What the current administration has done for the military and veterans
 

And our veterans and military deserve every bit of it :tro:

Ended previous “stop-loss” policy that kept soldiers in Iraq/Afghanistan longer than their enlistment date
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123741885685978043.html

Ended media “blackout” on reporting details of war casualties; allowing full information, the reporting and photographing, of return of fallen soldiers to Dover AFB (prohibited by Bush)
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/wash...ad-photos.html

Families of fallen soldiers now have transport expenses paid for themselves and body of loved one
http://https//cs.mhf.dod.mil/content....500.570.0.0.0

Increased pay and benefits for military personnel
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/0...obama_022609w/

Better body armor is now being provided to our troops
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/1...armor-120410w/

Improved housing for military personnel
http://www.militaryconnection.com/ne...y-housing.html

Shifted the focus of the war from Iraq to Afghanistan, changed command, infused new troop support, successfully putting the emphasis on reducing terrorism where it should have been all along.
(gee, does this really need to be referenced)

Ordered Osama bin Laden killed
(any of you doubt this one?)

Beginning the process of reforming and restructuring the military 20 years after the Cold War to a more modern fighting force: includes new procurement policies, increasing size of military, new technology and cyber units and operations, etc.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/veterans

Increased VA budget $112.8 billion, 15.5-percent increase over the previous year. Hiring more staff, treating 122,000 more patients, and beginning the switch of patient records to an electronic system that can be accessed by all VA facilities.
http://www.vawatchdog.org/09/nf09/nf...nf022609-8.htm

The creation of a Joint Virtual Lifetime Electronic Record for members of the U.S. Armed Forces to improve quality of medical care for enlisted and veteran members
http://www.usmedicine.com/articles/p...me-record.html

The increase will also pay for an uptick in education claims by veterans who are taking advantage of the Post-9/11 GI Bill, passed last year.
http://www.vawatchdog.org/09/nf09/nf...nf022609-8.htm

Provided the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) with an additional $1.4 billion to improve services to America’s Veterans (by cutting missile defense program by $1.4 billion in 2010) to be used toward improving services, including grant money to states to build extended care facilities for vets (authorized construction/opening of additional health centers to care for veterans) and the hiring of 1,500 new claims processors to speed up delivery of veterans benefits.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/veterans
http://www.disabled-world.com/news/v...t-spending.php

The VA and DOD held a joint Mental Health Summit in Washington last year, designed to "harness the programs, resources and expertise of both departments to deal with the aftermath of the battlefield." The initiative will include removing the stigma many soldiers feel about admitting to PTSD symptoms, and, finally, treating PTSD and traumatic brain injuries more fully, rather than how it's been dealt with in the past, as something to be merely contained enough to keep it from causing major social (or political) problems.
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-07-09/u...-wars?_s=PM:US

Thank you(really) for this important update. Up til now, I figured it was all golf and holiday. I am,however,waiting to see the demonstratable "fruit" of his labors:p

:eek:....you would die for this man

you got that too,huh?

Attachment 1766

Kev...It's going to be a beautiful thing when our President is re-elected. The right wing whackos ( and I know your motivation in these threads;)) just won't know what to do.

Sickening....

:D

Ror !! Bob let me thank you in advance for paying for all the free stuff Obama is going to be giving me.

gotta go Hannity is on ;):p

Look man..I suffered through 2 BCs at SA..THe LEAST you could do is cash in a voucher, buy a sweatshirt and get to CD in sunny November

I'm still frozen from the BC at Arlington Park....

But maybe.....just maybe my friend !!

The above is demonstrable. Done deals. I know you guys can't seem to stand the President, but I figured at least you'd give credit where it's due.

The Obama Derangement Syndrome can be pretty severe here at times <g>

I thought it was demonstrable, but its been a long day. As I said...when it comes to harvest, then I'll applaud.

where did the info in the first post come from?

My guess is someone's ass.

England's (yea Riot I know it's not all of England) take on Obama and the military

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ni...-presidential/

The news.

ahahahhahahahhaahahah "the news". Riot when you copy and paste something you are supposed to provide sources

Seriously? SERIOUSLY? :D

Yeah, I guess honoring the dead at the Tomb of the Unknowns before hand doesn't count.

What pathetic Obama hate. ROFLMAO.

whitehouse.gov

AP

Those are not exactly secrets.

What do you think is inaccurate? Which statements? (as I have time, I"ll go back and reference them, but that's pretty ridiculous as you guys obviously own computers and I assume you know how to use google, and have read some newspapers in the past couple of years. Maybe not.)

The political acumen and knowledge around this place is about a 1 on a 10 point scale. Seems the best some can do "talking politics" is to insult the poster. As Geeker likes to say, ROR!

you are the queen of copying and pasting full length articles with no sources!

do you really have a big problem with Obama playing golf?

I have absolutely no issues with the President golfing once a week during the warmer months.

just for disclosure, I also played 18 holes on Memorial Day & I still have tons of respect for our fallen hero's.

Which things I said Obama did for the military are false?

I didnt say anything is false & I am very happy that the "stop-loss" policy in particular was ended.


I was laughing at your source, "the news".

I referenced that entire list in the last 10 minutes. From "the news".

I figure most who watch "the news" or pay attention to politics regularly would have seen some fleeting reference to all those things in the past two years.

That's not true, looking back at the posts I make (which I just did). It's rare and infrequent that I don't reference a source with the direct link, and blue box quotes.

Just put huffingtonpost.com in your signature and you're good to go. :)

Obama doing his Kramer act. Now that's patriotism. :wf

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmHtG...eature=related

You have to admit that you having issues with where a quote or content comes from is pretty classic. I think Somer pointed out somewherre else, but that one rag that you had the child abuse article from was a doozey:eek:

I was just trying to help her out. Better than 50-50 odds her original post came from my suggestion. ;)

BTW that same doozy source provided video and photoraphic evidence, something Huffy rarely does.

And I said it may well be true (probably is) but the issue was the far right nature of the site...hey, you can quote any site you choose but seems a bit inconsistent when you then turn around and be critical of Riot's sources. Right wing folks tend to follow right wing sites and liberals tend to read liberal sites...me I will read anything but am duly wary of all, as I've said many times my politics are far left so I have fewer choices.

I believe this goes back to Riot's fictitious chart. When what is presented is proven false then obviously the source has to be questioned. We all know Huffy is left and Drudge is right only Huff links to op-ed pieces far more often than Drudge does.

What I question is why the left sites ignore the constant human rights violations to mainly women and children, including in this country and instead take the position Repubs are anti-women because they want Planned Parenthood defunded? Repubs also want PBS defunded so I guess they're also against television.

we need more abortions and birth control in this country, not less.

Oh I agree but it's far from being anti-women. Denying a female the right to get an abortion would be anti-woman and I conceed a minority of the Rep party would like to see that but thankfully it will never happen.

BTW Beating women for driving? Now that is anti-women.

it's an anti-human culture over there.

And we are partly to blame for supporting and legitimatising them. Especially when the President of the U.S. gives speeches on their great culture, music and inventions (most of which are lies) yet has no understanding of how these animals treat their women and children.

No. But you hold onto your little delusions. It's cute ;)

First, let's get straight that that chart is not false, and you're saying so doesn't make it so. It's accurate, it's been peer-reviewed by far more trained economists than you, and it's been perfectly accepted as accurate in public use.

In fact, I posted the referenced original source, several times, asked you what part of their data was wrong, and you couldn't say a thing about it. You couldn't address it. You changed the subject.

So your continuous little dance about "proven false" is ridiculous, Dell. Nobody is buying it. Nobody ever "proved anything false" about that chart. You couldn't even apparently understand the figures that went into making it when I posted the references.

You think that saying something over and over makes it so. Nonsense.

There are tons of aggregator sites, like Huffington Post. Posting an AP article that is the exact same on HuffPost, Drudge, Daily Beast doesn't matter if it's an AP article. You dismiss stuff if it's at an aggregator site you don't personally like, but the aggregator has nothing to do with who wrote the article. It's the writer that matters, the validity of the source. Not where it's published. A well-respected financial organization created that chart, not Huffington Post. And you know that.

Editorials are different, obviously. Different editorial writers certainly have different political views that color their opinions.

You are well known for posting editorial opinions as "fact" to back up your arguments, btw.

So your constant mocking of one aggregator website - which isn't even one of the true "left" sites is silly, and shows your general ignorance of internet media (try Firedoglake or Daily Kos if you want a real "left" site). And the aggregator stories all have to be referenced back to the original writer - not the site, if their authors didn't write an editorial.