Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PROLIFE who wrote (67154)	3/6/2012 11:57:23 PM
From: Hope Praytochange	1 Recommendation Respond to of 103300

Veteran Families Should Cry to Obama, Not Romney Election '12: Mitt Romney last weekend was faced with emotional cries for help from veterans' families. Their frustrations should be directed at the president who is shortchanging vets and gutting our defenses. 'You say you won't cut benefits for any of those heroes who are returning," Michael O'Machearley of Wilmington, Ohio, whose son was killed in Iraq, said to Romney during Mike Huckabee's Fox News candidate forum in Atlanta on Saturday. Then he asked, "Will you increase them?" Romney didn't address boosting government-funded veterans' assistance. But meeting with vets in South Carolina several months ago he floated a real solution — "private-sector competition" in which "each soldier gets x-thousand dollars attributed to them, and then they can choose whether they want to go on the government system or the private system and then it follows them," as in Florida's school voucher program. Romney eloquently pointed out that in a competitive private sector, "if I don't treat this customer right they're gonna leave me and go somewhere else ... whereas with the government ... you're stuck." The dominant media portrayed the exchange with O'Machearley — plus another question on benefits from the tearful father of a wounded Afghan war veteran suffering severe post-traumatic stress disorder — as chances for the supposed tin man Romney to prove he has a heart. It was actually their chance to shine light on Obama's defense-policy shortcomings. It is Obama, not Romney, who should be asked why health benefits for active duty and retired military are set for deep cuts while defense workers who belong to unions remain at current levels. As Bill Gertz reports in the Washington Free Beacon, the cuts are likely "designed to increase the enrollment in ObamaCare's state-run insurance exchanges" and congressional analysis warns that "a retired Army colonel with a family currently paying $460 a year for health care will pay $2,048." Part of $487 billion in Pentagon spending cuts Obama seeks over a decade, military health insurance premiums would jump 30% to 78% annually in year one, followed by five-year increases from 94% to 345%, more than tripling today's premiums. As he ends our longtime ability to fight two wars at once, Obama has aimed his socialistic schemes point-blank at the bank accounts of soldiers and veterans.