2 stories: Alito - Spending Priorities

| | Comments (2)

Spending Priorites:
Washington Post: : "The spiraling cost of post-traumatic stress disorder among war veterans has triggered a politically charged debate and ignited fears that the government is trying to limit expensive benefits for emotionally scarred troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan."

These are the kinds of irresponsible choices politicians force themselves into as a result of their pork-laden and wasteful, fraudulent, and abusive accomodations to big campaign donors and lobbyist's special interests. Sen Stevens of Alaska is just a figurehead for the rampant irresponsible spending in Congress that is forcing them to cut worthy spending and necessities as a result.

Washington Post: : "Supreme Court nominee Samuel A. Alito Jr. once argued that the nation's top law enforcement official deserves blanket protection from lawsuits when acting in the name of national security, even when those actions involve the illegal wiretapping of American citizens, documents released yesterday show."

So, what we have here is a Supreme Court nominee who believes the law does not apply to the President. A court nominee who believes some folks are, and should be, above the law they swear to defend and protect. Can America afford such a justice on the Supreme Court? What happens when we get a really bad president? I mean worse than this one, if the Supreme Court says they are not bound by laws meant for everyone else?


Your article brings up a good point many jsut dismiss, the medical cost of this war for our continued medical care of our soldiers. They say this may be medical wise, the most expensive war we ever fought. They say these vets will need health care services well into the future. They deserve to be cared for so American government better make sure they are.
Raymond B

Thanks, Raymond. One of the problems is that Dem's and Rep's can't agree on targeted spending cuts, so they are left with the only option which can muster enough votes to pass, across the board cuts, which, of course means, cuts to Veteran's long-term health care costs for disabilities.

This long term care is regarded by some in Congress as part and parcel of welfare spending arguing no one should be on the public dole for more than a short time. Well, of course, to a vet with no legs, or eyesight, the disability will not go away over time. And for many if not most, such disabilities will lower their income over their lifetime if they can even obtain an income.

It is a sad situation, this partisan rancor, which is hurting America's future and her people in ways that should never be allowed to happen.

Leave a comment

Type the characters you see in the picture above.


Monthly Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.25

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by David R. Remer published on December 27, 2005 12:39 PM.

Senate ANWR drilling defeated was the previous entry in this blog.

Republicans Slipping in Texas is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Offsite Links