+ + + 3 BRANDNEW NewsTickers for your Website! + + + easy configurable in less than 1 Minute + + + GET'EM NOW! + + +

   Home | Join | Submit News | MyShortNews | HighScores | FAQ'S | Forums 0 Users Online   
                 01/19/2018 06:52 AM  
  ShortNews Search
search all Channels
RSS feeds
  ShortNews User Poll
Are you excited about the holiday season?
  Latest Events
  2.957 Visits   4 Assessments  Show users who Rated this:
Quality:Very Good
Back to Overview  
08/30/2008 06:35 PM ID: 73065 Permalink   

Bush And Congress Fix "Sole Survivor" Policy


Bush signed the Hubbard Act into law Friday after congress rushed the law through the House and the Senate on a unanimous voice vote from both parties. A loophole in the original Sole Survivor Policy denied soldiers discharged their veteran benefits.

The new law allows a "sole survivor" that is Honorably Discharged after losing siblings and/or parents in combat to retain their health care and other veteran benefits.

It was named the Hubbard Act for Jason Hubbard who was discharged after he lost his second brother in combat in Iraq in a Black Hawk helicopter crash. He returned home to his pregnant wife to find he had lost his health insurance and other benefits.

    WebReporter: gws1968 Show Calling Card      
ASSESS this news: BLOCK this news. Reason:
they'll make sure these benefits are actually funded and all of our veterans have access to the services they deserve.

I'm sure they'll get right on that, too, überpatriots that they are...

^^Wants to know who put the drugs in her coffee
  by: morgora     08/30/2008 07:25 PM     
  Heckuva job, Bushie  
You keep taking plays from the Obama playbook and you might salvage something from your wretched presidency:

* Proper care for veterans (Obama called for it before Bush supported it)

* Responsible timetable of withdrawal from Iraq (Obama called for it before Bush supported it)

* Refocusing military efforts on al-Qaida (Obama called for it before Bush supported it)

* Limiting the scope of off-shore drilling to protect the environment (Obama called for it before Bush supported it)

It's amazing how Bush and McCain keep saying the Obama/Biden ticket don't have the right experience to lead America when Bush has taken so many of his cues from Obama (and McCain has, too, trying to bring his own brand of change with his VP pick). And has Bush forgotten that he called Sen. Biden for advice after the 9/11 attacks?

Yeah, heckuva job, Bushie. It's only taken you seven years to figure out that when Americans support their troops, whether or not they support the wars, they also mean rewarding them and taking care of them after they've been off fighting the country's battles.
  by: l´anglais     08/30/2008 07:42 PM     
  By the way  
I agree with the title, but it's pretty biased ...
  by: l´anglais     08/30/2008 07:44 PM     
I knew the title was a little biased but it's just how I feel. I also figured most people feel the same and I had to leave it open ended so people would see what the story is about. Although I don't like Bush I can admit when he does do something right. As far as congress, they are far from perfect but they could have gotten more done if Democrats weren't being obstructed by Republicans (Republicans have even admitted to this ploy) just to make them look bad. Way to put Country first!
  by: gws1968     08/30/2008 08:03 PM     
  Good to see this.  
If you're willing to risk everything to look after your country/countrymen, so should your country be willing to look after you. Maybe if this were more consistent, enlistment numbers wouldn't be such a problem.
  by: maverick7h     08/30/2008 08:22 PM     
  maybe now they can  
concentrate on fixing the military instead. I agree you shouald take care of your own, maybe now though they could stop murdering innocent people around the world
  by: dieu_7     08/30/2008 09:25 PM     
  This Law Corrects An Earlier Mistake They Made  
The congress members really should read the bills they pass.
  by: ichi     08/30/2008 10:16 PM     
i knew you would try to put some spin on the story like obama had something to do with it, but in all truths he had nothing.

im pretty sure bush has realized these things way before obama "called" for them.

im pretty sure that bush isnt listening to obamas speeches and say he lets do this lets do that.

please stop trying to make obama out to be some lord and messiah. whenever anything good happens, oh by the way obama said this and did that so it looks like has had his hand in it, when in real reality
he didnt.
  by: cray0la     08/30/2008 11:07 PM     
bush always had a time table in mind just not when it was hard to keep control in iraq.
he didnt want to cut and run like murtha,ried, polesi, obama, ted kennedy and so on and there reluctance to say that the surge worked and had something to do with the decrease in violence is disgusting.
  by: cray0la     08/30/2008 11:08 PM     
  time table  
was always a idea but only when the security there was no longer a issue.
  by: cray0la     08/30/2008 11:09 PM     
You're going to have come up with an alternative headline, as it stands it is pure opinion, and I would have to block it. Your summary is great so please don't make me block the story, you can either post the new headline here, or message me with it, and I'll change it.
  by: StarShadow     08/30/2008 11:10 PM     
Your short term memory is atrocious. Bush and the timetable has not "always" been an idea. Unless you mean it's always been an idea he's rejected.

"Bush rejected calls to set a timetable for withdrawing 135,000 American troops, despite the fact that earlier in the day, Democrats issued a pre-emptive statement about the situation on Iraq, demanding the president come up with an exit strategy.

Instead, he argued for maintaining the present two-pronged strategy: equipping Iraqi security forces to take over the anti-insurgency fight and helping Iraqi political leaders in the transition to a permanent democratic government.

“Setting an artificial timetable would send the wrong message to the Iraqis, who need to know that America will not leave before the job is done,” Bush said."

I'd post a lot more, but you'll just forget those, too. I hope you've just got a really bad memory, anyway. I'd hate to think you were just blatantly lying about things that are so easy to look up. It certainly wouldn't help your cause, would it?

  by: morgora     08/30/2008 11:21 PM     
Yes it would!
Selling lies is a business and business is GOOD.
  by: silentrage   08/31/2008 12:42 AM     
I remember posting the original story on Hubbard and I am so glad that something was done so he and others won't have to go through the hell it caused.

I thought unaminous means everyone so Crayola yes Obama had something to do with it just as McCain did. The whole point really is that it was screwed up in the first place and should have been fixed WAY before this. The vets in this country deserve way better than they are getting in the way of treatment and bs red tape being put upon their families.
  by: TaraB     08/31/2008 12:57 AM     
  New Title  
Bush And Congress Fix "Sole Survivor" Policy
  by: gws1968     08/31/2008 01:19 AM     
I've got an idea for you. Hands off the keyboard or the iPhone until you can get your facts straight, stop blatantly lying about things that are easily checked, and start posting stuff that's just regurgitated from the Rush Limbaugh show that you listened to on any particular day.

As it is, you're rapidly tearing off every last shred of your own credibility. I used to think of you as someone I could debate the issues with ... now, not so much.
  by: l´anglais     08/31/2008 02:38 AM     
  I meant  
... "stop" posting regurgitated Limbaugh-isms. Stop. STOP!!!
  by: l´anglais     08/31/2008 02:39 AM     
Ah, yeah. As a journalist, headlines should be objective.

The point is to tell the reader what to think about. Not what to think.
  by: Dayron   08/31/2008 03:12 AM     
  Title Fixed  
  by: StarShadow     08/31/2008 03:32 AM     
  obama and bush @ l'anglais  
The security deal with Iraq may reflect a compromise between the two similar plans.

Bush says let's have a conditions-based withdrawal, allowing troops to leave when conditions on the ground support the action. Obama indicates that he will withdraw the troops soon and end the war "responsibly" (side note: what does that word mean anyways? with due diligence to protect human life? which can be accomplished only... when conditions on the ground support it? suspiciously, that sounds a lot like plan A from Bush) The compromise being discussed is setting target dates for conditions to be met that make troop withdrawals sensible. Makes sense to me.

Btw, the Bush Admin experienced some lapses in judgment wrt Vet Benefits, but you seem to have forgetten how quickly SECDEF Bob Gates -- obviously part of the administration -- swiftly and decisively cleaned up the Walter Reed disaster, fired whoever had to be fired, etc.

I also don't recall bushies ever saying "let's drill off-shore and POLLUTE! yeee haw!!" Drilling in an environmentally responsible way sound pretty good. Recall that Obama only just recently, within the last month or so, suggested that _any_ type of off-shore drilling be allowed. Maybe he is taking notes from the McCain playbook?

Btw, i'm not a McCain fanboy or an Obama basher, but your comments are a little tricky. At least the end results are positive.
  by: bobjones     08/31/2008 06:02 PM     
Copyright ©2018 ShortNews GmbH & Co. KG, Contact: