Quote:
|
Originally Posted by xepherys
Uhm... I don't see it. Sure, there are people who are partisan for partisan sake, and that will never change. Frankly, I think Dems are as bad as Republicans, and primarily any politician isn't worth their weight in cow shit. There are, of course, exceptions... on all sides of the spectrum. So, what you're saying is, this is suddenly a newsworthy problem because Bush is in office? He's been in office for 6 years, and really it's not been very newsworthy. By next week, it again won't be newsworthy, sadly enough. It doens't make it any less of an actual issue. *boggle*
|
He's saying (I guess, not to speak for him) that since we have had this problem the whole time, why is it only coming out in the media now, as opposed to when Clinton was President, or George H. W. Bush, or Reagan, or Carter, or Ford, or Nixon, or Johnson, etc. I don't know if there is a connection, but it does seem a little fishy.
I believe that it is absolutely shameful how veterans are still treated in many cases, it is an issue seperate from any war, and that anyone who tries to connect the two for any personal or political gain is journalist scum (coming from a future journalist).
We should be doing more to help veterans, for sure, but not at the expense of present troops.