GI BILL

Discussion in 'Academy/Military News' started by AF6872, Jul 23, 2009.

  1. AF6872

    AF6872 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Messages:
    2,868
    Likes Received:
    237
  2. indexer

    indexer Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2009
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    you can thank the democrats for it.
     
  3. bruno

    bruno Retired Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    3,000
    Likes Received:
    300
    Tell me Indexer- do you actually have any thoughts on anything resembling the purpose of this site? For example do you have any thoughts on how to prepare to get into a Service Academy? Do you have any experience you could relate to students contemplating pursuing a commission thru ROTC or OCS? Do you in short have any business on the US Service Academy Forums beyond posting political commentary devoid of any relationship with the rest of the forum?
     
  4. Christcorp

    Christcorp Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2008
    Messages:
    4,963
    Likes Received:
    872
    Well, considering that this new change was part of the new GI Bill of 2008; which PRESIDENT George W. Bush signed into law; and that Obama had nothing to do with; and that the MINORITY party (Republicans) had to force the Democrats to do what was right by the military; seems like something "Indexer" conveniently forgot to mention.
     
  5. BeatNavy

    BeatNavy USMA Cadet

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2009
    Messages:
    450
    Likes Received:
    0
  6. Zaphod

    Zaphod Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    2,952
    Likes Received:
    4
    Please don't provide facts to the child. You'll confuse him. :rolleyes:

    Oh, and indexer? Proper grammar requires that you capitalize the first letter in a sentence and that, for the same reason rather than they actually rating it, the word "Democrats" be likewise capitalized.

    Make sure you ask your teacher to review those details with you when you start fourth grade in September. :thumb:
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2009
  7. mombee

    mombee Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is called the Webb GI Bill. Last time I checked, he was a Democrat.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/05/22/politics/politico/thecrypt/main4118662.shtml

    Let's not allow the desire to debunk a troll alter the facts.
     
  8. Christcorp

    Christcorp Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2008
    Messages:
    4,963
    Likes Received:
    872
    Not altering the facts. It was a compromise. Hence, the overwhelming 75-22 vote. As with anything in D.C., compromises are required. That's part of our political system. The republicans being a minority for the last 3+ years makes initiating and sponsoring bills difficult. Same when the democrats are the minority. But if you look at the bills that are presented; the riders attached; and the agendas sought after; you'll see the compromises. There are certain issues in the country that crosses party lines somewhat easily. E.g. Guns. There's a LOT of conservative southern gun loving democrats. Guns are definitely not a Republican agenda. Military spending is another one. Spending on weapon systems, bases, etc... are heavily debated; but funding for personnel, pay, benefits, etc... cross party lines quickly and become a topic that can be used as a bargaining chip for the rest of military spending. Now, when we start looking at health care, taxes, energy, etc... the lines of separation become much more pronounced. Webb might have sponsored the bill, but it wasn't a Democratic Agenda or a Democratic pushed initiative. Not with a 75-22 vote.
     
  9. justawife

    justawife Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2006
    Messages:
    204
    Likes Received:
    0
    Home Politics Politico Politico: The Crypt Blog

    May 22, 2008
    Senate Approves War Funding, GI Bill
    By Martin Kady II
    Font size Print E-mail Share
    (The Politico) The Senate has overwhelmingly passed a new GI bill and billions in new domestic spending as part of the $165 billion Iraq war funding bill pending before Congress.

    In two subsequent votes, the Senate passed the war funding portion of the bill, 70-26, and rejected an amendment that contained troop withdrawal language on a 34-63 vote.

    The 75-22 vote on the GI bill and domestic spending marked a resounding victory for Senate Democrats as well as Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), who has battled to expand the educational benefits for soldiers who served in Iraq. The measure also included a 13 week extension of unemployment insurance, home heating assistance and other domestic spending add ons. President Bush has threatened to veto the bill, which will top $200 billion with the extra spending.

    What was most surprising was not that the domestic funding amendment and the GI bill won a majority of the Senate votes, but that half of the Senate's 49 Republicans bucked President Bush and GOP presidential candidate John McCain to back the dramatically expanded GI bill. Many uncertain Republicans stood in the well of the Senate, taking their time to make a decision. Virtually every GOP senator who is politically vulnerable this year voted for the domestic spending, including Sens. John Sununu of New Hampshire and Roger Wicker of Mississippi.

    The bill now heads to the House, which must approve the war funding portion of the measure before it heads to the White House. Republicans believe they can sustain the presidential veto if the measure is sent back to Congress.


    Living in the beltway, this is the way it happened and the remember it too. Jim Webb used the public feeling that we need to support the troops to pressure Bush into signing the bill.

    The guy is a troll, only 25 Republicians voted yes.
     
  10. mombee

    mombee Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    0
    If the vote had not been as overwhelming as it was, and veto proof, President Bush planned to veto it. Senator McCain, our Republican leader would not vote for it because he felt that it would encourage people to get out of the military. I would seriously question any attempt to redefine history by calling this a Republic bill.

    This was the first time, I think, that I questioned my support for Senator McCain for President.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2009
  11. SteveHolt243

    SteveHolt243 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2009
    Messages:
    226
    Likes Received:
    1
    While correcting indexer's grammar, you used a split infinitive and allowed a plural pronoun to refer to a singular noun.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2009
  12. mom3boys

    mom3boys Parent

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2007
    Messages:
    1,886
    Likes Received:
    231
    "Oh, and indexer? Proper grammar requires that you capitalize the first letter in a sentence and that, for the same reason rather than they actually rating it, the word "Democrats" be likewise capitalized.

    Make sure you ask your teacher to review those details with you when you start fourth grade in September. "


    This first sentence is a run on. It simply needs better punctuation. It should read: Proper grammar requires that you capitalize the first letter in a sentence, and that for the same reason (rather than they actually rating it), the word "Democrats" be likewise capitalized. Of course, there are several correct ways to punctuate this sentence. This is just one of them.

    The pronoun "they" refers to the plural antecedent "Democrats," and is correct. The infinitive "to review" is not split.

    If I missed anything, I apologize in advance.

    Mom
    I am the grammar snob of whom your mother spoke.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2009
  13. bruno

    bruno Retired Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    3,000
    Likes Received:
    300
    Folks- play nice or not at all. Acting the fool in response to a troll only makes it more difficult to police the thread. This is neither the time nor the place for smarmy comments about each others grammar, education etc... Put this one to bed or at least keep your comments respectful and reasonable or keep them to yourself.
     
  14. indexer

    indexer Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2009
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    Only half of the Republicans voted for it , and all of the Democrats voted for it.


    Governor Bush didn't want to expand GI benefits. Neither did McBush (McCain).

    Democrats just played hardball and made Bush sign it. Have no illusions, this only passed because the Democrats took back Congress in 2006.
    It's called the Webb (D) Bill for a reason.
     
  15. AF6872

    AF6872 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Messages:
    2,868
    Likes Received:
    237
    Whosoever (notice the archaic) the sponsor and whoever the co-sponsor(s) this is a wonderfule entitlement measure and long overdue. Even a stopped clock gets it right twice every twenty four hours.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2009
  16. mombee

    mombee Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    0
    And it is wrong most of the time which might also apply to allowing the GI Bill to be passed to dependents. The sole purpose of the original GI Education Bill was to allow service members to better transfer into civilian life. I don't think passing it on to a spouse or children 15 years down the line accomplishes any of this. Our primary concern must remain the well-being of our soldiers and sailors. This action is primarily a morale booster only and actually possibly degrades the whole life of the service member. I can't wait till the divorce lawyers get a hold of it. I am most positive it will have to be split up as a part of a divorce settlement.
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2009
  17. mombee

    mombee Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    0
    Whew, I thought I had lost it. You don't know how long I stared at this post to try to see what SteveHolt was talking about.
     
  18. SteveHolt243

    SteveHolt243 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2009
    Messages:
    226
    Likes Received:
    1
    The new GI bill covers divorces.

    http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,190065,00.html:

     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2009
  19. justawife

    justawife Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2006
    Messages:
    204
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think that The new GI bill may help more folks stay in on AD. With the cost of college sky rocketing, many folks have been jumping out to the big $$$ with contractors. If you know 2 years of college is covered for your 2 kids, there is less pressure to get out. Maybe we can keep a few more O-4s and E-5/6s.
     
  20. kp2001

    kp2001 USMMA Alumnus

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,153
    Likes Received:
    113
    Doubt this will have much, if any effect on retention in the end. Talking with my guys the last thing on their minds when deciding to stay or go is how they will pay for college for their children/spouse. The more important issues they think about is the repeated deployments, having to move every 2-3 years, and job dissatisfaction(can we possibly create anymore paperwork?).

    One of the big issue for the O's in this new GI bill is that the timer on when they can transfer benefits. This does not start until after the completion of their initial service obligation (I'm talking only of ROTC/Academy grads). So for aviators this is a minimum of 8 years of service before they even begin to accrue time towards transferring benefits. The benefit for these folks is that they now qualify for any GI bill, but I have yet to meet someone who says they will stay on for the extra years just so they can transfer their benefits to their dependents.
     

Share This Page