The difference between the GI Bill bills being proposed by each side is this: the GOP bill is based on the feedback of Soldiers and the VA itself. The Donks bill is based on their own political posturing and does not best address the needs of todays so…

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/vincent-bugliosi/george-bushs-unseemly-res_b_103592.html

On May 27th, 2008 at 3:52 pm, Regulus said:

I’ve always wondered about that.. why wait til now to play hardball instead of taking it on the chin like so many times in the past.. would make me respect the guy (W) if he did so even 4 years ago..

No, not so much… ahem, “treason”.

Treason most foul.

Treason most foul, & in a time of war.

There you go… I SAID it.

Until the editorial board at the NYT is proscecuted, the notion of a nation of laws is at best a cruel joke.

The White House responded forcefully (something they should do more often).

The recent challenges by the administration to the NYT’s bull-squat editorial and NBC’s recent fun-n-games editing of the President’s interview with them would’ve encouraged me 8 years ago.

As it is, I feel like I’m watching a football game in which one team’s offense does the kneel-down, 3-downs-and-punt routine until they’re behind 70-0 with two minutes left in the 4th quarter; then, as they’re huddling under the shadow of their own goal post on 4th-and-10, they decide that now’s a good time to start moving the ball.

Too little, too late.

On May 27th, 2008 at 1:10 pm, JBro said:

First, thank you for your service and for an actual response about the facts.

The problem with the current benefits package is that that amount of money isn’t very competitive with many states’ scholarship programs. $250 a credit hour, and $12,000 a year for only 3 years (do you get both at the same time?) won’t cover even in-state tuition at most (or maybe just many) state schools, especially not at the better ones; it definitely won’t be enough to cover room and board. And that will barely cover even 1 year of a private university. Someone relying on that for funding will still graduate very deeply in debt.

I see what you’re saying about transferability, and agree fully. The minimum commitment is 8 years right, even though some of that is on reserves? (at least, all I could find on the army.mil that said anything directly said it was 8 years) I think if someone commits to the army for 8 years, they should be able to pay for college. They’ll already be starting when their 26 or 27 (granted, they could start on reserves, but they can get called back up so they couldn’t commit fully to the degree until 26 or 27). That’s really old to be an undergrad. They won’t finish until they’re 30; that is, they won’t be able to fully enter civilian life with a civilian job until they’re 30. Isn’t that a big enough sacrifice?

Can the military be staffed entirely by career soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen? Or do we need some people to serve in their youth who can then go on to civilian careers? Eight years should be enough for the soldiers who want civilian lives.

I see your point though. There are still fundamental problems with the lack of transferability and the failure to better reward folks such as yourself who stay longer. But the less fundamental problem of the bill not actually paying enough to go to a decent college is still a serious problem.

Google failed to make any acknowledgement about Memorial Day.