There I was at work today, having just read on my iPhone that I had miffed my friend William, all freaked out because I couldn't get to a computer to correct my offense (all blogs, and most other interesting sites are blocked by our filtering software), when I read about the Obama administration's proposal to stab our military in the heart.
I'm pretty sure the blood rushed to my eyes at that point. As reported by CNN, "Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki confirmed Tuesday that the Obama administration is considering a controversial plan to make veterans pay for treatment of service-related injuries with private insurance." I thought, "it's a good thing I CAN'T actually post something right now because I'm so mad it would probably come out incoherent." But, I'm still mad.
What an idiotic, insulting, demeaning, heartless, ignorant, callous, divisive, stupider-than-a-rock thing to suggest.
So let me get this straight. We can afford earmarks for Pasteurization of Shell Eggs, gang tattoo removal, lobster research, copper wire theft prevention efforts; we can afford to bail out AIG, GM, Citigroup, bad mortgages, FDIC, and anybody else that wants to stand in line for a handout, but our veterans don't deserve MEDICAL CARE FOR SERVICE RELATED INJURIES unless they pay for it with their own private insurance? Are you freakin' kidding me?!
"Charging for service-related injuries would violate "a sacred trust," Veterans of Foreign Wars spokesman Joe Davis said. Davis said the move would risk private health care for veterans and their families by potentially maxing out benefits paying for costly war injury treatments."
No kidding! And of course the next step is that no insurance provider would actually cover a soldier because, well, he would then be high risk. Oh wait, then he'd have to rely on the socialistic Obamacare. I get it. Not to mention that recruitment for those brave men and women who protect his sorry ass would plummet.
Well, as Ed points out: "Obama said he wanted to bring bipartisanship to Washington, and he may succeed here — by annoying both Democrats and Republicans." Both Democrats and Republicans are displeased with The Messiah on this one. Democratic Senator Patty Murray said the proposal would be "dead in the water" if the proposal ever reached Congress. Eleven veterans groups have already submitted a pre-emptive letter against the proposal.
Dumbfounded.
Note to Team Obama: if you wanted to find ANY issue that would tick the public off more, THIS would be it. Don't mess with our military. Don't mess with our soldiers, don't mess with our vets. You jerk.
3 comments:
Yes, being a Four-Star General, who was wounded in Vietnam, and is highly regarded in the military, we have every reason to believe that Shinseki could care less about our vets. He hates our military so much that he served almost 40 years and nearly gave his life in Vietnam.
This is final proof that he and Obama have been waiting for this opportunity to really turn their backs on our veterans. You're right, Obama is a jerk. Although i'm not sure why Obama would want to end the war and take our soldiers out of harms way, since he hates our military men and women so much.
One reason why I served in the military, and retired after a quarter of a century of service, is to live in a free country. I took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, which includes someone's First Amendment right of Freedom of Speech, even if that person doesn't have a clue of what they are talking about.
I served when General Shinseki was the ACofS (that Army Chief of Staff for you civilians), and he wasn't held in high regard. As a matter of fact he was despised by a large portion of the rank and file.
ASofC Shinseki,in the opinion of the regular grunt, was not a friend. He was the A-typical officer who could care less about the soldier and more about his climb to the top.
Most of the soldiers I served with didn't hold him in too high of regard either.
General Shinseki's final slap in the face of the soldier came when he put the entire Army in black berets. I guess one would have had to serve in the Army to know why this was a slap in the face. The Army is strong in traditions, and tradition was the black beret belonged to the Rangers. When I was issued my black beret, I felt like I was taking something I didn't earn. I felt like a PX Ranger (a person who goes to the PX and puts on tabs and badges he didn't earn to make himself to look like some sort of hero.) Not only is this highly illegal in the military, these type of people are highly despised.
I thank General Shinseki for his service and his sacrifice (losing part of a foot to a landmine). God bless him, and the thousands of other who served and sacrificed. But some times service and sacrifice doesn't make one a great leader.
Fair enough. I didn't suggest that he was beloved by all, as very few leaders are. I would argue, however, that the perceptions of the rank and file are not the best indicator of Shinseki's ability to head the VA. Being a great/respected field leader is not a prerequisite for promoting the welfare of veterans. Any suggestion, such as the insinuation of Pat's post, that Shinseki (and Obama) clearly doesn't care about the military and veterans, i believe is disingenuous and simply emerges from the fictional belief that conservatives are somehow more military friendly than liberals. Its a fiction created by conservatives to, i assume, brand themselves as the more patriotic ideology. But that's another debate.
My perception is that Shinseki put the welfare of the rank and file ahead of his own career when he testified to congress that our soldiers were being led into a war undermanned. This was in direct defiance of his superiors, and eventually led to his dismissal by Rumsfeld. That testimony, as we all know, eventually proved true. But i'd be interested in hearing how this was perceived within the military.
Post a Comment