraq we'd be funding the people attacking our troops and we'd be calling them freedom fighters instead of insurgents. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,116 #58 April 24, 2004 >And you think it would be better if we had National Health care? ?? I don't know. Weren't we talking about defunding veteran's benefits? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Ron 10 #59 April 24, 2004 Quote?? I don't know. Weren't we talking about defunding veteran's benefits? And didn't I say I have had no problem with my health care from the VA?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #60 April 25, 2004 QuoteQuote?? I don't know. Weren't we talking about defunding veteran's benefits? And didn't I say I have had no problem with my health care from the VA? And you also said that the system has problems. See how easy it is to take two separate statements out of context and make it look like you're contradicting yourself, or "waffling"? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,148 #61 April 25, 2004 Bush first proposed reducing Veterans benefits on the VERY SAME DAY he was giving a talk at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, saying how veterans deserved the best care the country could give them. Here's what he said: www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030117-8.html Here's a report on what the lying hypocrite subsequently did: www.vfw.org/index.cfm?fa=news.newsDtl&did=1576 ... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Ron 10 #62 April 25, 2004 QuoteAnd you also said that the system has problems. See how easy it is to take two separate statements out of context and make it look like you're contradicting yourself, or "waffling"? Maybe, but if you ask me I say I have not had a problem but there are problems....Kerry will not stick to anything"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,148 #63 April 25, 2004 Quote>I have found the VA hospitals run very well. And when I worked for the Air Force while Clinton was in office, things worked very well. Therefore Clinton did not cut military funding. (And I worked there and you didn't, so don't try any tricks mister!) 99% of my colleagues at work have PhDs. I therefore can conclude that there is nothing wrong with education in the US if it produces such a well educated workforce.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,116 #64 April 26, 2004 >And didn't I say I have had no problem with my health care from the VA? No, you asked about national health care. I wasn't talking about national health care. And then you said the VA system was messed up, and it took you a year to get in, which jibes with Molly and Amy's experiences working there, and also supports the idea that they are underfunded. But then you disagreed with the idea that the administration is defunding VA hospitals. Confusing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Ron 10 #65 April 26, 2004 Quoteyou said the VA system was messed up, True Quoteand it took you a year to get in True Quotewhich jibes with Molly and Amy's experiences working there, and also supports the idea that they are underfunded Thats a jump there. QuoteBut then you disagreed with the idea that the administration is defunding VA hospitals. Where did I say that?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,116 #66 April 26, 2004 >Question: Did the Clinton administration significantly cut military, >defense, and intelligence, spending? Yep. Cutting defense is pretty popular during peacetime. If Reagan "doesn't really cut defense, he becomes the No. 1 special pleader in town...The severity of the deficit is great enough that the president has to reach out and take a whack at everything to be credible...If you're going to rule out the other two [Social Security cuts and a tax increase], then you've got to hit defense." - Dick Cheney, Washington Post, 12/16/84 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 3 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
Ron 10 #55 April 24, 2004 QuoteSo when you said "I have found the VA hospitals run very well. " You meant: I have found the VA hospitals run very well after waiting a year to get in despite my connections and the guy next to me may not be very happy with the level of care and I don't doubt the system is really messed up. No, Im saying I found them run very well. And it took me a year to get in. I don't know how the guy next to me feels since I'm not him. And yes I think they are messed up...But given the scope of the job they have to do I would say they are better run than I would expect."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #56 April 24, 2004 QuoteSeriously, both Amy and Molly have worked at VA hospitals, and they are feeling the pinch. And you think it would be better if we had National Health care?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,116 #57 April 24, 2004 >If he can't get approval to engage his forces, it certainly restricts the >options. He doesn't need approval now to do what he wants. He commands the armed forces. If he wants to declare war, he needs the approval of Congress, but declaring war is uncool nowadays so at most we pass a resolution. > Same applies if he would have to spend all his political capital to do > what he thinks is in the best interests of the US. So you say he might have to make a hard decision? That he might be fine with 1000 US soldiers dying, but hesitate because he might become unpopular? I see that as a good thing. It's not an easy job; he has to make the hard decisions. Sending thousands of americans to their deaths (and killing thousands of innocent people) SHOULD be the hardest decision he has to make. And if he makes that decision in error, he should risk losing his position. He is, after all, in a position where such an error could kill millions, if not billions, of people. >So again it's really more a matter of controlling deficit spending. So > if a new sudden expense hits (a war, a new homeland security, > whatever) that can't be part of the budget planning in prior years, > the population should be tasked with choosing how they will pay for \ > it. Given the choice they will choose not to. "Reducing taxes" is something that every politician promises and every taxpayer wants. >>However, to say the security force bears no responsibility at all is silly. >Is it 0%? No. But it is remotely close to 50%? Hell no. OK, call it 25%. Like I said, we bear some responsibility to the people we promised to liberate. >>Now that is an odd example to use! >Why? I think they map quite well to the Iraqi rebels. Because we bankrolled them to do the violence they did. If we did the same in Iraq we'd be funding the people attacking our troops and we'd be calling them freedom fighters instead of insurgents. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,116 #58 April 24, 2004 >And you think it would be better if we had National Health care? ?? I don't know. Weren't we talking about defunding veteran's benefits? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #59 April 24, 2004 Quote?? I don't know. Weren't we talking about defunding veteran's benefits? And didn't I say I have had no problem with my health care from the VA?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #60 April 25, 2004 QuoteQuote?? I don't know. Weren't we talking about defunding veteran's benefits? And didn't I say I have had no problem with my health care from the VA? And you also said that the system has problems. See how easy it is to take two separate statements out of context and make it look like you're contradicting yourself, or "waffling"? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #61 April 25, 2004 Bush first proposed reducing Veterans benefits on the VERY SAME DAY he was giving a talk at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, saying how veterans deserved the best care the country could give them. Here's what he said: www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030117-8.html Here's a report on what the lying hypocrite subsequently did: www.vfw.org/index.cfm?fa=news.newsDtl&did=1576 ... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #62 April 25, 2004 QuoteAnd you also said that the system has problems. See how easy it is to take two separate statements out of context and make it look like you're contradicting yourself, or "waffling"? Maybe, but if you ask me I say I have not had a problem but there are problems....Kerry will not stick to anything"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #63 April 25, 2004 Quote>I have found the VA hospitals run very well. And when I worked for the Air Force while Clinton was in office, things worked very well. Therefore Clinton did not cut military funding. (And I worked there and you didn't, so don't try any tricks mister!) 99% of my colleagues at work have PhDs. I therefore can conclude that there is nothing wrong with education in the US if it produces such a well educated workforce.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,116 #64 April 26, 2004 >And didn't I say I have had no problem with my health care from the VA? No, you asked about national health care. I wasn't talking about national health care. And then you said the VA system was messed up, and it took you a year to get in, which jibes with Molly and Amy's experiences working there, and also supports the idea that they are underfunded. But then you disagreed with the idea that the administration is defunding VA hospitals. Confusing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #65 April 26, 2004 Quoteyou said the VA system was messed up, True Quoteand it took you a year to get in True Quotewhich jibes with Molly and Amy's experiences working there, and also supports the idea that they are underfunded Thats a jump there. QuoteBut then you disagreed with the idea that the administration is defunding VA hospitals. Where did I say that?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,116 #66 April 26, 2004 >Question: Did the Clinton administration significantly cut military, >defense, and intelligence, spending? Yep. Cutting defense is pretty popular during peacetime. If Reagan "doesn't really cut defense, he becomes the No. 1 special pleader in town...The severity of the deficit is great enough that the president has to reach out and take a whack at everything to be credible...If you're going to rule out the other two [Social Security cuts and a tax increase], then you've got to hit defense." - Dick Cheney, Washington Post, 12/16/84 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
