Jon Stewart Absolutely Annihilates Republicans for Opposing Veterans’ Benefits Bill

jon-stewart-vetsI absolutely love Jon Stewart.  I’ve said several times how I wish he was on a bigger platform than Comedy Central.  Though I know Comedy Central is still a decent platform to be on, it’s often not exactly the “go-to” source for political discourse – and when it comes to Jon Stewart, I think it should be.

I’m sure many of you have heard about the fact that Senate Republicans blocked a bill that would have provided education and health care benefits to our veterans.  Some Republicans claimed it was because “it would add to our deficit” while others were insistent that any veterans package be saddled with new sanctions on Iran.

You know, because helping our veterans should come with strings attached, right?

Well, Jon Stewart ripped into Republicans for blocking these benefits.  And rightfully so.

Stewart asked, “I guess my question is, why do these senators get to stay in office?  Maybe if we frame their actions in ways that we know generate real outrage in America — by prioritizing sanctions on Iran over the health and safety of our existing veterans, I think these senators may have just tweeted out a picture of their enormous b*lls. Now can we kick them out?”

He also slammed their hypocrisy about “spending” as it relates to our veterans considering Republicans sure didn’t seem to mind sending our troops off to war.

“So the VA is wasteful, often, and ineffective. This is true, and adds to the debt for this bill.  But apparently those were things that these senators didn’t worry about in 2008, when they voted to continue funding the Iraq war despite the Pentagon being unable to account for a missing $15 billion worth of sh*t that we bought.”

Stewart hit the nail on the head about everything.

The fact that these Senators would try to tie in new Iran sanctions with veterans’ benefits, or dare to say that “we can’t afford” to help those we sent off to war, is absolutely reprehensible.

How these senators can sit there and say they support our troops, while blocking an extension to veterans’ benefits, shows what absolute hypocrites they are.

And it also shows exactly where the Republican party sits as it relates to helping our veterans.

It’s okay to send them off to war – but they’ll only vote to help those veterans as long as it’s “cost effective” or new Iran sanctions are attached to the bill.

Yup, sounds like those “good, wholesome” Republican values to me.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • Jim Bean

    I have to ask; why would Democrats choose to allow our veterans to be deprived of these benefits in order to protect Iran from sanctions?

    • Cat Lover

      The Democrats are not the ones denying Veterans their benefits. You can put the blame on the Republicians in the House and the Senate. Mrs_oatmeal, I agree with you completely.

      • Jim Bean

        That’s an intriguing response. It completely absolves, without justification, the Democrats of all responsibility for their role in it, as if Republicans have some civic responsibility to agree to the Dems demands no matter what.

      • Sandy Greer

        And YOU believe Repubs have a ‘civic responsibility’ to oppose Dems, no matter what.

        Even at the expense of veterans. No matter what.

        In this case, Repubs get to kill two birds with one stone: They oppose Dems, AND they get to ‘deprive’ somebody of something.

        ^^^Laughable; Repubs are always so eager to ‘deprive’ somebody of something: They end of depriving themselves of votes.

      • strayaway

        The national defense appropriations bill reduced Veterans pensions. President Obama signed that. When Senate Republicans tried to restore veteran benefits by taking welfare benefits away from illegal aliens and giving it to veterans, Senate Democrats refused to cooperate. Democrats valued illegal aliens over veterans it seemed.

        This new bill was designed to make Republicans look bad. It is funded from an existing military fund. In other words, Democrats are paying for this by crippling our active military. I’ll bet that if Democrats would instead fund it by reducing funding for illegal aliens taking US workers’ jobs or some of their other pet programs, Republicans would be more receptive.

      • Sandy Greer

        >This new bill was designed to make Republicans look bad.

        Really? Well, it seems they fell for it, hook, line, and sinker. They always do. Why is that, I wonder?

        Gotta love it when the Party of Personal Responsibility blames others for making them ‘look bad’, LOL

      • strayaway

        It was politics as usual. Do you have a more responsible way of funding this bill than by crippling the active military? I would enthusiastically support this bill if the financing made sense. I have all sort of ways. Giving away billion dollar “loans” to Ukraine while sacking the active military budget to help our vets just doesn’t make sense.

      • gmartini

        Ooooo, I know the answer! End all subsidies to Big Oil. We can buy lots of nice things with those savings.

      • strayaway

        Good idea! Fighting wars largely for access to foreign oil is a corollary. We could reduce military expenses, the number of wounded vets, and some disabled veteran expenses. Fighting wars for cheaper oil is as much of a subsidy as tax breaks to oil companies.

      • mexhapati

        how about reducing the corruption and waste that we all know exists within the pentagon? wecould try not spending on obsolete and ineffective junk, for example

      • strayaway

        Another good idea. I have no idea why we are still in Afghanistan either.

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        gonna partially agree with strayaway here,,,,,
        fund it? tax scumbag VOODOO houses ( see: religion)

      • Pipercat

        Except when you get past the conservative blogs championing this, you find out the the proposal is nothing more than an unworkable talking point. A little thing called the 14th amendment would doom this proposal right out of the blocks. As for an alternative, how about updating the laws on energy royalties?

      • strayaway

        I disagree with your first point assuming I know what proposal you meant but your second point seems like a good idea.

      • Pipercat

        Fraud and welfare payments to native born children of all immigrants are the bulk of this welfare. You cannot legislate away fraud, only curtail it. As for rest, it would not pass judicial review.

      • strayaway

        Enforcing existing immigration laws to the letter and incarcerating the cheating employers of illegal aliens would dry up much of the supply of illegal aliens as some would go back home with their children and fewer would seek jobs here. It’s too bad that judicial review doesn’t protect US workers’ jobs as much as it protects employer profits.

      • Pipercat

        You see, you just made my argument. The whole notion is nothing more than a dog whistle proposal. As you stated, the problem is multifaceted and layered to the point where any legislation would be tenuous, tedious and ineffective. A simple delay, or elimination, to a boondoggle defense program would serve the same function; moreover, the NDAA has passed with the sequester limitations in place. Easier to redirect appropriated funds, within a department, than to add legislation which moves funding from one department to another.

      • strayaway

        The Republican proposal was to gut spending on illegal alien welfare and give it to vets. Democrats had a different priority. There is no law that can’t be overturned or defunded although you are right about courts legislating from the bench. Sometimes there just isn’t enough to pay for all your spending or Bush’s for that matter. I was suggesting additional avenues of achieving the same goal should the courts so intervene.

      • J.D.

        Interesting point, however, I wish when people stated facts such as that^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Fraud and welfare payments to native born children of all immigrants are the bulk of this welfare.^^^^^^^^^ that you provide a source citation. There is too much of that on the internet, people claiming they know something just because they read it somewhere, maybe. We need to cite the source of our information in order to have ANY credibility. Otherwise its just he said she said crap.

      • Pipercat

        Simple search really, did take some digging to get past the ideological blogs. One issue here, is you cannot embed a link in this comment section. So, you’re on your own… 😉

      • Sunny Ray

        I think that you have to know that America needs immigrants more than you think. First, they do the job that you american don’t want to do, too hard and underpaid, they are not stealing anything from you. Second, America needs immigrant to balance its population, there is not enough young workers to pay retirement to the elderly. That is not democratic but mathematics. Just sayin’…

      • strayaway

        I have to pay taxes to keep unemployed US workers on extended unemployment benefits and welfare while Illegal aliens (the legal term) profit their employers by undercutting US wages. I blame their employers and elected officials who promote this caste labor system you seem to favor. US workers will do any kind of work but not necessarily for illegal alien wages. Consider doctors who are paid well to probe every body cavity and deal with putrid smells and fluids or unionized meat packing plant workers who were replaced by cheap foreign non-union labor. Were trade agreements sending our jobs abroad and cheap foreign labor allowed to compete for remaining jobs reduced there would be a shortage of labor as you suggest. That would allow US workers to DEMAND a larger share of the national economic pie instead of begging for extensions of government programs. I’m for ending the labor caste system which so benefits the 1% while simultaneously destroying our middle and working classes.

      • J.D.

        You do make some good points, but turning our backs on our own citizens because of what the “free market” has created is wrong. I lost my job in 2009 and exhausted all 99 weeks of my unemployment, even though I worked as many part time jobs as I could to make it last, and returned to school for a degree. Things are getting better for sure, I don;t think it needs to be 99 weeks anymore, but not sure if 26 weeks would be long enough either. Some areas are still hurting in recovery.

      • Sandy Greer

        I, too, know people unemployed 1+ years. Or without Healthcare, in previous years. I personally do what I can to make sure those I know have food on their table, and do not go hungry.

        This ‘begrudging’ of others (Unemployment/Food Stamps/Welfare, VA benefits, etc) is where the GOP leaves me behind.

        There is nothing wrong with a government coming to the aid of its people.

      • Sunny Ray

        There is nothing wrong, and I will add that it’s its duty!

      • Sunny Ray

        I’m not in favor for this system, I’m just telling you true facts proved by sociologists. Actually, I’d like to see all those hard workers getting their well deserved green cards since, again proved by sociologists, “americans” inspire to more rewarding or intellectual jobs. It is the same everywhere, in Europe, north african people illegally cross the Mediterranean sea to find better opportunities in southern Europe, and guess what kind of jobs they get? Hard labor that “natives” don’t even think about trying. I don’t like it but that’s the way it is and while we are not ready to pay 3 times more the price of an orange, it won’t change much.

      • strayaway

        What’s been proven by sociologists? Don’t ever complain about urban sprawl if you dump 30M people into this country. That means 10% more roads, parking lots, shopping malls, and all the rest. Again, you are insulting US workers who you claim won’t work. My contention is that US workers will do any kind of work with enough incentive. You, instead, prefer illegal aliens working for less so their bosses can profit more. I really don’t understand such loyalties.

      • Sunny Ray

        I don’t support it, you don’t get it.

      • Kenneth Fussnecker

        Hey Sunny Ray, strayaway does get it and you are insulting.People that are here illegally are breaking the law!!!

      • Sunny Ray

        I’m not insulting anyone. Sure they are breaking the law, and the employers as well, but at the same time everybody gets benefits out of it but the illegals themselves since they are working under “contract slavery” and/or debt bondage. These are facts buddy, not my opinion.

      • republic84

        Although I don’t agree with strayaway, they didn’t say immigrants, they said illegals. No one has any issues with anyone who’s here legally working hard and attempting to make a living. That’s one of the things that make our amazing country just that.

      • Sunny Ray

        Illegals pay taxes just like you and me, so saying that they are stealing our jobs is hypocritical, also because they do what “americans” don’t like to do. It’s just a matter of paperwork but since many people hate their guts, it’s not happening.

      • strayaway

        They do jobs Americans won’t do for illegal alien wages. That’s why they are here. You are supporting a labor caste system. Most meat packing plants used to hire US union labor. Now they hire illegal, legal Somalis, whoever they can get to work for the lowest wage. Union meat packers are a thing of the past because of people with you disdain for well paid US workers and, of course, shareholder profits.

      • Sunny Ray

        “I am a Production Manager for a natural gas facility. The labor that the
        employees perform is very tasking and challenging. The company I work
        for has great benefits, is focused and concerned about safety, and pays
        decent. Those perks do not take away how physically taxing and intense
        the labor can be. I do not have many US citizens working for me because
        they do not stay and they have a piss-poor attitude. At one point we
        had a bunch of illegals and we still do have some. I now have several
        Asians working here, most have their papers. They come to work with a
        great demeanor. They are happy to work and do not complain every second
        about what they have to do.”

        Just one example found in a site like the one here, where people comment on articles.
        I’m not insulting american workers, you feel insulted because you don’t know what’s going on out there, or you don’t want to admit it…

        And by the way, you have the choice of accepting a job or not for any reason, they don’t, they take what they are given.

      • strayaway

        Raise your pay $15-20 an hour and I’ll bet you will have all sorts of Americans willing to work. It will take some Americans off of unemployment or welfare somewhere not that those would be the people you hire. Instead, you hire Asians? That’s for you convenience and profit, not ours.

      • Sunny Ray

        $15-20? why not $50? or $100!! Yay party time!! Come on, in what world are you living? Companies to live, grow and invest need profits, if not they close for good and you loose your job, happy now? Your statement just proves what I’m trying to tell you. You think you deserve more than they would offer you, you may be right actually, but the reality is what the job is worth, not what YOU are worth. Unless you are a doctor or engineer, and even then…

      • strayaway

        You sound like a Republican. Yes, let’s bring in Asian contract workers so we don’t have to pay enough to get an American to do the job. I realize that our national leaders betray us by sending away our jobs and opening the doors so any company that can’t get cheap overseas labor by exporting work can bring cheap labor here. It puts pressure on you to compete with other firms who take advantage of foreign labor. I’m saying, let’s close the loopholes to create a shortage of US labor so wages will be bid up so US workers can DEMAND a larger share of the national economic pie. I realize I’m repeating myself but otherwise there is no hope for US labor. Republican trickle down economic theory doesn’t work and Democrats throwing scraps to the poor doesn’t work. We have to instead revise the game rules to favor and empower workers. I’ve been a union worker most of my life and my experience is that Americans will work and work hard when they are treated fairly and are motivated.

      • Sunny Ray

        I’m not a republican and I understand your concern, but you have to realize that if hard workers get a larger share, all classes above will demand the same, a bigger share, since they’d still have jobs with more responsibilities, consequence? Inflation. The country as divided as it is, is absolutely not ready to make such compromise, it’s sad, but it’s the reality!

        That is why we have to vote all those idiots out! NOW!

      • strayaway

        I agree with you to a point. If the minimum wage goes up, something I support although for different reasons than many on this board, workers who made slightly more will want an increase if for no other reason to keep their status intact. I’m ok with that. Corporate CEO’s would probably prefer that their multi-million dollar salaries not be spent on worker’s wages. BUT…we have in the past, in this Country, had workers taking in a bigger percentage share of the GNP so we do know that CEO’s and shareholders have done just fine during most of our history when the 1% have not made off with so much. They will adjust.

      • Sunny Ray

        I totally agree with you! But as I said, until the county stays as divided as it is, it won’t change.

      • Sandy Greer

        I wish conservatives (if you are one) shared your POV on the Minimum Wage. All we ever seem to hear from The Right are cries of Class Warfare, and ‘takers vs makers’ arguments.

        I wish more thought that rising tides raise all boats.

        I wish your message could be ‘heard’ by the GOP.

      • strayaway

        While I’m pretty sure we can continue to find things to disagree about, in addition to supporting an increased minimum wage with a couple of qualifications, I also wish that Republicans would take a supportive libertarian view of unions. Since the rich are able to afford lawyers, lobbyists, and financial planners and do so, they have advantages. Seen as a free and collective way of poorer people hiring their own lawyers, lobbyists, and financial planners, unions should be viewed by Republicans, libertarian leaning Republicans at least, as allowing the not so rich to do exactly what the rich are able to do to look after their own interests. Why should any Republican object to that? Many do of course and I am trying to wean them off of that. Its true that unions sometimes kill their own jobs, but rich people’s advisors sometimes make mistakes too.

        Another thing I get myself into arguments with Republicans about is EV technology. Because they view the subsidization of EV’s as having to do with Obama, they throw the baby out with the bath water and come off looking like luddites. So I am having my arguments with them about all that. I think it’s more patriotic to buy a US manufactured Volt that uses only US produced energy then to buy cars depending to some extent on buying energy from our enemies. I would rather subsidize Volts than subsidize the oil companies with blood shed by our young people fighting resource wars for cheap oil. Calling Republicans less then patriotic and luddites for opposing EV technology gets me into some heated discussions too.

      • Sandy Greer

        So, Minimum Wage, Unions, AND ‘green’, LOL I imagine you DO get yourself in trouble.

        You asked why Repubs should object to the ordinary Joe having a union to look after his own best interest?

        Maybe they bought the Bill of Goods?

        1) Unions (automatically) = ‘bad’
        2) CEOs earning 3-400 times the average worker prove their ‘worth’
        3) Or maybe just that Greed is Good

        I hate to think Repubs don’t actually LIKE your average Joe (tho sometimes I have my doubts) I’d rather believe they bought the Bill of Goods.

        Anyway, I wish you good luck in your endeavors to persuade.

        And, you should have an avatar.

      • Jim Bean

        You wanna raise minimum wage so all those poor people and those on fixed incomes have to pay more at the dollar store and the grocery? I’m not feeling the love in that. And what about the youngsters who lose the opportunity to get into the workforce altogether? How you going to make it right with them?

      • Sandy Greer

        You say that like you actually believe prices stagnate, and don’t rise IRRESPECTIVE of the Minimum Wage. Go sell it somewhere else.

        You also seem to believe that only ‘youngsters’ earn Minimum Wage. Not true AT ALL. Too, Economists disagree on Minimum Wage being a job killer, so I just don’t ‘buy’ your Talking Point.

        But I tell you what. Let’s allow the poor and low income to decide for themselves where they ‘feel the love’:

        1) Dems, who try to help, or
        2) The Right, who see a hand up as a hand out, and vote to deny Food Stamps, Unemployment, Medical…and even VA benefits

        People are smart enough to determine that, I think.

      • Jim Bean

        Smarts aren’t the issue. Nearly all people know that perpetually spending more than you’re earning eventually brings a household or nation to its knees. The problem is responsibility. A great many people only care about themselves and as long as they believe it won’t be THEM who suffers in the end, they’ll continue the irresponsible behavior. There’s no question the Dems are driving us towards a society where ‘everyone gets a trophy and personal performance is optional’ and the Pubs are trying to regress back to an ‘everybody has to earn their own keep’ society. If its any consolation, I believe your side will win. Obama has forever changed the trajectory of America into a downward one and we will eventually be just another mediocre, unremarkable, constantly struggling socialist style nation until we hit the Greece/Ukraine stage where civil war breaks out. Hang on to your guns.

      • Sandy Greer

        Your premise of ‘perpetually spending more than we earn’ is wrong: My understanding is our deficit is shrinking.

        More important is the case to be made for using debt to build wealth. From a ‘household’ buying a first home, to a firm investing in business holdings, to a nation investing in infrastructure, and its people.

        ^^^I could make a pretty good case for any of that.

        There IS a question Dems are the Root of All Evil, and that Obama is the Harbinger of Socialistic Doom. Good Lord, where do people come up with this stuff?

        YES, the Times, they Are a-Changin. But they’ve ALWAYS done so, and we’ve ALWAYS muddled thru; WE ARE STILL HERE…despite disaster being predicted how many times thru the centuries?

        ^^^Pessimism (Doom & Gloom is everywhere) makes it hard to get out of bed in the morning.

        Optimism works for me. Because I believe it really does take a village.

      • Jim Bean

        – A ‘shrinking deficit’ is still a growing debt.
        – If growing debt increased wealth, we’d all be wealthier now than ever before.
        – There is optimism (good) and blind optimism (bad).
        You should test this one: ‘ If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck . . . . . ..’ There will be some uncomfortable moments but I think it will work for you.

      • Sandy Greer

        Heard about the two dogs? Both enter the same room, separately. One comes out, tail wagging. The
        other comes out growling.

        Turns out, it’s a room full of mirrors.

        The first dog saw hundreds of dogs, all wagging their tails, wanting to be his friend. The second? Nothing but angry, snarling, growling dogs, everywhere he looked.

        ^^^IOW: Seek, and ye shall find. A Truism, already tested.

        Optimism is ALWAYS good: Even the cloudiest of days hold promise of sun. From rain, come flowers.

        To each their own, of course. But you’re barking up the wrong tree, trying to convince me to look at the ‘bad’ side of life.

      • J.D.

        No, your company as a businesses dictates what we NEED to survive in our economy buy what you charge for your services. You yourself said the labor was hard. You think it should be done for free. By hiring illegals, you perpetuate an ongoing problem in this country. Pay them at least enough so they can become LEGAL. What is the average pay of your workers, You said the pay was “decent”. One question 1) would you do the work you ask of them for what they get payed??? Here in America we have fought too long and hard for fair pay and equal rights as workers so that greedy ass companies like yours don’t take advantage of us in the name of “profits”. Yes a company needs to make a profit, that is a given, but many corporations have become VERY GREEDY.

      • Sunny Ray

        Before posting a comment, you should make sure you understood what you are answering to!
        -It is not my company buddy…
        -I never said they should work for free
        Don’t associate me with words I never used please.
        You guys just don’t get it, I’m not for all this shit, I’m just telling you facts about what’s going out there, you don’t like them? Me neither, but again that’s the way it is now. Need me to translate in another language?
        To answer your question. no, I’d never do the same job, even with a better pay because, unlike them, I went to school for a better education and I inspire for something more rewarding, this is called honesty. And the one who says that for a better pay he will do it, this is BS. He’ll do it for a few weeks, maybe a few months and he’ll be done. Why? because he wants to do better than that! Whereas for immigrants, whatever the’ll get, it’s way better that they had before. AGAIN, this is facts and not an opinion, get it?

      • J.D.

        Just re-read the post you had put ;-). May I suggest next time that you imply that you are quoting someone or something else BEFORE you put the text not after. I was so irritated after reading just half of it that I did not bother to see that you where quoting another post. Just a suggestion. I would like to know where you read that post because I would love to rip him up….thanks

      • strayaway

        I don’t think I ever inferred it was your company. While you are saying what is out there, I am suggesting that changes be made in what is out there. Kudos to hard working immigrants, illegal aliens, and foreign contract labor. No one is critical of their wanting to take jobs here. However, I am a partisan supporter of US labor and will leave it to you and others to defend our foreign caste labor system.

      • Sunny Ray

        “I don’t think I ever inferred it was your company” my last reply wasn’t for you…
        “and will leave it to you and others to defend our foreign caste labor system” try to read my posts again but with a dictionary close by, maybe you’ll get my point.

      • Sandy Greer

        >Raise your pay $15-20 an hour and I’ll bet you will have all sorts of Americans willing to work.

        ^^^I’ll bet you’re right; plenty of folks take anything they can get right now, just to put food on the table.

        But we can’t even raise the Minimum Wage to $10 without Repubs screaming we’re flushing the economy down the toilet.

        $15-20 an hr? Pie in the Sky.

      • strayaway

        I’m saying what has to be done to get American workers back to work. I have no soft spot for a caste labor system hiring cheap foreign workers while paying Americans not to work. Demand for US workers is the answer so they can demand higher wages. If Asians can be brought in to work for $20/hour (these are guestimate for example numbers) and it takes $35/ hour to secure good US labor, that is not unreasonable considering the social costs of keeping millions of Americans on unemployment lines or welfare. I think it would be a bargain.

        I am, by the way, fully in support of state administered minimum wage laws and federal minimum wage laws related to federal contract, the District of Columbia, and other federal venues. They would reduce welfare costs, reduce the size of bureaucracies admininstering some social programs, accelerate the development of robotization and other efficiencies, an let the recipients of a higher minimum wage have more control over their assets without so many strings attached.

      • mexhapati

        sunnyray i have a business too and i can tell you that insofar as attitude and dedication goes, the migrants work CIRCLES around the others….whenever i ask for volunteers to work overtime, the “legal” laborers look at you like you’re crazy whereas the migrants are HAPPY to volunteer….

        the work ethic in the usa is dead, the attitude is work sux, i just wanna have fun, get high, go out…nothing like our forefathers

      • J.D.

        Nice spin, but before Obama could even sign this bill, it had to pass THROUGH the Senate and the Republican controlled house, correct??? Republicans are good at the smoke and mirrors, and you bought it hook line and sinker. Also just to inform you, this bill was SPONSORED by Rep. Howard McKeon of District 25 in California, he also happens to be a REPUBLICAN!. Do your friggin research before falling for the smoke and mirrors, or the banana in tailpipe trick.

      • strayaway

        Which bill are you talking about? The Appropriations bill was passed by Republicans and democrats and signed by Obama. It cut veteran pensions. The bill I was talking about was offered by Republicans in the Senate moving money from funding illegal aliens to restoring veteran pensions. It never got out of the Democratic majority senate. There was a third bill offered by Democrats offering educational and other benefits and paid for by draining the coffers of the active military. That was rejected by Republicans. Please try to keep up.

      • J.D.

        My original post to you was in response to this post++++ The national defense appropriations bill reduced Veterans pensions. President Obama signed that. When Senate Republicans tried to restore veteran benefits by taking welfare benefits away from illegal aliens and giving it to veterans, Senate Democrats refused to cooperate. Democrats valued illegal aliens over veterans it seemed.

        This new bill was designed to make Republicans look bad. It is funded from an existing military fund. In other words, Democrats are paying for this by crippling our active military. I’ll bet that if Democrats would instead fund it by reducing funding for illegal aliens taking US workers’ jobs or some of their other pet programs, Republicans would be more receptive.

      • Jim Bean

        We’ll see. The Dem’s are frantically preventing people from enjoying the full effects of Obama care until after 2016. We’ll have a good sucker count after that election if not the mid terms.

      • Pipercat

        Actually, they’re placating a bunch of morons that cannot do, even the most, simple research.

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        bingo!

      • J.D.

        Please enlighten me as to HOW the DEMS are preventing us from enjoying OBAMA care aka ACA, when it is the REPUBLICANS who have tried in vain to reascend the law over 50 times? Republican run states have refused to cooperate with the law properly, making its role out as difficult as possible.

      • Jim Bean

        He’s preventing you from enjoying the paying for it part until after 2016. Can believe the man sold it to you at the beginning of his term and then delayed big (the ugly) parts of it for 8 (EIGHT!!) years – until after his term in office was over? He made some history with that slick maneuver, for sure. What a coward! ‘Refused to cooperate with the law properly?’ You mean the exercise of their legal options to opt out on Medicare? That’s not the Pubs fault – that’s the Dem’s fault. They’re the ones that put that option in there for their own political fortunes. Go gripe at them. Why are the bad outcomes of your ‘good intentions’ always someone else’s fault?

      • J.D.

        Why would I go gripe. I am not the one that obviously has a problem with ACA, you do. I think healthcare reform is long over due. You talk like I am the one who has the issues with this stuff, when it is clearly you who does. See i do not have a problem with helping the less fortunate in an out of control capitalistic society. I do however have a problem with war mongering politicians who promote war on false pretenses, spend over a trillion dollars on it and then benefit financially from it. We obviously have differing views on priorities.

      • Jim Bean

        Will you vote for Hillary know she voted for those wars?

      • J.D.

        Probably not. I was surprised to see Ron Paul voted against the war….

      • Jim Bean

        Unless you are religiously sending your $20 or more per month to the Wounded Warrior Project, then you DO have problem with helping the less fortunate. What you don’t have a problem with is letting someone else reach into their pocket to do it.

      • Sandy Greer

        *I* don’t ‘religiously send my $20 per mo to WWP’. I donate once per year, and NEVER less than a grand to ANY charity: WWP is only one of my favorites.

        But. Why must we choose YOUR charity? Why can’t we choose our own?

        And what’s with the ’20 per mo, religiously’? Do you know how you sound?

        ^^^Like you’re looking down your nose at those who can’t afford $20 per mo; assume they’ve got their hand in your pocket.

        Somebody who sees a hand up as a hand out.

      • J.D.

        I am done with you, you are making absolutely no sense what so ever. You assume to know everything about me,, but in reality you don’t know a thing. Since I do not have a lot of money to donate, I donate over 1000 hours a year of my time to helping the youth of our community. There are many other ways to help people other than giving money, and honestly giving 20 dollars here and there to a cause, while noble, is the easiest thing to do. Try donating time, that is a little more meaningful and requires a greater level of commitment. I also pay taxes like all the other citizens of our nation, and I have no problem with that money going to help the less fortunate and veterans.

      • Jim Bean

        And I would add that Obama just ignores anything he doesn’t like in a piece of legislation/law anyway, so what’s the point of them agreeing to one thing if he’s going to do something else?

      • gmartini

        No, if the Republicans want sanctions, perhaps they should draft a bill calling for sanctions and NOT attaching it to a Veteran’s aid bill.

        Spoiler Alert: Good luck with the sanctions thing; if passed, President Obama will veto it.

      • mexhapati

        republicans will not, cannot vote for ANYTHING no matter how badly needed, if there is ANY chance it might make obama look good

      • J.D.

        Touche.

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        jimbo drinks a great deal,,,,,
        that explains his looking upside down on things

        ……………….. perhaps jimbo is really Rumsfeld on this site???

      • George Nestico

        Speaking of responsibility, you must be referring to the 450 plus filibuster Right Jimmy baby, especially the ones that filibustered their own Ideas, like Obama’s Job bill loaded to the top with Republican Idea’s filibustered 8 time, or are you talking about the same Republicans that Overwhelmingly voted down the extension of health benefits for the brave men and women first responders of 9/11 who were and still are dying today because they were told that there was nothing in the air they were breathing remember that it Was Stewart that got that bill passed, But F…ing Republicans will cut food stamps which 1 million military families rely on as well as elderly, and protect with their lives 5-15 billion every year of our tax dollars that subsidize oil companies and 78,000 dollar tax breaks for dancing ponies and in five years Jimmy Baby the Tea- publicans have not put forward one Jobs bill in five years not one ooo the Republicans sure are the Party of Responsibility all right, 4,400 dead, 41,000 wounded 87% will have a life time of health issues,37% have lost limbs and 22 commit suicide every day, not because Iraq did anything wrong, Halliburton had the contract for Iraq six months before the 9/11 attack they send your sons daughters grand kids off to war for F… oil but just as they always have when they come home it’s F them and they the piss heads all wave the American flag claiming to be Patriotic, Nothing and I mean nothing screams responsibility Jimmy like the Republican party. SHM

      • Jim Bean

        And Dems will spend every penny the Pubs will let them to buy votes and pass the bill onto our great grandchildren. I’m not sensing the nobility in all that.

        And speaking of filibusters, uncle Harry nuked the filibuster to get Obama’s nominees through and what happened? He put Dems in the awkward position of having to vote for or against lousy nominees. Consequently, Dems couldn’t get Debo Adegbile confirmed even with the filibuster out of the way. You can’t get much more embarrassing (or hilarious) than that. The Pubs would have blocked it with the filibuster and the Dems could have done the only thing they do well – blame the Pubs. Yet they cheated themselves out of even that.

      • Sandy Greer

        >And Dems will spend every penny the Pubs will let them to buy votes

        Dems don’t need to buy votes.

        All we’ve got to do is sit back and reap the benefits of the mean-spirited ‘haters’ on The Right: Getting their ‘hate on’ for any/everything Obama; for gays, immigrants, minorities, poor; WAY too many others, too numerous to mention. Policies that begrudge here, resent there: Always AGAINST, never for.

        Hell, GOP is even ‘purging’ itself of Moderates, scorning them as RINOs: Very few are ‘right’ ENOUGH for The Right.

        ^^^And all those people got nowhere to go but left. Better get out of the way before the stampede runs you clear over.

      • J.D.

        Great points, but I have to say that that is the longest run un sentence I have ever seen ;-).

    • crabjack

      Your Teabag double speak is laughable.

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        and it is fueled by his alcoholism

    • Pipercat

      Voting for the bill is deprivation?

    • gmartini

      The Democrats are not the ones that added on this little nugget (sanctions). They wanted a CLEAN bill, a bill that focused solely on the legislative intent: veteran’s benefits. How hard is that to comprehend?!

      • J.D.

        If they comprehended anything they would not be Republican…..they would be smart.

    • J.D.

      I ask you why do the REPUBLICANS feel the need to hold poor people and veterans hostage for their political gain????THAT is the question you should be asking.

      • Jim Bean

        I counter ‘why do you feel the need to ‘help’ everyone out today with your grandkids money?’ Its always someone else’s money you’re being benevolent with while your doing everything in your power to funnel someone else’s money your way for your own benefit.

      • J.D.

        Typical Republican response, answer a question with a question. I am tired of the Republican “I’ve got mine so F them” attitude. It was the policies of our government that got our nation into the financial and economic problems we are still digging out of, SO YES the government SHOULD help those that need it. I didn’t make the policies, they did. Republicans love to tout our wonderful capitalistic nation, but the side effect to it is that some take advantage of others. I DO NOT, buy into the Social Darwinism theory that is at the root of so many Republican supporters. That was the favored theory of a certain German Dictator in the 40’s…and how did that turn out. Also, why EVEN question whether or not we should be taking care of the soldiers that take care of us????? I DID NOT support spending TRILLIONS on a war founded on false pretenses and lies, but I DO SUPPORT taking care of the men and women that were forced to go over there. You don’t like it, then have the idiots behind it, BUSH, CHENEY, and RUMSFELD, held accountable for their actions.

      • Jim Bean

        The only way you would want Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld held accountable is if you could pardon Biden, Clinton, Schumer, Reid, and Kerry.

      • J.D.

        Well thought out answer there buddy. Is there some sort of book you guys go to to get these regurgitated Republican responses. It’s always the same unsubstantiated rhetoric with no substance to it. “If some one say this, then you respond with this”. There is never any thought, or study behind it. I can give you lots of reasons why those three should be tried for treason, what are the reasons you feel those other should be “pardoned”. Also, in a typical Republican knee jerk reaction, you ASSUME I am Democrat, but I am not. I support any politician that does the right thing REGARDLESS of party. Just so happens that your party of Dummies does not have but 1 or 2 people with ideas or values I can get behind.

      • Jim Bean

        What, specifically, in my comment ‘lacked substance? Did you even understand it? And you’re absolutely right about ‘my party.’ I’m a registered Democrat – but freely admit they make me ashamed nowdays.

      • J.D.

        Then maybe you should not associate with a party and think on your own. I do not support a party, but I support more of what the Dems, Independents, and liberals do.

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        that infantile ‘argument’ is irrelevant as you and 95% of tea party trash didn’t utter a word when bush/cheney and CO dragged us from a surplus to a huge deficit. Not ONE word til a black dem got presidency

      • Sandy Greer

        Where were those crocodile tears for the grandkids money when our former president put TWO unfunded wars on the grandkids credit card?

        One could make the case for going into Afghanistan, even on a charge card.

        But Lie-Raq?

        ^^^We spent the grandkids money on Big Oil. Spent the grandkids money, 4500 +/- US lives (not to mention Coalition forces, or Iraqis) AND lost our focus on Afghanistan…leaving bin Laden for another decade, another president.

        But now Repubs shed crocodile tears over the grandkids money, and say we should practice Tough Love ‘begrudging’ the poor, and turning our backs on the very vets we sent into Lie-Raq for Big Oil.

    • Linda Rotella

      @Jim Bean…..HUH???? Wrong…
      Do not advance …go back and read the facts..not what you heard on FOX…

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        why do U all cry about jim bean? he is an alcoholic and loves crying

    • moe/larry & curly keys

      hey small dicked jimbo—-
      where O where O where do U get these ersatz ‘facts’???
      unless; jimbo is RIGHT and all others WRONG!!!

  • Mrs_oatmeal

    Can’t we just vote to give veteran’s their due without tying other stuff to the bill? If both parties agree on one thing, can’t they just deal with that issue and get something done? Their always has to be an agenda and other crap attached to get stuff through. Then there could be discourse about sanctions for Iran. Why do Republicans try to repeal the ACA 50 times? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results is the definition of what?

    • J.D.

      Because they are Effing insane. That is the definition of insanity, trying the same thing over, and over and over expecting a different result. That is also the big problem with our political system, tying laws up together in a “bill” to get them through. One side ties it something that is important to the other side and holds them hostage. It is BS and needs to change. That is why bills that get passed are over a 1,000 pages.

      • Paul Snyder

        Actually it’s not the definition of insanity, but just something you saw on facebook. But I wholeheartedly agree with you otherwise.

      • Edward MacGuire

        Actually it’s a quote from Albert Einstein.

      • Paul Snyder

        Actually that doesn’t matter. I can quote a lot of things from a lot of impressive people saying smart things to make a point, but that doesn’t alter reality. Before Google there were things called dictionaries. I suggest Oxford. Find one and look it up. You won’t find a(n alleged) quote from Einstein.

      • Edward MacGuire

        I think it’s quite clear that it’s Einstein’s definition, not one that would necessarily be found in a dictionary. For example – “A bank is a place that will lend you money if you can prove that you don’t need it.” Bob Hope

      • Paul Snyder

        Do you really want to get into a stupid argument on the internet, Edward MaGuire? Firstly, cite the Einstein quote if you plan on using it to discredit me. Secondly, the quote given is the type of quirky statement to illustrate a point. It’s a narrow definition of insanity by any standard, and certainly even an internet troll like yourself can see that. And you do realize that you’re only supporting my initial statement with your previous one? Yes, a bank will lend you money (or more accuratley, can lend you money but not necessarily will), but that’s a rather narrow definition. I might also lend you money, but I am not a bank.

      • Edward MacGuire

        I would very much like to insult you but, sadly, I’m certain would completely miss the point.

      • Paul Snyder

        Oh, I’m sorry. Did I hurt your feelings? Go ahead and insult me if it will make you feel better. God knows you can’t make an argument that makes any sense. I’m sure I’ll get the sentiment, but you are right that you’re terrible at actually making a point. I still don’t see the point of your first comment. That was never made very clear. That often happens on the internet when the uneducated try to have an “argument” with educated people. Good luck, Edward MacGuire. I sincerely wish you all the best.

  • FD Brian

    nothing would make me happier than veterans ripping all those American Flag lapel pins off republican’s suits and shoving them up their ass.

  • Matthew Reece

    Taxpayers should not be on the hook for veterans benefits. The politicians who sent the soldiers into unnecessary wars should be held personally accountable and have their private assets seized to pay for the war-related illnesses and injuries for which they are ultimately responsible.

    • J.D.

      Why I understand what your saying, I disagree with the fact that we should cover their benefits. They protect “OUR” rights, regardless of why the idiots that sent them into harms way. We owe it to them. I do agree idiots like Cheney, Bush, and Rumsfeld SHOULD be held accountable. I personally believe Rumsfeld should be prosecuted for political corruption and treason. Look up any controversy from the last 20 years, the authorization of aspartame, approval of GMO’s, the Iraq War…….etc. his name will inevitably be tied to it. He is a piece of garbage and should pay for everything he has done to this country.

      • Matthew Reece

        They do not protect our rights. Most of them have been indoctrinated with lies to make them believe they do, but it is not true. In fact, it cannot be true. Government is an inherent rights violator, so for anything funded through government processes to claim to be a protection of rights is a performative contradiction.

      • J.D.

        Thats the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Whether you like it or not, without a functioning military to protect it, you would NOT have the rights that you have because our country would be run by some other entity. Our soldiers protect our constitutional rights and the existence of this country, good and bad. They deserve, at the very least not be homeless and broke after doing so. If you think OUR government is an “inherent right violator”, may I ask you to go spend some time in North Korea in order to get some perspective on that. Is our government perfect, HECK no, but it is still better than a lot.

      • Matthew Reece

        Ad lapidem is an admission of defeat and ignorance.

        You are assuming that a state military is necessary, which dismisses without evidence the possibility that private defense agencies could perform the necessary service of military defense.

        All governments violate the rights of the people they claim to protect. Some are just worse than others; North Korea is probably the worst right now, while the US is somewhere in the middle.

      • J.D.

        Government is the unfortunate side effect of living in societies, something humans innately feel compelled to do because of instincts. I disagree with private defense as an option. Ever hear of Halliburton, one of our nations largest private defense providers. Also formerly run by one of our most corrupt politicians of the last 200 years, Rumsfeld? I think if it was run by private defense, then you run the risk of losing complete control to that private defense company. Conflict is bad in any form, but it is an unfortunate occurrence in this world. You have to have some presence of national defense in order to keep people who feel above the laws under control.

      • Matthew Reece

        To quote Herbert Spencer, “It is a mistake to assume that government must necessarily last forever. The institution marks a certain stage of civilization — is natural to a particular phase of human development. It is not essential, but incidental.” We are now in the process of moving past this phase.

        I am certainly against public-private partnerships. One need look only to private prisons with law, courts, and police remaining public to see why these are a terrible idea. When I use the term “privatization,” I mean no government involvement in any way.

        Government cannot restrain those who feel above the laws because those are who will seek and get control of the government.

      • Jillian Brown

        So basically you’re saying that the American people should be protected by a private (ie corporate) military. I don’t understand why some people trust private companies over public government. Both are prone to corruption. The only difference being that the public can vote out of office various officials, put pressure on others for change, or overthrow government systems entirely. Corporations don’t have that kind of pressure on them. As long as they make a profit every quarter and make their shareholders wealthy, they can do whatever they want (unless government regulations check them).

        We the people need government to protect us from corporations and other powers, and we the people need to keep an eye on our government to make sure it’s working for us and not something else. But this hasn’t been happening because the American people no longer care about what their representatives are up to. Thus, the lack of uproar over this veterans mess. Government is “of the people, by the people”; or at least that was the intention. We seem to have forgotten that.

      • Matthew Reece

        I am saying that there should be several private defense agencies offering protection to people, and people should be free to choose which, if any, of these agencies with which to contract for protection. Those who do not like services from a private company can fire the service provider, but governments have monopolies within their
        geographical areas and cannot be fired (at least not without an armed rebellion, which will be very difficult to pull off in the US).

        Corporations are not private entities. A corporation is a legal fiction created by the state to shield executives from liability. Government cannot protect people from corporations because government creates the legal system that allows corporations. The source of the problem cannot be the solution to the problem. Government will always work for the 1% because they have the most money with which to bribe the politicians.

        Companies make their shareholders wealthy by providing goods and services that people want and are willing to pay for to an extent that makes a profit. Companies cannot do whatever they want, as customers can support their competitors and/or sue them for damages.

      • Kenneth Fussnecker

        Matthew Reece have you ever been in the military? Have you ever voted? If you don’t love your own country get a one way ticket and leave!!! My dear Mr. Reece go to a better country and stay,we Americans have the right to protect ourselves by the use of the 2nd. amendment.Americans have the power to form a militia. An American Civilian Army would be powerful enough to fend off any threat. You sound like an anarchist!!! I blame both parties and the people, like Jillian Brown says in her comment,put pressure on your government officials. Some Vets paid with their life blood for you, leave,go and stay. GOD BLESS!!!

      • Charles Vincent

        He is arguing for you did you miss that? He is saying you shouldn’t have been deployed into places like Korea or Vietnam or Iraq etcetera. He is also saying that you and every other individual are responsible for your own protection via the 2nd amendment. And is stating that government is the evil that has caused all the problems, and in the development cycle of human society it(government) is becoming obsolete.
        Thanks for your service but you could better serve your countrymen by sharing your experience and training with them.

      • Kenneth Fussnecker

        What do you mean training with them? Do you mean to fight? YOU AND MATT both need a one way ticket,I don’t need the anarchist and you the trainer to argue for me! Gun in one hand Bible in the other! GOD BLESS!!!

      • Charles Vincent

        Man I wouldn’t want to be in a fox hole with you they call it friendly fire.

      • Kenneth Fussnecker

        Charles,Charles, Charles,I don’t quite understand your meaning but if
        you mean your friendly fire you would shoot me in the back.Now say what
        you mean.If you were in a foxhole with me you would be with a real
        American Patriot,now say what you mean. I don’t like threats and when
        you said friendly fire that was a threat to me,only a low life would say
        that!!! coward! I WOULD FACE YOU DOWN ANY TIME or did I misunderstand
        you. GOD BLESS!!!

      • Charles Vincent

        I meant I am on your side don’t hit me with friendly fire and Matt is probably on your side as well. I don’t threaten people on the internet it’s.. rather impotent. I also don’t cow down as I would rather take an asswhoopin one time, than be subject to a litany of abuse for a life time.

      • Charles Vincent

        “What do you mean training with them?”
        I mean sharing your knowledge and experience with your fellow countrymen whom may not have had the experience you have.

      • Matthew Reece

        Of course I am an anarchist. That is the only moral position to take toward government; to reject it entirely.

        As for your “love it or leave it” comment, to say this to an anarchist is like saying to an unjustly imprisoned person, “Well, if you don’t like this cell right here, you should leave and go to another cell! You could stay in any other cell in the prison, you know!” It completely misses the point.

      • Kenneth Fussnecker

        You are not only an anarchist, you are anti American. You never answered my two simple questions did you serve or vote ever? If you don’t vote you can’t have equal rights because the only voice you have is on fb. the point is on top of your dumb head! GOD BLESS!!! Oh you probably don’t believe in GOD.

      • Charles Vincent

        Well I am not anti-American. I didn’t serve but my dad two uncles and three grand parents did serve. I dislike the people running this country into the ground. the government is the problem right now and as the framers of the constitution said it is our right to alter or abolish any government that becomes destructive to our right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
        Anarchist =/= Atheist.
        I Vote.
        I am agnostic.

      • Matthew Reece

        Being an anarchist implies being against every national identity, not just American.

        I have never been in the military because while I have not always been as enlightened as I am now, I was always able to understand that a state military commanded by politicians is a threat to liberty, not a champion of it.

        I used to vote in elections before I understood that voting for rulers is consenting to be governed by them as well as committing an aggressive act against every person to be ruled, something I will no longer do. I still vote every time I support or choose not to support a provider of goods or services, and this is the form of voting that actually produces positive change in the world.

        Ad hominems are admissions of defeat and ignorance.

      • Matthew Reece

        Your rights to freely assemble and to keep and bear arms do not come from the First and Second Amendments. These rights are valid because it is impossible to argue against them without committing a logical contradiction. The Constitution merely claims that the government it purports to justify will not infringe upon those rights. The government has infringed upon those rights, therefore the Constitution is a breached contract and is null and void. As the Constitution is the source of legitimacy for the US federal government, said government has no legitimacy.

    • moe/larry & curly keys

      utopian thinking,,,,,,,,,, but matt: anything constructive U might add?

    • GOOD….so that means we can try Bush and Cheney as war criminals.

      • Matthew Reece

        I wish. Also Obama and Biden, Clinton and Gore, Bush 41 and Quayle, etc. It will never happen though.

  • alnvegas

    I wish they could be kicked out of office, better yet why not stop their pay package, their retirement pensions, living expenses, etc. I would sign a petition to get that done!

  • rossbro

    All proposed bills should be clean bills. No riders. No add-ons

    • Kenneth Browning

      Some countries limit the number to like two.

  • Kenneth Fussnecker

    Charles,Charles, Charles,I don’t quite understand your meaning but if you mean your friendly fire you would shoot me in the back.Now say what you mean.If you were in a foxhole with me you would be with a real American Patriot,now say what you mean. I don’t like threats and when you said friendly fire that was a threat to me,only a low life would say that!!! coward! I WOULD FACE YOU DOWN ANY TIME or did I misunderstand you. GOD BLESS!!!