Over Iran, of all things.
What a piece of work those guys are. In the end, it doesn't matter who said what or who amended what. It only matters who voted for or against helping fix a lot of things that need to be fixed with regard to veterans access to benefits.
BKB
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...ock/?hpt=hp_t1
Did you read that last part???
Democrats intentionally putting stuff, so Republicans will not pass it!
Making the Republican's fault it didn't pass to help Veteran's and make people vote democrats????
Are you understanding how deceiving the Democrats are doing business, not giving a damn about the Veteran's or the American people.
I hope the democrats get their ass's whipped in the next electron, for this kind of $hit!
I'm not sure what this means.....
I don't see where that's any different than it is right now. WTF???They (the Republicans) also complained the bill would open the VA’s health services to any veteran regardless of whether their disability was service related or if they had private insurance to cover it.
1) The VA has been there for me since I got out of the military in 1975 and NOTHING I've been treated for has been "service related".
2) The system is set up on a tier system according to income ... under a certain level, services are free. Up one notch ... there's a co-pay for Rx's. Up another level and there's a co-pay for certain services as well as Rx's. Up another level and the co-pays become higher, etc etc.
3) If one uses VA services and they have insurance, the insurance company is billed and VA picks up what is NOT covered. This includes Medicare/Medicaid. Once I became eligible for Medicare, my info was entered into the system. When I have VA care, they bill Medicare for what they'll cover and the VA picks up the balance.
Politics (Rep. AND Dem.) makes me sick these days. What a bunch of worthless fucks!
Originally Posted by Sunshine
Do you have no reading comprehension at all? The bill was a clean bill before the Iran stuff got added. what does Iran stuff have to do with a veterans bill? Simply look at who voted no on this bill and you will see who defeated it.
BKB
Barry if the bill had not had the Iran crap attached to it perhaps it would have passed.
The problem is when the Democrats introduce a bill that "sounds" good like "help the vets bill" and then attach stuff to it that has nothing to do with the bill like the Iran stuff.
They should be two separate bills....
"Help the Vets Bill" pass or fail and "Kick Irans ass Bill" pass or fail
I do know Burr well enough that if he says it stinks, it does.
Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner
A Government that pays people to do nothing destorys their willingness to do anything!
Ummm, Cappy ... I think maybe you should read it again ...
Democrats accused Republicans of trying to spike the bill by insisting one of their amendments deal with imposing new sanctions on Iran ...And as for Burr ... just more of the same ...“It was disappointing – if not surprising – when Republicans almost immediately injected partisan politics into a debate over a bill that should be bipartisan, insisting on an unrelated amendment on Iran that they knew could derail the veteran’s bill ..."
WTF do Iran sanctions have to do with Vet care?Burr agued it’s fair for his party to push for amendments, including a vote on Iran sanctions ...
That's what is so frustrating Captain. If you read the article, or any other article on the bill, it failed BECAUSE THE DEMOCRATS WOULDN'T ALLOT THE REPUBLICANS TO ATTACH THE IRAN ACTION TO THE BILL. The Democrats wanted a straight up and down veterans bills exactly like you suggested. And I agree, they should vote up and down on each issue.
I didn't mean this to turn into partisan politics. this is a total failure by the US Senate and both parties, IMO, are at fault for this mess. But it was taken there by someone else and taken there with something that is totally not true.
BKB
It would seem that MY reading comprehension is at fault, as I did read the article but did not understand it that way till Kribbs posted..
I don't understand the adding on to the bill by either party unless it pertains to the subject of the bill
Like you I think the bill should be voted on and perhaps amended only within its subject matter.
Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner
A Government that pays people to do nothing destorys their willingness to do anything!
I think they'd tried to amend the rules several times in the past for this kind of thing, but they can't seem to agree on how they should do it. this is how bridges to nowhere and that kind of crap gets tacked onto totally unrelated bills.
and don't think just because it was the Republicans that tried to add this on that there weren't political shenanigans pulled by the other side either, we just don't know what they are this time. The bottom line though is, the Senate failed the American people yet again. We won't do anything about it. We'll just blame it on the other side and vote the same assholes back into office. And complain. We do that really well.
BKB
Nicely said! They're ALL guilty ... both sides of the isle.
They (neither side) are going to address this. Where the hell do you think all the pork comes from?
If you turn a dog loose to hunt – you’d better to be ready to deal with what he trees.
I thought it came from Iowa!
BKB
From Okie weddings!
Oh no. She's much too old for an Okie bride.
BKB
It's her fourth marriage. The other 3 cousins dumped her.
WTF do food stamps have to do with farm subsidies? Business as usual for that trifling bunch.
Will
This is totally off the subject but I heard an old quote this week that I hadn't heard in a long time. And it still makes sense, but maybe in modern times in a perverted sort of way it means something totally different given that most of our food comes from Monsanto and ADM these days.
"At some times during your life you will need a doctor, or a dentist, or maybe even a lawyer. You need a farmer every day three times a day."
BKB
Three words.
Line
Item
Veto
No one on either side will allow it, though.
WARNING - Due to the rising costs of ammunition, warning shots will no longer be given.
the side that has a sitting president is always for it, while the ones that don't are agin' it. It switches which side supports it every time we switch parties of presidents. If it were a teenage girl, we'd call it FICKLE.
BKB
Yes.
But it solves these problems. Food stamps in the farm bill is asinine. But it's the way every bill is done..............
P.S.
Congressmen and Senators do not write bills. 98.5% of all bills are written by lobbyists.
WARNING - Due to the rising costs of ammunition, warning shots will no longer be given.
Oh, I fer it. All of the arguments I've heard against it are from the very people who porkify their way into office every election cycle.
If you think about it, Robert Byrd of West Va prolly wouldn't have lasted two terms if line item veto had been in place.
BKB
I'd guess less than one.
Which is the max term that all of them should have.
I'm for term limits..........but not the way it's being proposed. I want the max limit to be 1/10 of a term.
WARNING - Due to the rising costs of ammunition, warning shots will no longer be given.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote