Just put this on a commercial in Hampton Roads.  Burnt, dried, stale toast, begging to be tossed in the trash.

I think we're just seeing the beginning of the attention that the troops will need in the years to come after the wars wind down.  They will require health care, education, etc.  There needs to be a bipartisan commitment to provide for the members of the armed services and they care and support they will need.  I find it a little ironic that the GOP supported the war, and the continuance thereof, but won't turn around and support educational benefits for the troops who did the heavy lifting.

So this guy, Tom Davis is supposedly the Republican who "gets it".  He writes to all of the other out-of-touch radicals and points out that their brand isn't worth dogfood, but then he votes AGAINST education benefits for veterans.

Here's a memo congressman, it's idiotic grandstanding like this that put the Republican brand in the toilet to begin with.  Remember back in 2003 when you leveled your accusations of treason at all of us who had some questions about Iraq. Yeah, the greatest strategic blunder in American history and we were the traitors for asking some questions.  Maybe a little more education and a little less zealotry could go a long way.

Congressman dogfood is the smartest of them?  feh!  If Davis were to switch parties, he'd lower the average IQ of both.

While of course everyone supports the troops this bill in its final form was and remains incomplete as a total GI Bill. The bill should not only benefit, and not to the extent that the language may encourage, those leaving the military ranks but laso those who re-enlist. We need are greater emphasis on those who remain career military as well as a package for those who serve their committments and return to civilian life. We should also be encouraging these men and women to become "citizen-soldiers" as well and encourage enlisting in our Guard or Reserves by increasing the benfit structure for those who do so. How mmany tours have been conducted by our Guard and Reserve military since 1990? Families of those in the Guard/Reserves should be given greater access and benefits for the seperation from servicemen on long tours of duty.
Certainly there can be some concensus b/t the two bills being examined and come to a common ground "complete" package that truly benefits those that served and continue to serve.
There needs to be programs in place for encouraging re-enlistments and or military occupational specialty conversion to required needs by the military.
If you want to see an increase in those leaving the military then roll out this package and watch when a tired and strained serviceman must make a decision to committ not only him but his family to four or six more years. if he is given greater benefit to leave then to reenlist what would you do? How hard is this for people to understand.
Those that slam the "nays" for seeing this point have very short memories.

If you want to know what will happen take a look at the military size in 1992 versus 1998 when we managed to reduce our military to such levels we still have not recovered from. Does anyone care to remember exactly the policies and programs that were undertaken that resulted in that decrease in our Armed Forces?

Play all the partisan games, thats your right, but I was one of those Marines that was not only shown the door but felt as though we were being pushed through it in the 90's.

just because you repeat them doesn't make them true.  And in fact, Sens Hagel and Warner don't agree with them either and they are both veterans.

This generation should be rewarded for its service.  Aren't they supposed to be the new greatest generation?

If rewarding them with an education is so wrong, then why was it so right for the WWII generation?

And we already have a retention problem.  If we didn't - then thousands wouldn't be quietly called back through the IRR.  Saying that if they get educated then they will leave is just ridiculous.  And completely insulting.

You either support the troops and our veterans or you don't.  And actions are speaking much louder than words or stupid lapel pins.

We can not hammer home on a daily basis how bad this economy is and how people are really hurting out there to make ends meet and then completely discount what our active duty and reserve families go through as part of that economy. If you think teachers are underpaid (and I do) then you can certainly undertand what its like being a E-3 in the USMC with a wife and two children at age 25. Current military benefits are virtually stagnant compared to the increase in the last ten years we were seeing in the genral economy. A college graduate can take an entry level job with capital One and make 35K. How much do you thin an E-1 through E-5 makes? We have to stop class warfaring our military into thinking when we are talking about officer pay and benefits its the same as enlisted. Its not. Afterall, the career offciers have a retirement to look forward to.
We "have a retention" problem because we have manage to economically marginalize our military when compared to our greater economy. City of Richmond refuse workers make more than enlisted men serving in Iraq. Where is the cost/benefit ratio for that 20 something faced with that reality.
No one is saying not to reward this generation, but we need balance in plan that does not reward those leaving disportionately to those that opt to stay.
Seems to me the rhetoric here parallels that of the SCHIP- you either want the kids to have healthcare or you dont--well maybe people think they deserve more than this bill and want it to get worked out in a final form everyone is happy with.
Funny are not some Vets groups supporting the other bill in Congress as well. If these folks cannot compromise and create a balanced bill by combining the best elements of each one then it seems to me it is ALL about politcis and not the troops.
As to the point on education no one disputes this on either side. We have had GI benefits for veteran like myself and others all the way back to Vietnam- this is not the issue everyone support the educational funding aspect. It goes directly to benefits for those that determine to stay in the military.
If you think that the increasing benefit to leave is not a component of the decision made by young serviceman everyday you are quite naive given the fact that in this world there are higher chances of injury in the line of service than ever before. I guess men and women do not factor that either.
A Chesterfield County serviceman was killed last week in training at camp Lejuene for the rigors of service overseas. You do not have to be in country in Iraq to have your life taken when your in the military. You are always at risk.

I think I understand what you are saying - and agree with the point that we severely underpay our enlisted grunts, soldiers and all of our volunteer forces.

To get by, many seem to take advantage of the increases in pay and better housing you get by getting married, and the combat pay is an increase - albeit often paid for in blood.  It's not nearly enough for what they do for our country - no matter the politics.

But just take that point alone and see what this administration has done.  They give no bid contracts to Halliburton - Blackwater - etc - and allow them to charge whatever they feel like for services and pay ALL of it.  No questions asked.  No hearings or details allowed.  And they are robbing us blind.

Is that not a severe contributor the retention problem given the fact that your average E3 can opt to not re-enlist - then up their salary from about 25K a year to about 200K a year and go work for Blackwater?  Do you know that the last I heard we had approx. 120K "mercenaries" in Iraq alone?  Let's deal with the big problems, such as the contractor issues we have, and not nickel and dime our forces further to death, when they are the ones making the sacrifices.

In my eyes the current GI Bill, that has backing of all the veterans service groups as well as bipartisan support in the Senate, is something they have earned.  And it can be viewed as a recruitment tool not a retention problem.

at the last minute to cosponsor, after being challenged by Tom Perriello. He obviously has no regard for his word since he cosponsored it, and obviously has no regard for the veterans wait for the compensation they deserve.

This is shameful, and should not be off the lips of every actual supporter of troops. Like you and me.

This is the backstory on the challenge and the result.

Thanks for reading.

These people can trash their incumbent opponents for not supporting our troops, which is a big deal here in Virginia.

VA-01: Keith Hummel (http://www.virginiapopulist.com/)
VA-02: Glenn Nye (http://www.glennnye.com/home/)
VA-04: Andrea Miller (http://andreamiller.us/)
VA-05: Tom Perriello (http://www.perrielloforcongress.com/)
VA-06: Sam Rasoul (http://www.samrasoul.us/home.html)
VA-07: Anita Hartke (http://www.hartkeforcongress.com/)
VA-10: Both Judy Feder (http://judyfeder.com/) and Mike Turner
VA-11: All the Democratic Candidates!

Ok, so the candidates vying for the nomination in the 11th can't come out against their opponent as he is retiring/running in shame, they can certainly come out against the Republican party for failing it's empty promises of troop support.  This issue really resonates with most Virginians for a variety of reasons.  I cannot emphasize enough how much mileage this will give each and every one of these campaigns.

Surely future Senator Mark Warner can use this same argument against Gilmore should he become the Republican nominee, though Gilmore is not an incumbent who voted against the GI Bill, he is clearly an empty-promise maker in the biggest way.

It must be our freedom. The House GOP caucus hates our freedom. That's got to be it.