Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMitt Romney addresses veterans without mentioning veterans' issues
Mitt Romney addresses veterans without mentioning veterans' issues
by Meteor Blades
<...>
Speaking in Reno Tuesday to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the oldest existing national veterans association in the country, the Republican nominee gave a hollow boilerplate speech on foreign policy which said nothing he hadn't already said. Repeating six decades of Democrats-are-weak-on-defense rhetoric, he vowed to keep Iran and Russia in check, keep Israel America's friend and keep America itself the No. 1 military power on the planet. He intoned the phrase "an American century" five times, echoing the two-dozen or so neoconservatives on his foreign policy advisory team's now-defunct Project for a New American Century.
But for the veterans as veterans? Nothing. There's a good reason for that. As Laurin Manning at the American Bridge points out, Romney's proposals for taxes and spending would devastate veterans. Some examples:
His proposed budget would boost Pentagon spending but ax $176 billion in non-defense discretionary spending by 2016. That would mean cuts in veterans health care and veterans disability compensation.
By 2022, his proposed budget would cut non-defense spending by 59 percent. According to the Boston Globe on April 12, 2012: "At issue are these programs, just to name a few: health research; NASA; transportation; homeland security; education; food inspection; housing and heating subsidies for the poor; food aid for pregnant women; the FBI; grants to local governments; national parks; and veterans health care. Romney promises to immediately cut them by 5 percent."
According to ABC News on Nov. 11, 2011: Mitt Romney suggested on Friday that he was open to introducing private sector competition into the health care system U.S. military veterans receive. At a campaign event in South Carolina, Romney raised the possibility of a voucher system."
As governor, Romney cut funding for veterans cemeteries and outreach centers by $86,018 in May 2003.
Gov. Romney increased fees for long-term care at the Chelsea Soldiers Home. According to the Lowell Sun in February 2003: "The changes include a $100 fee for clients to determine eligibility for Department of Mental Retardation services, imposing a $10 fee to issue Certificates of Blindness to legally blind citizens, and increasing user fees for long-term care at the Chelsea Soldiers Home.
There's a good reason Romney had nothing new to say about foreign policy. And a good reason he had nothing to say about what his policies for veterans have been or would be. But he is, of course, notorious for his ability to say one thing today and the opposite tomorrow. From that perspective, the fact that he did not propose improvements in benefits for veterans is a bit of a surprise.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/24/1113297/-Mitt-Romney-addresses-veterans-without-mentioning-veterans-issues
by Meteor Blades
<...>
Speaking in Reno Tuesday to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the oldest existing national veterans association in the country, the Republican nominee gave a hollow boilerplate speech on foreign policy which said nothing he hadn't already said. Repeating six decades of Democrats-are-weak-on-defense rhetoric, he vowed to keep Iran and Russia in check, keep Israel America's friend and keep America itself the No. 1 military power on the planet. He intoned the phrase "an American century" five times, echoing the two-dozen or so neoconservatives on his foreign policy advisory team's now-defunct Project for a New American Century.
But for the veterans as veterans? Nothing. There's a good reason for that. As Laurin Manning at the American Bridge points out, Romney's proposals for taxes and spending would devastate veterans. Some examples:
His proposed budget would boost Pentagon spending but ax $176 billion in non-defense discretionary spending by 2016. That would mean cuts in veterans health care and veterans disability compensation.
By 2022, his proposed budget would cut non-defense spending by 59 percent. According to the Boston Globe on April 12, 2012: "At issue are these programs, just to name a few: health research; NASA; transportation; homeland security; education; food inspection; housing and heating subsidies for the poor; food aid for pregnant women; the FBI; grants to local governments; national parks; and veterans health care. Romney promises to immediately cut them by 5 percent."
According to ABC News on Nov. 11, 2011: Mitt Romney suggested on Friday that he was open to introducing private sector competition into the health care system U.S. military veterans receive. At a campaign event in South Carolina, Romney raised the possibility of a voucher system."
As governor, Romney cut funding for veterans cemeteries and outreach centers by $86,018 in May 2003.
Gov. Romney increased fees for long-term care at the Chelsea Soldiers Home. According to the Lowell Sun in February 2003: "The changes include a $100 fee for clients to determine eligibility for Department of Mental Retardation services, imposing a $10 fee to issue Certificates of Blindness to legally blind citizens, and increasing user fees for long-term care at the Chelsea Soldiers Home.
There's a good reason Romney had nothing new to say about foreign policy. And a good reason he had nothing to say about what his policies for veterans have been or would be. But he is, of course, notorious for his ability to say one thing today and the opposite tomorrow. From that perspective, the fact that he did not propose improvements in benefits for veterans is a bit of a surprise.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/24/1113297/-Mitt-Romney-addresses-veterans-without-mentioning-veterans-issues
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
5 replies, 1494 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (11)
ReplyReply to this post
5 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Mitt Romney addresses veterans without mentioning veterans' issues (Original Post)
ProSense
Jul 2012
OP
nc4bo
(17,651 posts)1. Empty vessell makes lots of noise.
Thanks Prosense, here's another one that goes into my browser's bookmark folder under "UnPresidential".
Siwsan
(26,320 posts)2. What the hell would that chicken hawk bastard know about Veteran's Issues, anyway
I think he should disclose exactly how he spent his time, during the Viet Nam War. How he protested in SUPPORT of the draft, and then took a religious deferment to spend several years trying to convince the French to give up wine.
lpbk2713
(42,774 posts)3. Mute Robme
He can talk for an hour or more and still say nothing.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)4. The only thing Romney appears to be knowledgable about is how to
play a rigged and underhanded game of finance. I really think he is less savvy than Geo. W. Bush on all issues.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)5. Possibly will work, some veteran groups must believe in trickle down. More wars = more benefits. n/t
We have a new member who tried to talk his VFW out of voting for Romney in a knee jerk fashion. Good post, it was.