Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) Votes Against VA Bill, Voted For Both Wars

Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) Image credit: www.ap.org

Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL)
Image credit: www.ap.org

This one is going to be a doozy, y’all and you’ll have to excuse me for being a little bit more angry than usual. From the Whiskey Tango Foxtrot files: 3 Republican senators. Bob Corker, Ron Johnson and Jeff Sessions were the only senators that voted against a bipartisan veterans’ benefits bill earlier this week. Yes, out of all the senators voting, these three were the only ones who had a problem with the bill which was introduced by Senate Veterans Affairs Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont), and John McCain (R-Arizona).

So what was the reason that they chose to oppose it? Perhaps the bill didn’t go far enough, or maybe it didn’t have some special earmarks for their districts? Maybe it didn’t have an amendment for completely repealing the Affordable Care Act or perhaps they just couldn’t go on record as voting for anything that the president would sign? Nope, it was the cost.


Here’s what Senator Bob Corker (R-TN) had to say:

“This bill is moving back to the House where I hope they will more thoughtfully address the serious issues that have been uncovered in the VA and ensure the bill is paid for in a way that does not burden future generations with crushing debt so I can support it when it comes back to the Senate.” (Source)

And here’s some of Senator Ron Johnson’s (R-WI) defense of his “nay” vote:

“…just the first two years would cost $35 billion, and every year after that $50 billion.”

“Hopefully, we’ll come up with a bill that actually fixes the problem, that doesn’t mortgage our children’s future further…” (Source)

Yes, you heard that right and no, that isn’t the 2nd Friday afternoon margarita messing with your head. They actually thought that taking care of our veterans would be too costly. Seriously, Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? Here’s the most hypocritical of them all, and I’ll tell you why in a little bit:

Before passing the bill, senators voted 75-19 to turn aside objections to its cost raised by Republican Jeff Sessions of Alabama. “I feel strongly we’ve got to do the right thing for our veterans. But I don’t think we should create a blank check, an unlimited entitlement program, now,” Sessions said. (Source)

So how much was this “unlimited entitlement program” expected to cost? $2 trillion dollars with the final sum of up to $6 trillion over the next 4 decades? Yeah, that could really be expensive and I can see why a strong fiscal conservative might want to see how we could offset the spending with cuts elsewhere or raising additional revenues but… oh wait, that’s the cost of the Iraq War that Jeff Sessions voted for in 2002. But surely as a fiscal conservative, wouldn’t Senator Sessions have made sure we paid for that war, especially since we were already involved in Afghanistan? That’s going to be a big negative ghostrider. You see, he voted for the Bush tax cut in 2001, voted to authorize war in Afghanistan, and then voted again to authorize yet another war without funding. Ok, so perhaps after voting to lower taxes during a war and then voting to put yet another one on the credit card Senator Sessions would finally come to his fiscal senses? Again, negative ghostrider. In 2003, he voted for yet ANOTHER round of tax cuts.

But what about Senator Corker or Senator Johnson? While they’re certainly the scum of the earth for opposing a bill to fix the very VA hospital issue they wanted to turn into yet another scandal to pin on President Obama, they didn’t vote for the Iraq or Afghanistan wars. Although I’m sure they would have gladly voted for any military action (not anything sanctioned by President Obama, of course) at the drop of a hat, they weren’t in Congress at the time – but Senator Jeff Sessions was. Don’t get me wrong, their votes were reprehensible as well but the Senator from Alabama voted for 2 tax cuts and put two wars on the credit card, yet he has the unmitigated gall to vote against the VA bill which would help fix the problem he criticized the president for in the first place.

For this blatant hypocrisy and absolute disregard for our veterans, Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Asshole) is the inaugural recipient of my weekly Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? award. You’ve certainly earned it, Senator.

What can you do to express your outrage? You can make sure to vote this coming November, and here’s what’s at stake:

—All 435 seats of the U.S. House of Representatives

—33 seats in the U.S. Senate

—46 State Legislatures

—38 State and Territorial Governorships.

If you’re tired of people like Jeff Sessions and others who put obstruction of the President above the needs of American veterans, then don’t just complain about it, spread their shame and get out the vote in November.


Comments

Facebook comments

  • rossbro

    These dickheads ‘ got to go’ ! Unfeeling, uncaring bastards !

  • Greg Cronin

    Actually, most Veterans are Republicans.. Can you really say the a Harvard Professor (Elizabeth Warren){Harvard; A place of hate towards all thing Military} is more pro veteran than Jeff Sessions?

    • Travis

      Elizabeth Warren is more pro veteran than Jeff Sessions. Yep, I can say it, and their votes prove it.

    • v2787

      Yes.

  • Its about time

    Stop sending money to other countries and take care of our vets…maybe politicians paychecks are an entitlement we can’t afford..how about that.

  • Jim Bean

    It seems to me that voting for the bill without regard for the cost for political expediency is the easy way out and its the demand for fiscal prudence that takes the cojones and serves us all the best. No evidence here that anyone wants to deprive veterans of anything. Why does the left never care what anything costs? Oh, yeah, they make up the bulk of the 51% of us not paying any income tax.

    • ted

      The left didn’t start two unfunded multitrillion dollar wars! Where was all of this fiscal responsibility when we illegally invaded Iraq based on a pack of lies that BUSHCO knew were lies when they told them? Or is it okay to spend trillions on welfare to the rich programs providing they’re paid for by people living paycheck to paycheck?

      • Jim Bean

        Answer: People who caused the unfunded illegal Iraq invasion. Question: Who are Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid, John Kerry, George Bush and Joe Biden? Seems to me that your camp is very hypocritical with regard to who they excuse and who they blame. Am I wrong? (They all saw the same intelligence)

      • ted

        Congress and the UN were handed a pack of lies which swayed their decision. Remember the “Mushroom Cloud” mantra that they were repeating on every channel after Ambassador Plame proved there was no yellow cake connection? Then they outed his CIA counter terrorism wife in retaliation when he let the truth leak. That’s called treason in case you’re interested.

      • Jim Bean

        How can you be absolutely certain that other countries don’t have their own intelligence agencies and that they didn’t come to the same conclusion ours did?

      • ted

        British and American intelligence agencies already had information that there was no active WMD but it didn’t jibe with what BUSHCO wanted to hear so they were ignored along with milions of protesters worldwide and the evidence was quashed. Generals were relieved of command, intelligence analysts were fired and they were replaced by yes-men. They were told that an invasion was unnecessary, wind up in a multi trillion dollar quagmire and open the door for jihadists to fill the vacuum. Colin Powell was against it and wrote later that when he said “I can’t read this b*llsh*t!” when he was told to read from their script regarding mobile nerve gas installations that didn’t exist. I’m sure Cheney didn’t have any eyes on the second largest sweet crude oil reserve on the planet when he said the war “might last six days, six weeks or six months, but I doubt six months.” Now we managed to start a decade long occupation, facilitated a civil war between five factions, opened the door for jihadists, paid trillions on a credit card and will pay trillions more to fix what we broke (including our vets), destabilized the entire region and China has contracts for 60% of the oil. That’s what happens when the military/industrial complex wages wars and ignores their own military and intelligence agencies. The ONLY people that came out ahead were the profiteers like Halliburton because the Iraqis are worse off than they were before our invasion and our military is exhausted.

      • Jim Bean

        Put this in your browser: iraq’s weapons of mass destruction the assessment of the british government

      • ted

        Point being, who are you going to believe, generals, analysts and intelligence agencies; or bureaucrats indebted to the military/industrial complex whose sole function is to lie, deny and counter accuse? Who is going to lead you up the hill in a battle, a politician or a tactician? The Bush administration had planned on invading Iraq, Syria and Iran by February of 2001 (look it up) because it was going to be “slam dunk” to introduce a Jeffersonian form of Democracy to people whose culture was never geared to it. When the WTC was attacked the Bush administration immediately blamed Iraq to further their agenda. Of course 6 months later when they were called on the fact, they lied through their teeth and said they NEVER made such a connection (despite the recorded evidence) In fact there are people on the right who to this day think the reason we invaded Iraq was 9-11. You can be an apologist/revisionist and deny the facts until you’re blue in the face, but history will denote Iraq as the worst waste of blood and treasure for nothing other than the bottom line of profiteers since Vietnam and there is ample evidence at your finger tips to support that fact.

      • Jim Bean

        I’m not apologizing for anyone. It was a mistake. But at the time it didn’t seem to be a mistake. The UN believed Saddam was deceiving the weapons inspectors. They’re not part of the ‘Bush administration’. If you want to see what the MSM was saying, paste this in your browser:

        “The U.N. orders its weapons inspectors to leave Iraq after the chief inspector reports Baghdad is not fully cooperating with them.”

        — Sheila MacVicar, ABC World News This Morning, 12/16/98

        “To bolster its claim, Iraq let reporters see one laboratory U.N. inspectors once visited before they were kicked out four years ago.”

        –John McWethy, ABC World News Tonight, 8/12/02

        “The Iraq story boiled over last night when the chief U.N. weapons inspector, Richard Butler, said that Iraq had not fully cooperated with inspectors and–as they had promised to do. As a result, the U.N. ordered its inspectors to leave Iraq this morning”

        –Katie Couric, NBC’s Today, 12/16/98

      • Dark_Space

        It seemed like a mistake to me at the time. It actually seemed like a mistake to everyone around me at the time. I recall pretty much everyone questioning whether the WMDs could possibly be true, and why we were attacking Iraq when most of the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Everyone was pretty perplexed. But, I was surrounded by Army vets from the first war and a bunch of evil bankers on Wall Streets who all lost friends on 9/11 around that time, so what did they know…

      • Jim Bean
      • Dark_Space

        I guess I hang out with smarter-than-average people 😉

      • Shhelb

        Because Bush’s own committee even said he was lying.

  • Brian

    If they’re so worried about money, why not bring taxes back to what they were in the Clinton administration?

    • ted

      Because the Koch brothers and the rest of the billionaires that pay them might have to pony up some taxes for the first time in 15 years.

  • gregzotta

    “supplemental appropriation mainly for the opening of the 26 clinics.” There is no need for more Government run clinics. The Government run VA system does not work now; opening up more clinics is not the answer. What should be done is for all of the VA Hospitals to be closed. Government needs to get out of the healthcare business, which includes Obamacare. The city of St. Louis used to have city owned and operated hospitals, until the powers that be realized it was not cost effective and got out of the business. The same should be done with the VA. Veterans’ medical needs should be taken care of by the doctor or medical facility of the Veteran’s choosing, as a benefit for serving in the military and then the bill should be sent to Uncle Sam to pay, which would save taxpayer money by reducing overhead costs of maintaining buildings. Most importantly, the veterans medical needs would be taken care of.

  • MotherEarth

    “This bill is moving back to the House where I hope they will more thoughtfully address the serious issues that have been uncovered in the VA and ensure the bill is paid for in a way that does not burden future generations with crushing debt so I can support it when it comes back to the Senate.” NICE…did you do the same when it came to going to war? Was THAT paid for? NO! Now you have to live with the consequences of putting our troops in harms way. OR how about the crushing debt our poor students, who only want to get an education, have? Oh, right…that is your buddies in the banking sector who are getting rich off of the dreams of young people wanting an education. OR how shipping our jobs overseas has created a vast number of employable unemployed workers who need a little help to just survive .THAT costs money, too. Did you not realize that if citizens have NO work, they can’t pay taxes or buy the products that your companies flood in from China? All of these circumstances YOU created, all the while taking “kick-backs” from the Kroch Brothers who want to destroy America. SHAME ON YOU!

  • v2787

    For God’s sake–and for the sake of our beloved country–inform yourself about the issues and candidates, then get out and vote in November! Don’t let anything stop you–be sure you’re registered, show up at the polls, and vote. If you don’t vote, you don’t deserve to be allowed to complain when the right wingers give tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires while consigning the poor and most vulnerable to fend for themselves. If you don’t vote, you have no right to voice your displeasure with government. If you don’t like what the politicians are doing but don’t bother to vote then you’re a hypocrite and a lousy citizen. Vote, people–we can stop the senseless gridlock that pervades our political system. It’s easy: just stop voting for the regressive, obstructionist right wingers. Anyone–especially any woman, minority, veteran or unemployed person–who votes for a republican politician is an absolute fool.

  • ted

    Sessions said he thought the Klan was “OK until I found out they smoked pot.” Typical “Christian” Conservative elitist!

  • Dark_Space

    Actually, this guy is so supportive of the vets it should make you wonder. I didn’t read the bill, but he did over a decade in the Army, very public supports vets, and has voted in the past to increase survivor benefits to vet’s families by a multiple of nearly 10.

    So, my knee-jerk reaction is the opposite of yours – I wonder what was wrong with the bill… (I’m not a Republican, didn’t vote for Sessions, and think our troops shouldn’t be in the desert right now).

  • are_you_kidding_me99

    Hey pal. Since you have told veterans you don’t support them and feel they don’t deserve “entitlements” as you call it for healthcare I’m wondering how you feel about the entitlements you receive as a senator? You receive free medical care paid for by the citizens of this country. Maybe you should think about that before you bad mouth the young men and women who gave their lives to our country.

  • TruthPrevails

    Please do,your duty and watch Oliver Stones History of the United States. Get the truth. At least know the truth