GI Bill
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:15:26 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:



By the way, I'm not a huge fan of the VA in general.

I have my reasons -someday when we're just sitting around with nothing
else to do I'll tell you why.


Other than the education benefit (which helped because I was married, two
kids, working my first, real civilian job and going to school at nights)
and the purchase of our first house, I haven't had anything to do with them
since.

Oh.... yes, I did.

I recently requested (on the on-line military records website) a stamped
copy of my DD-214. I don't know what happened to the original I had, and I
want a free flag when I kick the bucket.

Eisboch

GI Bill
 

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 20:44:51 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:22:40 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

What's your beef? Don't like Jim Webb?

I served '66 to '72 and know full well what $238/month did - squat.
Might have paid for books if you had a light semester. And it did
nothing for out-of-state tuition if you were living somewhere other
than your home state of enlistment.

I got 400 a month with 2 kids and it made all the difference in the
world. State school was fine for me, and books weren't nearly as
expensive as they are for kids now. It really ****es me off when my
kids are forced to pay OVER 200 BUCKS for a book, and there is no
"used book" option. The book/author/teacher scam was alive when I
went to school, but didn't hurt like it does now.

Do a direct comparision of benefits from WWII and Vietnam. WWII vets
to this day can get totally free education paid for by the VA - can
you?

I do recall Webb mentioning WWII vets going to Columbia and Harvard
on the bill, so I see your point. Doubt there was the huge cost
difference then for the WWII vets then though, since those schools
weren't so hoity toity. And Webb did mention what he's pushing for
applies to state schools only.

I don't give a rat's ass about Jim Webb.

Given what John said about current benefits, I'm starting to question
Webb's motives. Since I don't know the details of what Webb wants,
I'll reserve judgement. One thing I don't like about the current
system is opting in, since the enlisting kid might make an error
about needing it in his future. Post-service education wasn't a
thought in my mind when I enlisted. Should be automatic.

--Vic

GI Bill
 

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...


Post-service education wasn't a
thought in my mind when I enlisted. Should be automatic.

--Vic


I hear you.

I also preached to my three kids that "what" school you get your degree from
is nowhere as important as getting a degree. The few exceptions are for
those with career goals in politics or law.

Maybe it's because I was always more tuned into technical disciplines where
a school's "philosophy" had little to do with the laws of physics.

Eisboch

GI Bill
 

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:29:39 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 20:44:51 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:22:40 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

What's your beef? Don't like Jim Webb?

I served '66 to '72 and know full well what $238/month did - squat.
Might have paid for books if you had a light semester. And it did
nothing for out-of-state tuition if you were living somewhere other
than your home state of enlistment.

I got 400 a month with 2 kids and it made all the difference in the
world. State school was fine for me, and books weren't nearly as
expensive as they are for kids now. It really ****es me off when my
kids are forced to pay OVER 200 BUCKS for a book, and there is no
"used book" option. The book/author/teacher scam was alive when I
went to school, but didn't hurt like it does now.

You think that's expensive - HA!! Try medical books. :)

Do a direct comparision of benefits from WWII and Vietnam. WWII vets
to this day can get totally free education paid for by the VA - can
you?

I do recall Webb mentioning WWII vets going to Columbia and Harvard
on the bill, so I see your point. Doubt there was the huge cost
difference then for the WWII vets then though, since those schools
weren't so hoity toity. And Webb did mention what he's pushing for
applies to state schools only.

I went to a state school - the problem was that it wasn't the state in
which I enlisted.

Fortunately, after my first semester, I received an academic
scholarship which paid for the tuition - books and living expenses
were still mine.

I don't give a rat's ass about Jim Webb.

Given what John said about current benefits, I'm starting to question
Webb's motives. Since I don't know the details of what Webb wants,
I'll reserve judgement. One thing I don't like about the current
system is opting in, since the enlisting kid might make an error
about needing it in his future. Post-service education wasn't a
thought in my mind when I enlisted. Should be automatic.

I agree with that. I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans
their due - good for them.

It just annoys me that Korean and Vietnam vets weren't given the same
status as WWII vets.

Sorry if I sounded a little strident. I have issues with Jim Webb
that go back a few years.

GI Bill
 

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:40:31 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

Maybe it's because I was always more tuned into technical disciplines where
a school's "philosophy" had little to do with the laws of physics.

LSU had a great math department which is why I went there.

Well, that and I got the chance to play college football as a walk on
because Charley McClendon had a soft spot in his heart for veterans
with more heart than brains. ;)

I even got a chance to play in a real game. :)

GI Bill
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:29:39 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 20:44:51 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:22:40 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

What's your beef? Don't like Jim Webb?

I served '66 to '72 and know full well what $238/month did - squat.
Might have paid for books if you had a light semester. And it did
nothing for out-of-state tuition if you were living somewhere other
than your home state of enlistment.

I got 400 a month with 2 kids and it made all the difference in the
world. State school was fine for me, and books weren't nearly as
expensive as they are for kids now. It really ****es me off when my
kids are forced to pay OVER 200 BUCKS for a book, and there is no
"used book" option. The book/author/teacher scam was alive when I
went to school, but didn't hurt like it does now.

You think that's expensive - HA!! Try medical books. :)

Do a direct comparision of benefits from WWII and Vietnam. WWII vets
to this day can get totally free education paid for by the VA - can
you?

I do recall Webb mentioning WWII vets going to Columbia and Harvard
on the bill, so I see your point. Doubt there was the huge cost
difference then for the WWII vets then though, since those schools
weren't so hoity toity. And Webb did mention what he's pushing for
applies to state schools only.

I went to a state school - the problem was that it wasn't the state in
which I enlisted.

Fortunately, after my first semester, I received an academic
scholarship which paid for the tuition - books and living expenses
were still mine.

I don't give a rat's ass about Jim Webb.

Given what John said about current benefits, I'm starting to question
Webb's motives. Since I don't know the details of what Webb wants,
I'll reserve judgement. One thing I don't like about the current
system is opting in, since the enlisting kid might make an error
about needing it in his future. Post-service education wasn't a
thought in my mind when I enlisted. Should be automatic.

I agree with that. I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans
their due - good for them.

It just annoys me that Korean and Vietnam vets weren't given the same
status as WWII vets.

Sorry if I sounded a little strident. I have issues with Jim Webb
that go back a few years.

Feel free to call Webb anything you like.
--
John H

GI Bill
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:40:31 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

Maybe it's because I was always more tuned into technical disciplines
where
a school's "philosophy" had little to do with the laws of physics.

LSU had a great math department which is why I went there.

Well, that and I got the chance to play college football as a walk on
because Charley McClendon had a soft spot in his heart for veterans
with more heart than brains. ;)

I even got a chance to play in a real game. :)



My oldest son was the quarterback and team captain on his high school
football team.
When it came time to pick colleges, his criteria was the school's football
coach's offensive play strategies.

I told him it's time we had a little talk.

Eisboch

GI Bill
 

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:40:31 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

Maybe it's because I was always more tuned into technical disciplines where
a school's "philosophy" had little to do with the laws of physics.

LSU had a great math department which is why I went there.

Well, that and I got the chance to play college football as a walk on
because Charley McClendon had a soft spot in his heart for veterans
with more heart than brains. ;)

I even got a chance to play in a real game. :)

Did they let you stand in the huddle, on the field, during a time-out :)

GI Bill
 

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 20:00:49 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:29:39 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 20:44:51 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:22:40 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

What's your beef? Don't like Jim Webb?

I served '66 to '72 and know full well what $238/month did - squat.
Might have paid for books if you had a light semester. And it did
nothing for out-of-state tuition if you were living somewhere other
than your home state of enlistment.

I got 400 a month with 2 kids and it made all the difference in the
world. State school was fine for me, and books weren't nearly as
expensive as they are for kids now. It really ****es me off when my
kids are forced to pay OVER 200 BUCKS for a book, and there is no
"used book" option. The book/author/teacher scam was alive when I
went to school, but didn't hurt like it does now.

You think that's expensive - HA!! Try medical books. :)

Do a direct comparision of benefits from WWII and Vietnam. WWII vets
to this day can get totally free education paid for by the VA - can
you?

I do recall Webb mentioning WWII vets going to Columbia and Harvard
on the bill, so I see your point. Doubt there was the huge cost
difference then for the WWII vets then though, since those schools
weren't so hoity toity. And Webb did mention what he's pushing for
applies to state schools only.

I went to a state school - the problem was that it wasn't the state in
which I enlisted.

Fortunately, after my first semester, I received an academic
scholarship which paid for the tuition - books and living expenses
were still mine.

I don't give a rat's ass about Jim Webb.

Given what John said about current benefits, I'm starting to question
Webb's motives. Since I don't know the details of what Webb wants,
I'll reserve judgement. One thing I don't like about the current
system is opting in, since the enlisting kid might make an error
about needing it in his future. Post-service education wasn't a
thought in my mind when I enlisted. Should be automatic.

I agree with that. I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans
their due - good for them.

It just annoys me that Korean and Vietnam vets weren't given the same
status as WWII vets.

Sorry if I sounded a little strident. I have issues with Jim Webb
that go back a few years.

Feel free to call Webb anything you like.

I'll tell you the story someday when we are fishing on the Bay in your
Key West. :)

GI Bill
 

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 20:22:08 -0500, BAR wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:40:31 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

Maybe it's because I was always more tuned into technical disciplines where
a school's "philosophy" had little to do with the laws of physics.

LSU had a great math department which is why I went there.

Well, that and I got the chance to play college football as a walk on
because Charley McClendon had a soft spot in his heart for veterans
with more heart than brains. ;)

I even got a chance to play in a real game. :)

Did they let you stand in the huddle, on the field, during a time-out :)

LOL!!

No - I actually played for eight minutes - three on offense as a slot
receiver and on special teams.

The unfortunate part was that I got my bell rung while blocking on a
return and they woudln't let me go back in - I was totally lunched for
about a half hour.

Explains a lot doesn't it? :)

GI Bill
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


I agree with that. I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

GI Bill
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:52:34 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


I agree with that. I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

Nothing new there. That's been going on since soldiers have been sent
overseas.
--
John H

GI Bill
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:57:22 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:20:13 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:52:34 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


I agree with that. I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

Nothing new there. That's been going on since soldiers have been sent
overseas.

So much for your "Family Values".


Family values have nothing to do with it. I've been there and done that.
Continuously looking for a fight does you no good.
--
John H

GI Bill
 

On Feb 14, 8:57*am, wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:20:13 -0500, John H.





wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:52:34 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:

I agree with that. *I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. *It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. *Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. *I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

Nothing new there. That's been going on since soldiers have been sent
overseas.

So much for your "Family Values".- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Your party who has been more or less in power for the last half
century.. Maybe if they would stop some of these rediculous
investigations, they could address the problem in congress... ....
where it would have to be addressed,

GI Bill
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:37:28 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:30:31 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:57:22 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:20:13 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:52:34 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


I agree with that. I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

Nothing new there. That's been going on since soldiers have been sent
overseas.

So much for your "Family Values".


Family values have nothing to do with it. I've been there and done that.
Continuously looking for a fight does you no good.


Family values is ALL the above has to do with. Continuously exposing
yourself as an amoral self absorbed pig does you no good.


"...amoral self absorbed pig..."

Wow, is that because I'm not into baby killing or because I couldn't take
my kids to Korea?


--
John H

GI Bill
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:45:35 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 06:39:14 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Feb 14, 8:57*am, wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:20:13 -0500, John H.





wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:52:34 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:

I agree with that. *I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. *It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. *Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. *I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

Nothing new there. That's been going on since soldiers have been sent
overseas.

So much for your "Family Values".- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Your party who has been more or less in power for the last half
century.. Maybe if they would stop some of these rediculous
investigations, they could address the problem in congress... ....
where it would have to be addressed,

"My party"? And what dose Ken Starr have to dio with this?


Salty, slow down. You're losing it.
--
John H

GI Bill
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:05:10 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:54:04 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:37:28 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:30:31 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:57:22 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:20:13 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:52:34 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


I agree with that. I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

Nothing new there. That's been going on since soldiers have been sent
overseas.

So much for your "Family Values".


Family values have nothing to do with it. I've been there and done that.
Continuously looking for a fight does you no good.


Family values is ALL the above has to do with. Continuously exposing
yourself as an amoral self absorbed pig does you no good.


"...amoral self absorbed pig..."

Wow, is that because I'm not into baby killing or because I couldn't take
my kids to Korea?


It's who you are on every level, apparently.


Why is it that a discussion with you folks ends with you making personal
attacks, name-calling, derogatory implications, etc.

I've never understood that. Doug, Harry, you - all the same.
--
John H

GI Bill
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:35:48 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:36:15 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:05:10 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:54:04 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:37:28 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:30:31 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:57:22 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:20:13 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:52:34 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


I agree with that. I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

Nothing new there. That's been going on since soldiers have been sent
overseas.

So much for your "Family Values".


Family values have nothing to do with it. I've been there and done that.
Continuously looking for a fight does you no good.


Family values is ALL the above has to do with. Continuously exposing
yourself as an amoral self absorbed pig does you no good.


"...amoral self absorbed pig..."

Wow, is that because I'm not into baby killing or because I couldn't take
my kids to Korea?


It's who you are on every level, apparently.


Why is it that a discussion with you folks ends with you making personal
attacks, name-calling, derogatory implications, etc.

I've never understood that. Doug, Harry, you - all the same.

There is no such thing as "you folks".

Why do YOU folks

Say what??

insist on equating abortion to murder, yet have no
problem supporting the death penalty. Don't try to weasel out of that
with some argument about people who get executed are different. In
fact, many of them are later found to be innocent, and you yourself
cited the Christian ultimatum, "Thou shalt Not Kill". Is that one of
the ten commandments, or the ten suggestions to be used when
convenient?


I'm astonished that you know my religious inclinations and my feelings on
the death penalty.

Again, why is it that a discussion with you folks ends with you making
personal attacks, name-calling, derogatory implications, etc?
--
John H

GI Bill
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:04:24 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:53:00 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:35:48 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:36:15 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:05:10 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:54:04 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:37:28 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:30:31 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:57:22 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:20:13 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:52:34 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


I agree with that. I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

Nothing new there. That's been going on since soldiers have been sent
overseas.

So much for your "Family Values".


Family values have nothing to do with it. I've been there and done that.
Continuously looking for a fight does you no good.


Family values is ALL the above has to do with. Continuously exposing
yourself as an amoral self absorbed pig does you no good.


"...amoral self absorbed pig..."

Wow, is that because I'm not into baby killing or because I couldn't take
my kids to Korea?


It's who you are on every level, apparently.


Why is it that a discussion with you folks ends with you making personal
attacks, name-calling, derogatory implications, etc.

I've never understood that. Doug, Harry, you - all the same.

There is no such thing as "you folks".

Why do YOU folks

Say what??

insist on equating abortion to murder, yet have no
problem supporting the death penalty. Don't try to weasel out of that
with some argument about people who get executed are different. In
fact, many of them are later found to be innocent, and you yourself
cited the Christian ultimatum, "Thou shalt Not Kill". Is that one of
the ten commandments, or the ten suggestions to be used when
convenient?


I'm astonished that you know my religious inclinations and my feelings on
the death penalty.

Again, why is it that a discussion with you folks ends with you making
personal attacks, name-calling, derogatory implications, etc?


I think you'll have to ask "you folks".


Let's start with you.

Why is it that a discussion with *you* ends with you making personal
attacks, name-calling, derogatory implications, etc?

--
John H

GI Bill
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:48:05 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:43:05 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:04:24 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:53:00 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:35:48 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:36:15 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:05:10 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:54:04 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:37:28 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:30:31 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:57:22 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:20:13 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:52:34 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


I agree with that. I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

Nothing new there. That's been going on since soldiers have been sent
overseas.

So much for your "Family Values".


Family values have nothing to do with it. I've been there and done that.
Continuously looking for a fight does you no good.


Family values is ALL the above has to do with. Continuously exposing
yourself as an amoral self absorbed pig does you no good.


"...amoral self absorbed pig..."

Wow, is that because I'm not into baby killing or because I couldn't take
my kids to Korea?


It's who you are on every level, apparently.


Why is it that a discussion with you folks ends with you making personal
attacks, name-calling, derogatory implications, etc.

I've never understood that. Doug, Harry, you - all the same.

There is no such thing as "you folks".

Why do YOU folks

Say what??

insist on equating abortion to murder, yet have no
problem supporting the death penalty. Don't try to weasel out of that
with some argument about people who get executed are different. In
fact, many of them are later found to be innocent, and you yourself
cited the Christian ultimatum, "Thou shalt Not Kill". Is that one of
the ten commandments, or the ten suggestions to be used when
convenient?


I'm astonished that you know my religious inclinations and my feelings on
the death penalty.

Again, why is it that a discussion with you folks ends with you making
personal attacks, name-calling, derogatory implications, etc?


I think you'll have to ask "you folks".


Let's start with you.

Why is it that a discussion with *you* ends with you making personal
attacks, name-calling, derogatory implications, etc?

Probably has something to do with you.


Understandable.
--
John H