It sounds interesting but I am not sure that I agree with you completely.

Will continue discussion of your post #19, bullet by bullet on the older posts section, once this has post has sundowned, if you like.
I appreciate you noting that I would like to cut funding for the Iraqi welfare program, while then do what I could for my fellow countrymen.
That does not include, however, drafted investor status (Taxpayer) for programs with no return on them like welfare programs.
More later.
Look forward to your response.

So that begs the question JAT. Why do you want to cut off the Iraqis and not the Americans? And how will that further improve our global image?

have a splendid day
peace, neocon

And 93-6 would’ve been what, more overwhelming? It’s easy for the libbies in Congress to vote on such “military” issues as the GI Bill–it shows they really “care…”

Thank you for agreeing with me that being a drafted investor in the Iraqi welfare program brings no more of a return than being a drafted investor in the domestic welfare program.

Have a nice day!

um……your post #28 confirms my belief that you are indeed a partisan buffoon.

To opine that McCain has anything but the best intentions for the military at heart is too demonstrate an ignorance seldom scene.

And if you’d like to get into political hackery, I can begin to list the litany of absurd Obama comments and flip flops.

But why digress. I have no doubt it will become more and more evident to the voting public how inexperienced and naive Obama is and will they will ultimately choose the man that they have known for years and trust to lead this nation: McCain.

Your desperate attempts to paint it any other way is just, well………..desperate.

I guarantee a McCain win.

have a nice day
peace, neocon

Since we’re talking about political hackery… let’s talk about McCain’s “support” of the bill… first, he opposed the bill… now, he’s trying to claim he supported it when he wasn’t there for the vote… explain that one…

But McCain served and Obama didn’t, therefore McCain is really the one who cares about the troops no matter what the two of them actually do (Obama supporting the passage of a troop support bill McCain worked against, for example) according to the feeble mind of neocon.

We all know that McCain doesn’t care about our uniformed personnel, right?

He only served for 23 years, was held POW for 7 years and comes from a family with a history of service.

But you embarrassingly assert that his absence on the vote demonstrates his lack of concern towards those GI’s, and Obamas presence solidifies his, despite the absence of any service on the part of Obama.

Care to reconsider that, or should we all just consider you a complete partisan buffoon from now on?

peace, neocon