He was supporting his son in the best way he knew how.

Paul W. I agree with this. I think Tom McGinnis is probably a great guy who loves his son. Ross McGinnis is a hero. And if it has the support of most veteran’s groups, Bush should probably sign it.

That being said, I question using a memorial service for his son to promote a political aim. He also question the same thing if you consider his quote I posted:

If I didn’t do it when I was down there at the Pentagon or the White House, one of the two, when will I ever have the chance to make an impact? I did what I felt was right, whether it was right or not.”

whether it was right or not. McGinnis understood what he was doing. He understood he was using the occassion to promote Webb’s GI bill.

That doesn’t mean that he’s not a great guy grieving for his son, who’s a hero. Just that he knowingly used his son’s memorial service to promote the Webb bill. He understands it.

You can’t appreciate the sacrifice and still oppose the bill?

This is a complete non sequitur. Nowhere did I say you have to support the bill for any reason. What I said was, To McGinnis, supporting the bill cannot be seperated from the sacrifice his son made.

You accused this man of playing politics to the disrespect of his son. That’s because, like I said before, to you it’s all a game and following the rules to the game is paramount. What you fail to understand is the lives that are affected are in fact paramount. McGinnis wasn’t disrespecting his son, he wasn’t exploiting his son’s death for political gain. He was supporting his son in the best way he knew how.

http://progressiveworldreview.com

That incentive, as well as multiple deployments with little to no rest between them, are the main reasons soldiers are not re-enlisting. Not just because they can’t afford college.

Chris. You’re probably right about this and the Webb bill.

If it doesn’t make it more difficult to maintain staffing in the short run, and most veterans organization support it, Bush should sign it.

You can post all you want, but get used to me pointing out your total fraudulence.

That’s kind of a “if you can’t attack the message, attack the messenger” tact.

If there’s an idea, it’s not really relevant who the messenger is. Wants important is, the idea.

If my ideas are irrelevant or wrong, they’ll be dismissed.

But, spending your time trying to disqualify the messenger instead of addressing the message makes it seem as though you don’t have an adequate response to the message.

Just saying.

You cannot seperate the sacrifice his son made with the bill McGinnis wants to see signed.

Paul W. This is just wrong.

You can’t appreciate the sacrifice and still oppose the bill?

It’s not unlike:

You can’t oppose the war and still be patriotic?

im the messiah that melts in your mouth..

Nice.

My impression was the difference in bills was that republican bills postponed the benefits to encourage veterans to stick around, but the benefits were as (or more) generous, in the long run. I could obviously be wrong. And the fact that most veterans groups seem to support the Webb Bill, is a very convincing argument.

With your track record, it’s safe to assume you are. Why are you coming around acting like you care about the troops? You had plenty of time, but we hadn’t heard you say anything about this when the republicans were in power. Why do you think that you suddenly have the right to be concerned now, when you guys are about to be even more in the minority, for what has transpired these past seven years? Noe credibility.

I’m merely pointing out that you’ve had your chance at being relevant, but decided that hero-worship was more important. At some point, one’s past bad judgement disqualifies one from being taken seriously. And it disqualifies one from “showing concern,” when one is part of the problem. You ‘ve had years to attone for your past bad judgements, yet it is only now, when it looks like your kind will be defeated at the polls, and sent back to the political wilderness, do yopu come around with your phony “concern,” for the troops, andthe economy, and health care, and all the rest. Where were you, when it counted most? Waving your little flag, with your ears stoppered shut. You have lost the right to be considered a serious intellect, be supporting this crap, when it was evident to all but the politically myopic how damaging Bush was.

You can post all you want, but get used to me pointing out your total fraudulence.

im the messiah that melts in your mouth..

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11669242/

however, if anyone would be bothered by my being black, well, then i am :)

The point is this: politics isn’t just a game. The bill is important, it will have a very significant effect on peoples lives. McGinnins, more than most, understands the sacrifices soldiers and their families make and for you to dismiss him for just “playing politics” is wrong.

You cannot seperate the sacrifice his son made with the bill McGinnis wants to see signed.

http://progressiveworldreview.com

“I could talk about it to my friends all I want,” he said. “What good is that going to do? If I didn’t do it when I was down there at the Pentagon or the White House, one of the two, when will I ever have the chance to make an impact? I did what I felt was right, whether it was right or not.”

I respect the sacrifice of Private First Class Ross Andrew McGinnis and his family.

Why compromise that sacrifice for political ends?

Political ends? It’s all just a game to you isn’t it? This is about real lives and having something to show for the sacrifices they’ve made.

http://progressiveworldreview.com

If it’s about short term staffing that impacts our ability to continue operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, I understand the reluctance of those that still support those efforts.

My impression was the difference in bills was that republican bills postponed the benefits to encourage veterans to stick around, but the benefits were as (or more) generous, in the long run. I could obviously be wrong. And the fact that most veterans groups seem to support the Webb Bill, is a very convincing argument.

Remember the differences between there, they’re and their!

Walt. you got me. my spelling is horrible, two.

Is it a reference to a black Jesus (which is quite probably more historically accurate) or a ‘holiday’ chocolate Jesus (ie, like chocolate easter bunnies)?

If it doesn’t, what objections do opponents of the bill give for there resistance?
###

The biggest concern I have heard is money. They are worried about where the money will come from, and how it will be used. Anytime I am talking to someone that I know is against the Webb GI Bill, I always frame theagument from a monetary standpoint – because I know that is their biggest concern. The Webb GI Bill would cost the same as 17 hours of operations in Iraq.

But, I am concerned the Webb bill is being used to force a premature withdrawal in Iraq by inducing heavy short term military separations.
####

Actually, the one does not have anything to do with the other. For one, the inability to afford college should not be the reason our troops re-enlist. However, more than 80,000 troops are under stop-loss orders anyway, so ETS’ing is out of the question anyway. For those who are near their ETS date, and not under stop-loss, the biggest obstacle to retention is civilian contractors. Our troops know they can continue to do the jobs they love, with better equipment,and 5 times the pay, if they work for a civilian contractor. That incentive, as well as multiple deployments with little to no rest between them, are the main reasons soldiers are not re-enlisting. Not just because they can’t afford college.