Bush Administration Proposes Cut in Veteran Benefits

[barefootlady]

It seems that our President has given his blessing, no he specifically gave his approval, to cut benefits to veterans, increase the out of pocket cost some veterans pay for their meds, cut benefits/services, especially out-patient services at several facilities nationwide, and charge this new generation of veterans about $250.00 per stay in facilitles. This was a blurp I heard on CNN earlier this AM.

I did not get all of the blurp but when I heard this my blood pressure started going up. How dare he place the lives of our young people in harms way with his oil war, show disrespect to the veterans who have served in past times,and say "here's your bill" to the newer veterans. I may not have every fact straight but I have enough to have to pray extra hard this AM for this man. When, O Lord, are we going to see an end to this pretender?

[Marie_LPN, RN, LPN, RN]

And just to hammer the point home, go to this thread:

https://allnurses.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1042473#post1042473

The thread is from January of this year. None of our current crop of outraged had much to say here. Probably never even saw the thread. It's title was about a poor VA hospital. This thread's title was about how Bush was taking vets benefits. Think there might be a connection between how the threads are titled, and who reads them?

KM

It might be the timing of it, and might actually have nothing to do with the word "Bush" in the title. (Considering i was working wacky hours in January and February, and was half-awake when i visited this site.)

Or perhaps some people were busy writing letters to their senators about their concerns? (Which is what i started doing as soon as i learned of the proposed cutback on CNN. It's not all i do either)

Or maybe some people choose to fight this battle at other websites directly related to the subject?

It also might have something to do with remarks such as "current crop of outraged", which can imply that that those who don't reply don't care. And quite honestly, i hear those kind of remarks at work enough as it is when they start talking 'cutback'. So typically, i read anything and everything in the CE forum, and skip replying here because i'd rather go as directly to the source as possible.

In other words, just because there isn't a response doesn't mean it's not a concern to some people.

[SmilingBluEyes]

It might be the timing of it, and might actually have nothing to do with the word "Bush" in the title. (Considering i was working wacky hours in January and February, and was half-awake when i visited this site.)

Or perhaps some people were busy writing letters to their senators about their concerns? (Which is what i started doing as soon as i learned of the proposed cutback on CNN. It's not all i do either)

Or maybe some people choose to fight this battle at other websites directly related to the subject?

It also might have something to do with remarks such as "current crop of outraged", which can imply that that those who don't reply don't care. And quite honestly, i hear those kind of remarks at work enough as it is when they start talking 'cutback'. So typically, i read anything and everything in the CE forum, and skip replying here because i'd rather go as directly to the source as possible.

In other words, just because there isn't a response doesn't mean it's not a concern to some people.

bingo!

[kristylee]

ok, I couldn't hold back when I saw this comment...

Good grief, what has President Bush done to be ashamed of?

Are you kidding? He's taken us to war for no reason and over 1,500 of our soldiers have died because of it!! That is more than enough reason to be ashamed - HELLO!!! I too was blinded by Bush and the Bush Administration until I started to educate myself. You can start by watching Fahrenheit 911. Also, here's a link that will highlight all the news Bush and the Republicans tried to slip past while media obsessed on the Schiavo case.

http://www.progressivedailybeacon.com/commentary.php?id=458

Our President is a LIAR and has many reasons to be ashamed! ok, so Clinton wasn't a good husband, but our dollar was strong and our economy was great. Since Bush has been in office, our economic state has been the worst in the Presidential history - big red flashing lights coming at you...

[Katmease]

ok, I couldn't hold back when I saw this comment...

Are you kidding? He's taken us to war for no reason and over 1,500 of our soldiers have died because of it!! That is more than enough reason to be ashamed - HELLO!!! I too was blinded by Bush and the Bush Administration until I started to educate myself. You can start by watching Fahrenheit 911. Also, here's a link that will highlight all the news Bush and the Republicans tried to slip past while media obsessed on the Schiavo case.

http://www.progressivedailybeacon.com/commentary.php?id=458

Our President is a LIAR and has many reasons to be ashamed! ok, so Clinton wasn't a good husband, but our dollar was strong and our economy was great. Since Bush has been in office, our economic state has been the worst in the Presidential history - big red flashing lights coming at you...

I respectfully disagree with you. I think there was a valid reason to go to war, Farenheit 911 has been proven to be full of lies. Our economic status is fine & it goes in cycles to a certain degree anyway - just like when the internet & tech stocks that crashed, I didn't like Clinton but it wasn't the President that made people invest in risky stocks. We were diversified so it didn't hurt us but a lot of people were wiped out. I don't consider myself blinded by President Bush, no one is going to agree with someone a 100%, but overall, he thinks as I do far more often than not. Fortunately, there were more of us that voted for him than for the disaster Kerry.

At any rate, this thread is about Veteran's Benefits.

[LydiaNN]

Perhaps in my previous post I was a bit too subtle. Allow me to introduce you to a very obscure, little known literary device known as "irony."

In this thread so far, we have six pages of comments. In those six pages, we have a number of posters, yourself included, who have never had to step foot inside a VA as a patient, and all of these posters want to lecture a disabled veteran, who must go to the VA for treatment of certain conditions, and tell him that he does not know how poorly we are treating our veterans. Yet that same veteran is being condescending in his choice of words. Can you see the irony in your statement?

As you yourself have posted, spending on veterans benefits is going up, not down. Along the way, how that money is being spent is being realigned to better meet the needs of our veterans who were disabled in the line of duty. But you want to tell me that is just wrong, darn it all. If we don't keep the programs that are being cut, then we are, what, insensitive? In spite of the fact that the programs being cut as a rule aren't for the disabled vet. In fact, in the case of nursing home care, if a vet needs such care as a result of a service connected condition, s/he will get it. How do I know? I have been to the VA nursing homes, and seen the veterans get that treatment.

Once again, the problem isn't with the money. It isn't with any actions taken by any presidential administration. It's with the entrenched bureaucracy. Or are you willing to increase our spending by more than tenfold to be sure that all veterans get free health care for life for all medical conditions? Because that is exactly what the outcry is all about. Those of us with service connected conditions haven't lost anything.

Well, except perhaps our dignity.

Kevin McHugh

I am very curious what makes you think that none of the people who have posted so far have set foot in a VA as a patient. And even if that assumption is true, why you think it matters. As a citizen and a taxpayer, my interest is valid and legitimate. Thanks for the definition of irony, though. It was very helpful. (And yes, that was meant to be ironic. I'm a quick learner.)

[kmchugh]

Guys, out of respect for the moderators and owner of this board, let's keep this debate to the issue at hand. It is a nursing activism board. The topic at hand is a debate among nurses about health care for veterans. Questions about whether or not we belong in Iraq rightfully belong in the Current Events Forum.

In case you can't tell, this is a topic that is near and dear to my heart, both as a nurse and as a veteran. I'd really hate to see this thread closed down because it was hijacked into something that more properly belongs in current events.

Kevin McHugh

[Marie_LPN, RN, LPN, RN]

As a citizen and a taxpayer, my interest is valid and legitimate.

Exactly.

[kmchugh]

I am very curious what makes you think that none of the people who have posted so far have set foot in a VA as a patient. And even if that assumption is true, why you think it matters. As a citizen and a taxpayer, my interest is valid and legitimate. Thanks for the definition of irony, though. It was very helpful. (And yes, that was meant to be ironic. I'm a quick learner.)

It matters because it is pointless to debate veteran's benefits, or what veterans face if you have never had to experience it yourself. How much credibility would I have if I started lecturing you on how you just did not understand the sexism women face every day? Or if I chose to lecture a black person on the fact that they simply did not understand what racism really was? It's a matter of perspective and experience.

Again, the problem isn't the tiny programs being cut. It is the deeply engrained, entrenched philosophy and attitude that pervades the VA. So many of you are so concerned about the mouse in the attic but are ignoring the elephant in the living room.

Kevin McHugh

Edited to add for both you and Marie: I'm not saying your interest isn't legitimate. It is simply aimed in the wrong direction.

[kmchugh]

Maybe what I am really trying to say is if you want to help the veterans, perhaps it would be beneficial to both the veteran and you to find out what the veteran thinks is the biggest problem.

KM

[Marie_LPN, RN, LPN, RN]

Maybe what I am really trying to say is if you want to help the veterans, perhaps it would be beneficial to both the veteran and you to find out what the veteran thinks is the biggest problem.

KM

Wow, you know, that was an idea i came up with a few years ago when i brainstormed on how i could HELP veterans, instead of just wondering how i could, and put that plan into action.

Not bad for someone whose interest "is simply aimed in the wrong direction".

I'm out of here.

[LydiaNN]

It matters because it is pointless to debate veteran's benefits, or what veterans face if you have never had to experience it yourself. How much credibility would I have if I started lecturing you on how you just did not understand the sexism women face every day? Or if I chose to lecture a black person on the fact that they simply did not understand what racism really was? It's a matter of perspective and experience.

Again, the problem isn't the tiny programs being cut. It is the deeply engrained, entrenched philosophy and attitude that pervades the VA. So many of you are so concerned about the mouse in the attic but are ignoring the elephant in the living room.

Kevin McHugh

Edited to add for both you and Marie: I'm not saying your interest isn't legitimate. It is simply aimed in the wrong direction.

There's that word credibility again. And your assumption that I haven't had any experiences to shape my perspective. Interesting, in a very presumptous sort of way. And as for the mouse in the attic, you know what they say about seeing one mouse. It means there are at least 15 more that you don't see. It is a heck of a lot easier to get an elephant out of your living room than it is rid your house of mice. I am sure that is one of the more clever things I have said today, if only I could figure out why...

[begalli]

How is using the term "dear" when addressing an individual in an intellectual debate and irony even remotely related? Feeling insulted because of a challenge to one's opinion and plainly talking down to a person are two completely different things and are not even comparable.

How is primary htn service related? It has no clear pathology (idiopathic) and so shouldn't, under the way the VA's resources are suppossedly doled out, be covered. So isn't one who's treated by the VA for PH participating in the "curtailment of free treatment for non-service connected conditions." (post #16). I'm NOT saying it shouldn't be treated, but I'm just trying to understand here.

Gosh, there is such arrogance in this thread.