[Perlstein]

You wrote "When we think of Bush's character, we're likely to focus on the administration's proposed budget cuts for veterans, the children indefinitely detained at Abu Ghraib, maybe the story of how the young lad Bush loaded up live frogs with firecrackers in order to watch them explode."
----
1) Budget cuts for veterans. Everyone who follows politics knows that there is huge argument over what constitutes a "budget cut"; both parties play the game of calling shortchanging increases cuts. Dismiss my use of it if you wish. But my favorite invocation of the SPIRIT of the Bush veterans budget comes from no less than the Veterans of Foreign Wars:

VFW TERMS PRESIDENT'S VA BUDGET PROPOSAL HARMFUL TO VETS
VFW Appeals to Congress for Relief

Washington, D.C., Feb. 2, 2004--"The President ignored veterans in the State
of the Union Address and with today's release of his 2005 budget, it is
further evident that veterans are no longer a priority with this
administration," said the leader of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the
U.S., expressing dismay at the disgraceful 1.8% increase in veterans'
medical care funding. "We look to Congress to reject the President's
inadequate proposal and to provide a budget that fully acknowledges the debt
our nation owes its veterans."

VFW Commander-in-Chief Edward S. Banas, Sr., of Voluntown, Conn., said that
with only a $500 million increase in medical funding, the administration's
budget falls $2.6 billion short of what the Independent Budget recommends is
needed to fully meet the demands for quality veterans' health care.   "This
funding package is a disgrace and a sham,"  Banas said.

"This deplorable budget will do nothing to alleviate the many thousands of
veterans who are waiting six months or more for basic health care
appointments with VA.  Instead, the budget seeks to drive veterans from the
system by realigning funding, charging enrollment fees for access and more
than doubling the prescription drug copayment.  This is inexcusable,
especially when no member of this administration or Congress would wait this
long for their health care.

"What the administration is proposing for veterans is a shell game.
Veterans are being asked to pay for their own health care to make up for
shortages in the budget.  We are adamantly opposed to charging veterans an
enrollment fee and we are opposed to increasing payments that veterans make
for prescriptions and for other health care services, especially when
millions of this nation's veterans are already locked out of the system,"
Banas said.  "To ask this nation's veterans to subsidize their health care
is outrageous.  They have already paid for their health care with their
sweat and with their blood.

"This budget indefensibly will not meet the increasing health care needs of
our veterans, nor will it lessen the many months they wait for disability
benefits.

"As our veteran population ages and service men and women return from
Afghanistan and Iraq, we must have a system that meets the health care needs
of all veterans.  It is clear that, just as we fought on the battlefields,
we must now bring the fight to the halls of Congress to rectify this
disgraceful budget.  Having traveled throughout the nation, I know that the
American people will not tolerate this shoddy treatment of America's
veterans, especially at a time of war," Banas said.

[Phantom Lord]

Why were the democrats so afraid to speak their minds, talk about their ideas and policies, and totally hide who they really are at the convention?

And was Howard Dean right to call Bush a "facist" and a "book burner" to delegates while speaking to them on the floor? If so, why and what evidence do you have to support Dean's assertions?

[Dominic Harr]

Q. Have you ever seen the British shows, "Yes, Minister" and/or "Yes, Prime Minister"?

Q. Are so-called "Social Conservatives" who want govt enforcement of vice laws really "Political Conservatives", in the modern sense of the word?

[F.J. Mitchell]

It is no secret to millions of Vets, that the leadership of the VFW are extremely libertal. It's no suprise to this vet, that the VFW is in bed with those who would take away everything that American's veterans have sacrificed to save.

The American Legion on the other hand, is on our side.

[kingu]

Budget cuts for veterans. Everyone who follows politics knows that there is huge argument over what constitutes a "budget cut"; both parties play the game of calling shortchanging increases cuts. Dismiss my use of it if you wish. But my favorite invocation of the SPIRIT of the Bush veterans budget comes from no less than the Veterans of Foreign Wars:

Why is it that no where in that article nor in your response is there the answer to a simple question: What should be done to reduce the cost of health care?

A family member recently was ill. The total hospital bill, excluding any specialized care, operating room costs, etc, came to just over half a million dollars. Once all the specialist bills are in, it's likely that the total bill for one month of medical care will exceed a million dollars.

I personally don't think that most liberals or most conservatives are so far apart on a lot of issues, but we waste tremendous amounts of time debating if the coop should have been locked while the fox is enjoying an after dinner mint.

[woofie]

Woofie, I'm often accused on FR of going into my reporting with my premises already firmly in place, then just "cherry-picking" quotes that confirm it. All I can do is tell you in good faith I don't. I developed the HYPOTHESIS that some conservatives were beginning to use their judgement that Bush was an inherently good person, deep within his soul, as an excuse not to think straight about what George Bush is doing, in an email dialogue with a FR member.

The hypothesis also came from reporting I did on conservatives who believe Bush was an instrument of God's will, and even literally prophesied in the Bible.

It also came from reading every single post on the live thread on FR about Bush's April press conference.

I was surprised to notice the depths of the hero worship, and how it cut directly against conservative wisdom about human nature, and went to Portland to see how common it was. It wasn't universal--that's why I reported on the guy who kept on criticizing Bush, but said that the liberal alternative was only building "bike paths"--but it certainly was there.

I'm sorry you think I'm bigoted towards conservatives. Talking with conservatives is one of the things I most enjoy in the world

I will try to give you the benefit of the doubt.... but it would be nice to see more libs do the same for GW and those on this side of the fence ...(you will always find the religious folks out there and I wouldnt read too much into it.)

Would also like your reaction to David Horowitz:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1183700/posts

[Southack]

"Budget cuts for veterans. Everyone who follows politics knows that there is huge argument over what constitutes a "budget cut"; both parties play the game of calling shortchanging increases cuts. Dismiss my use of it if you wish. But my favorite invocation of the SPIRIT of the Bush veterans budget comes from..."

I'm not dismissing it, and I'm fine with you using it (not that you need my permission), but I would hope that you would want your readers to be as informed as possible (one presumes that you aren't simply trying to con them).

To be that informed, it might help if you said "spirit of budget cuts" or "cuts in projected budget increases" instead of "budget cuts"...the latter term being so easily misinterpreted as an actual *reduction* in money for veterans, something that is incontrovertibly not the case.

5 Legislative Days Left Until The AWB Expires