Today's quiz question: Why is it that it's suddenly become fashionable to force veterans to pay for improvements/expansions of VA care?

 Today's quiz question: Why is it that it's suddenly become fashionable to force veterans to pay for improvements/expansions of VA care?

The first example I know of is the expansion of the Agent Orange program to include Blue Water victims from the Vietnam War.

The goals of the program are worthy. ALL veterans exposed to Agent Orange are eligible for care resulting from that exposure.

Formerly, it was limited to those who had actually set foot in Vietnam or it's water ways.

The need for the expansion of this program was obvious.

Requiring other veterans to pay for it by adding fees to VA home loans, making already expensive housing that much MORE expensive for the veteran, is not.

And now, it seems that the Good Idea Fairy has landed once again on Congressional Shoulders, which a House Bipartisan series of improvements to VA care, including expanding benefits including in home care and for disabled vets and increases in pay for caregiver support.

Ideas long overdue, perhaps. But how are they going to pay for it?

"Paying for the package would be done through new fees on VA home loans, an offset that lawmakers say will prevent the legislation from breaking congressional budget rules. But even with that, passing the veterans legislation remains a difficult task."

How much is it expected to cost?

$1.7 billion.

Over the next 10 years.

If the Federal budget were to remain the exact same as it is now for that same time period, the total cost would be $62 trillion.

The article, from Army Times, refers to the excuse for shafting veterans again as a way to avoid "budget busting."

I'm reaching an age and a condition where I would likely benefit from this expansion.

But the effort to make my fellow veterans pay for it?

Is sickening.

https://www.armytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2024/05/14/vets-bill-would-expand-caregiver-support-boost-in-home-care-options/

A response to the question of "Why are Republicans opposed to the forgiveness of student loans?"

I was cruising Quora Digest the other day, when I came across the following.

Now, the basis for Quora is as something of a discussion board where people ask questions seeking information.

The difficulty is that many questions are moronic. Many are trolls. Many can be answered by using a search engine google is one, but if one is searching for information with at least a modicum of non-bias, others exist.

Even the question I am about to paste here is rather stupid, considering how it's been debated to death in other forums, newspaper/magazine pieces and blogs.

But I've got to admit the first line of the response to the question intrigued me.

And I was impressed enough to copy and paste this particular exchange for your edification

*******************************
Q: Why are Republicans opposed to the forgiveness of student loans?

A: May I answer as a Democrat? I think many good reasons are stated here regarding the morality of essentially forcing people who already paid for their college and people who didn’t go to college to pay for those who went and have yet to pay for it.

But I have another reason. If you happen to support student loans, forgiving them now will eventually kill them altogether.

Once loans devolve into the government simply paying for college, which is what the progressive wing of the party is really after, then the debate is on about whether college should be “free” or not.

Since that is the real objective of the people pushing for loan forgiveness we should just have that debate instead of trying to slip a major policy change through the back door.

I believe that Progressives don’t want to have that debate because they know they will lose it. The Federal government simply has no money for another expensive entitlement, and the things they would need to do to make it somewhat affordable for the government will not appeal to the “free college” crowd, like tracking kids from a young age via entrance exams as they do in European and Asian countries to ensure that only the “best and the brightest” get to pursue baccalaureate degrees while the rest get funneled into vocational training. [Edit: there is nothing wrong with vocational training. I think it is way underrated in our society today. The question is who gets to choose.]

“Free college” would look nothing like today’s sprawling verdant campuses with carpeted dorms and climbing walls at the gym.

Anyone who knows that and still pushes for loan forgiveness for people that have experienced these things cannot accuse those opposed to their special pleading as being “selfish.”

The objection to pandering and vote-buying is not only from Republicans.

********************************

I caught this and am blogging it because it is, to me, as succinct and accurate assessment of the issue... and response to why it's insane to engage in this practice... as any I've ever read.

I wish I could claim credit for these words but they come from a responder by the name of "Marc H," who believably claims an MBA from the Wharton School and that he "gives advice for a living."

Written a year ago: my take on the 2024 election.

As the Durham Report verifies, the allegations Trump has leveled against the Letter Agencies of the Federal Government were largely correct.

Allegations repeatedly condemned by democrats and their media arm in the most vicious abuse of the First Amendment in American history, it does call into question other allegations by Trump and other condemnations by democrats.

Politically, democrats lie.

At roughly every level down to the local, leftists view words roughly the same way Muslim militants view them as means to an end. (For further info, look up the words "Taqiya" and "Kitmān.")

They lie, because of course, they get away with it.

Yesterday, when I posted the direct link to the Report, I wrote "DOJ Special Counsel John Durham's report is out and while damning, it simply won't make any difference IMHO."

(https://www.justice.gov/storage/durhamreport.pdf)

In everything from the MSM burying this story (while so many of the fake, completely contrived allegations against Trump got the front-page-above-the-fold treatment, I haven't seen much mention or discussion of it by the leftist-controlled media organs) to the lack of listing those who caused these outrageous weaponizations against political enemies for indictment, I somehow knew as bad as this report was going to be, it wasn't going to make any difference.

Leftists, of course, completely dismiss any allegations regarding the theft of the last (and perhaps other?) elections.

But then, they have frequently dismissed every allegation, later proven factual, that Trump et al, have made.

When the allegations concerning the theft of the 2020 election were made, I repeatedly stated the obvious: every effort to investigate any aspect of that election was fought by the left. They'd scream, they'd go to court. They'd vilify, they'd attack. They'd harass. And they'd do those things mainly because they didn't care if the election WAS stolen, they got the outcome they wanted and they were not about to risk that outcome due to investigations into the not-explained-to-this-day irregularities of that election.

Imagine how different things on our political landscape would be today if they had said something to the effect of, "you know what? There WERE some strange things going on in this election... so let's join with you to examine these allegations and see where the evidence takes us..." or words to that effect.

Faith in our electoral system is part of the fabric of our Nation. Without it, we're just another 3rd World dictatorship. And that fabric is frayed when it doesn't have to be. And it's not the allegations of electoral fraud that fray it. It's the failure of government to actively investigate these allegations and put them to bed, or, in the alterative, confirm them.

Many of the allegations made by Trump concerning FBI and FISA and other agencies have been shown to have been accurate. Much of the weaponization of the FBI is confirmed in the Durham Report.

But those responsible will never be held accountable any more than Hillary was held accountable for shattering federal law and setting up her bathroom server so foreign interests could check out her email before she did.

And while Durham knows full well those directly and actively involved in a rank weaponization that continues to this day in the FBI – Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Joe Biden White House, none of them will ever be prosecuted or held accountable in any way. It's a free pass like those on the Epstein flight list have received, or those 217 or so members of Congress who used taxpayer dollars to pay off their victims of sexual assault/harassment.

And why will it continue?

Because from their perspective, there's no reason it shouldn't.

I say it here first: the predicted and overwhelming Red Wave that failed to materialize in 2022 is the precursor to the 2024 presidential election: Once again, the Republicans will lose.

Ask yourself why Biden has announced his reelection bid? Because his handlers believe it's already in the bag. And they will have had 4 years to refine their shtick, to make it much less obvious and much more subtle. And the same leftist deniers that were out in full force since November of '20 will be out there with their hypocrisy: the same people who claimed Trump's presidency was illegitimate and then vociferously defended the 2020 election will be out there doing it again.

The Durham Report portrays federal agencies as extensions of the Democrat National Committee. It's a portrait of direct federal government interference and a four-year long coup attempt that violated the rights of Trump and dozens of others.

There will be no outrage by the left. There will be no media calls for justice. There will be no demonstrations.

I can't even begin to imagine what would be happening now if, in fact, Trump was president and this report came out concerning FBI efforts against Biden.

Instead... so far... we don't even get a media yawn. And we likely won't in the future.

I jusr read a post about a complaint that the Fed has wasted $66B on illegal aliens, but only has a $3B budget for homeless vets. My response:

I get that.

But generally speaking, there is no shortage of housing for veterans that I'm aware of.

The sad reality is that in my experience of working with homeless vets, they're generally homeless because they want to be. It sounds counter intuitive, to be sure, but that is the case.

Here's a blog post I wrote several years ago that illustrates the story: Major Thomas Egan: Why'd you do it? (Originally published 24 Dec 08)

I originally posted this 8 years ago today (24 Dec). And it bears repeating.

This story was in the paper... although, unfortunately, not on the Columbian web.

It is the story of a retired Army Major, one Thomas Egan; a veteran of 2 years on the Korean DMZ, a Master's graduate of the University of Oregon; a retired Oregon Army National Guard officer. He was found dead, apparently frozen to death, next to a bottle of booze, in Eugene, Oregon within the past few days.

Unfortunately, the story speaks for itself. Sometimes, the desire to destroy one's self can overwhelm all other instincts.

I never knew you, Major, but we served in the Army together at the same time. I have no idea what happened to you, but I wish I did... and I wish it could have been fixed.

Tomorrow is Christmas. If you know someone who needs help, take the time and the effort to try and get that help to them. Major Egan had help available, but made bad choices when it came to using it.

As I look outside at the foot of snow, I ask myself: "how many Major Egans are there? Is there more that could have been done?"

Probably not.

But I wish there had been.

Good bye, Major. From all accounts, you served us honorably and well. I never met you, but I won't forget you.

I could have been you.

************************************
Soldier’s death resonates
Homeless veteran froze to death though services were available
By JACK MO (Eugene) Register-Guard

EUGENE, Ore — Thomas Egan was a scholar and a decorated soldier. He was also a homeless alcoholic whose life ended last week when he froze to death in Eugene during an unusually long and harsh cold snap. His body was found covered in snow near the corner of West First Avenue and Blair Boulevard, a bottle of liquor by his side.

News of the demise of the longtime Eugene resident troubled many local veterans — especially those who knew that with some effort and some help, the man they called Major Egan could have had a roof over his head.

Memorial for Maj. Thomas L. Egan ret.

“The whole National Guard community is taking this very hard,” said Bud Dickey, a vocational rehabilitation coordinator with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs’ community reintegration service center in Eugene.

“It’s very disturbing for all of us, because Major Egan was retired and could have been drawing his (veterans’) benefits,” Dickey said. “He had options that he did not access.”

Egan collected monthly Social Security checks, but the amount was a pittance compared with the payments he was entitled to as a retired military veteran. When he turned 60 in July, Egan became eligible to receive $909 each month in National Guard retirement income, Dickey said.

Then Lieutenant Egan

Egan also could have applied for a separate pension check based on unemployability. “That would have gotten him an apartment if he wanted one,” said Jay Rea, a Springfield resident who served under Egan in the National Guard in the late 1980s. “I shed a tear when I heard he died,” Rea said. “It breaks my heart because he was the friendliest guy, and so smart.”

A New York native, Egan joined the Army in 1971 after graduating from Quinnipiac College in Hamden, Conn., with a bachelor’s degree in history. He was stationed at the demilitarized zone between North and South Korea for two years, and was reassigned to the Oregon Army National Guard in 1977.

Earned master’s degree

Egan earned his master’s degree from the University of Oregon in 1983, and ultimately attained the rank of major with the National Guard.

He retired honorably in 1991, following a 20-year military career during which he was awarded several service medals and ribbons.

Dickey said Egan’s desire to drink made him ineligible for VA housing programs that require sober living.

Egan had declined to enroll in substance abuse treatment programs offered through the veterans agency, Dickey said.

According to those who knew him, Egan worked sporadically. He did some landscaping, and most years helped deliver telephone books.

Sometimes, he found an apartment to stay in for a while. At other times, he lived on the streets. In August, Egan spent two weeks at the Eugene Mission — which is less than one block from the spot where a passer-by discovered his body last week.

Mission officials said Egan never caused any trouble there, and could have stayed any time. Dickey said Egan has no relatives in Oregon, and tracking down members of his extended family on the East Coast has been challenging.

Dickey, who served five years with Egan in the National Guard, is helping to direct an effort to have Egan interred at the Roseburg National Cemetery.

“He will be buried as a veteran in a veterans’ cemetery,” Dickey said. “He was a good soldier, and we’re going to get him the burial he’s due.”

************************************

"Dickey said Egan’s desire to drink made him ineligible for VA housing programs that require sober living."

That's it in a nutshell for most homeless veterans. Rules. Rules that even educated former field grade officers refuse to live by on occasion.

We cannot force homeless veterans to get help. We can't ram it down their throats. At some point, self-accountability has to rear its ugly head.

Of course, the Fed shouldn't be spending a dime on illegals save for the cost of their instant and automatic deportation.

But the issue does not appear to be a shortage of funds for homeless vets. It appears to be a shortage of homeless vets to use those funds.

Who to support with your vote? It has to be more than media, mailings and the voter pamphlet (Method)

I initially wrote this back in 2018 or so, but I believe it bears repeating.

Who to support with your vote? It has to be more than media, mailings and the voter pamphlet (Method)

It is my sincerest hope that anyone reading this understands the importance of their vote.

I, for one, want EVERY legal American Citizen to vote as long as you know both what you're voting for... and when it comes to candidates, WHO you're voting for.

If you're an American, non-felon citizen, you have the privilege of voting. And, while I get that the left is doing their best to eradicate that privilege through allowing non-citizens and illegal aliens to vote, I'm hoping that such is an aberration and that the courts... and/or the Fed... will eventually crack down on rogue municipalities enabling the pollution of the voter pool.

Meanwhile, when you're staring at your ballot, and you're about to fill it out, why are you doing that?

Politics has a variety of problems today as it's had since the art began.

Sadly, my 30 years or so in politics has shown that most of the political stereotypes are 100% on target.

Lies, manipulation, exaggeration, backstabbing, assassination... that's how the game is played.

Double standards abound where one is condemned for doing something while another is lionized for doing the exact, same, thing.

An embarrassingly biased and corrupt media has long since ceased being the purveyors of news as opposed to the makers of news. Reporters no longer even try to hide the fact that they've sold out. In the last presidential campaign, reporters actually coordinated their news coverage with the DNC and the Clinton campaign.

Biases abound in the media world, but they rarely, if ever, acknowledge those biases so they want you to believe their opinion... on anything... is more valuable than yours.

It isn't.

Reporters here locally are screened for bias. A former reporter for the democratian told me years ago that the only bias they could show was leftist and that they had to remember who they worked for at all times.

Well, yeah, that figures.

But when your news is filtered by a political bias... how can the news you're getting be depended on to form YOUR opinions?

Leftist politicians will be supported by a leftist media. Right side politicians will be vilified, attacked and beaten to a pulp, you name it. Who can forget the democratian endorsing a leftist for the 18th District Senate seat?

In 2000 they wrote of democrat challenger Lou Peterson, “although sincere and well-intentioned, (he, Peterson) lacks even a rudimentary understanding of the important policy questions for Southwest Washington and the state. About the only attribute in his favor is the fact that he’s not Don Benton. And on that admittedly flimsy basis, we endorse Peterson.”

Lesson? Don't form any position based entirely on what a newspaper or TV news or internet source tells you.

And it happens on both sides: Leftist propaganda mills like the Daily Kos have counter-balanced sites like World News Daily. Both are part of the swamp, and both need to be drained generally and ignored particularly.

I refuse to kill off brain cells reading either.

Another source of information are the tree-killing wastes of money known as mailers.

Candidates use mailers basically for 3 purposes: increase name familiarity, comparisons between candidates and attack ads.

The problem? The main purpose of all mailers, on the off chance they're actually read (most aren't) is to get the reader to think or believe what the sender wants.

The main problem for the voter is that these mailers look great and contain a great many words.... that typically say absolutely nothing... or absolutely nothing of importance.

The possible exception may be the comparison piece... presuming the comparisons are factual. And how is the reader supposed to know that?

Lesson? Mailers at best are merely a start of the discussion. Don't take them at face value.

As many as a third of voters who actually vote limit their research to what happens to be in the voter's pamphlet.

Well, who do you think wrote that stuff? How do you think it got put in there?

Major candidates have professionals write their voter pamphlet descriptions. They know the value of these snippets because they know the numbers of voters who depend on these fictions is huge.

These short stories, limited by rule to certain sizes depending on the office... 100 words, 200... 300... have the same purpose as every other political communication: to convince you to fork over your vote.

They rarely include the candidate taking responsibilities for their failures, their betrayals, and their sellouts.

They really do promise the moon plus $2 to get your vote... and then, all too frequently... those we believed in simply ignore their promises and pledges and do whatever their special interest masters tell them to do.

And in the case of Clark County, Washington State?

Those betrayals have cost... and are costing.... the people of this community hundreds of millions of dollars.

We were told one thing... promised in writing, in fact... and delivered... without asking.... another.

The voter's pamphlet is full of promises... full of marketing and all too often, full of lies.

I get that for many, this kind of news is discouraging. You may not have even considered these perspectives. You may be asking yourself, if I don't make a decision based on this... what do I use?

Well, that depends.

What's important to you?

If truth is important to you, then vote against a candidate or incumbent who has lied. Many have. And many will continue to lie for the simple fact that all too often, those who lie to us... to get elected, to stay elected, or to get some bill passed... are rarely held accountable for their lies.

If truth is important to you, then vote against initiatives or referenda where the proponents lie.

That's difficult, given few know all of the information. That's where common sense comes in.

Politics is little different from all other forms of sales when it comes right down to it. Those who want something from you, in this case, your vote; are more than willing to lie, exaggerate, cheat or steal to get it.

Screen capture from the pro pot initiative

The pot initiative of a few years back, for example, promised the people of this state $582 million per year in revenue... which sounds like an impressive number. It was also supposed to empty out our prisons and end drug prosecutions.

Yes, that sounded impressive.  TOO impressive.

It was a rather simple matter of dividing the number of people in this state into the fictional number proponents used to lie this initiative into being.  At about 7 million men, women and children, that number worked out to require that each of those people purchase enough pot to generate around $83 each in taxes.

That number was absurd on its face.

Jails are just as full. Drug enforcement is just as expensive. A thriving underground pot economy continues unabated. Our taxes were just jacked up to pay for the teacher's scam of McCleary and that means, simply, that none of the promises of the pot initiative have been true.

This is not to rant against the pot initiative. It is merely an illustration of how far those who support an issue, a project, a law or a candidate will go to get them passed or to get elected.

If taxes are important to you, and a candidate either refuses to tell you if they'll raise taxes or fees, refuses to tell you if they'll require a referendum for tax or fee increases; or if, like Ann "Gas Tax" Rivers, they've told you one thing in the past (they'll oppose gas tax and tab fee increases) only to vote for those increases once they were elected, then either vote against them... or know going in that you're voting for a liar.

Efforts will be made to play you. And that's why it's so important to do your own research.

Don't rely on marketing to make your choices for you. Rise to the occasion. Do the work.

Even I've been fooled... badly... so remember: like every other sale in life, if it sounds too good to be true?

It likely is.