LumberJocks Woodworking Forum banner

Of interest to Military and Veterans

3K views 55 replies 16 participants last post by  HorizontalMike 
#1 · (Edited by Moderator)
I have sent this to my Congressional Reps. in Washington, D.C. It may be of interest to all Americans.

Message Subject: My tricare and Terrorist soccer field
Message Text:
I am a retired Military Veteran, and I am outraged by what that imposter in the WH is trying to do. Something has to be done to not allow the following to happen.
" Obama's plan is to cut $1.8 billion from Tricare, the military's health insurance and medical system, in the fiscal 2013 budget, and a whopping $12.9 billion by 2017. Administration officials told Congress that the goal of the increased fees is to force military retirees out of military health coverage and instead onto the rolls of the ObamaCare system, including all that goes with it - Death Panels, Independent Payment Advisory Boards, the works."

If you have the influence to gather the force together, PLEASE try to get this stopped. Terrorists do not and should not have priority over our Military and our retirees. Wayne Gauthier
 
#3 ·
I don't know about everyone else - but - I am getting real tired of hearing all the whining from the bigots, racists, right wing wing nuts, birther nuts, holier than thou attitudes of the religeous fanatics, and anti-everything crowd of proclaimed self righteous hate mongers.
 
#6 ·
Hey rosebud, if you are an obumma lover, suck it up, the Dummo's have done their damndest to dumb up us bigots, racists, right wing wing nuts, birther nuts etc.,as you call us, but, it hasn't worked. Can you prove beyond reasonable doubt that he IS a legal US citizen? He was not vetted, McCain was vetted even tho he has been a Senator and born and raised in the US. You Dummos are so transparent .
 
#7 · (Edited by Moderator)
Waho609, that is what I read from that quote. This came from "Conservative Contacts Alerts. @
http://emailactivity.ecn5.com/engines/publicPreview.aspx?blastID=512382&emailID=145621998

OBAMA SLASHES MILITARY HEALTHCARE YET BUILDS
$750,000 SOCCER FIELD FOR GUANTANAMO TERRORISTS

ppacsoldierssalutingThe Obama administration is set to jack up military health insurance premiums by 345% and slash $12.9 billion worth of active duty and retiree Tricare coverage. Yet the very same day, plans were revealed to build a state of the art $750,000 soccer field for the terrorists being held at Guantanamo Bay.

OUR SOLDIERS, SAILORS, AIRMEN AND MARINES NEED OUR HELP RIGHT NOW! - FAX CONGRESS HERE!

Obama's plan is to cut $1.8 billion from Tricare, the military's health insurance and medical system, in the fiscal 2013 budget, and a whopping $12.9 billion by 2017. Administration officials told Congress that the goal of the increased fees is to force military retirees out of military health coverage and instead onto the rolls of the ObamaCare system, including all that goes with it - Death Panels, Independent Payment Advisory Boards, the works.

ppacguantnamobayMeanwhile, Fox News discovered that the administration is currently in the process of building a state of the art $750,000 soccer field for the terrorists held at Guantanamo. The detainees will now have a choice of three recreation centers while they "suffer" through their detainment.

Since when does America put the comfort of terrorists above the needs of the men

Read from that what you will.
 
#8 ·
@yank SAID: "...McCain was vetted even tho he has been a Senator and born and raised in the US. You Dummos are so transparent ."

RepubliKons can't even get their facts straight! DOAH!

http://www.snopes.com/politics/mccain/citizen.asp

SNOPES.COM

Claim: John McCain does not qualify as a natural-born citizen of the U.S. because he was born in Panama.

Status: Undetermined.


Example: [Collected via e-mail, July 2008]

I am hearing talk that Senator John McCain is not eligible to be President of the United States because he is not a natural-born citizen.

Origins: Among the few qualifications specified in Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution regarding eligibility for the office of President of the United States is that the office-holder must be a "natural born citizen of the United States." This qualification has not previously been an issue in U.S. politics since no one so far elected to the office of president (or who otherwise served as president) was born outside of the United States. But it has been a (minor) issue so far in 2008, as the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Senator John McCain of Arizona, was born not in the U.S. proper but in the Panama Canal Zone. (McCain's parents were themselves U.S. citizens, and at the time of his birth they lived on a military installation in the Panama Canal Zone, where his father was stationed as a U.S. Navy
officer.) If Senator McCain were deemed not to be a natural-born citizen of the United States, his name could be kept off of ballots in the 2008 presidential election, and he could be ineligible to serve as president even if won the election.

As much we'd like to dismiss this one as just another frivolous election season rumor, it's impossible to make any definitive statement about Senator McCain's presidential eligibility because the issue is a matter of law rather than a matter of fact, and the law is ambiguous. There is no disputing that, under the U.S. statutes and laws applicable to the offspring of Americans living abroad and to the Canal Zone, John McCain is a citizen of the United States. However, the difference between "citizen" and "natural-born citizen" is an important one in this case, and some of the legal distinctions between the two are still murky. (The particular sticking points in Senator McCain's case are whether the Panama Canal Zone was covered by existing citizenship laws at the time of his birth, and whether someone who was born outside the U.S. and holds U.S. citizenship status by virtue of a law passed after his birth and applied retroactively qualifies as a natural-born citizen.)

The framers of the Constitution didn't elaborate on the term "natural born citizen," there has never been a court case defining exactly what a "natural-born citizen" is, and neither Congress nor the Supreme Court has definitively resolved the issue. It is therefore not completely inconceivable that someone could mount a legal challenge to Senator McCain's presidential eligibility, and that the issue would have to be decided in court:
"There are powerful arguments that Senator McCain or anyone else in this position is constitutionally qualified, but there is certainly no precedent," said Sarah H. Duggin, an associate professor of law at Catholic University who has studied the issue extensively. "It is not a slam-dunk situation."

In a paper written 20 years ago for the Yale Law Journal on the natural-born enigma, Jill Pryor, now a lawyer in Atlanta, said that any legal challenge to a presidential candidate born outside national boundaries would be "unpredictable and unsatisfactory … it is certainly not a frivolous issue."
The issue is even more complicated because the process of challenging a presidential candidate's eligibility is itself a murky issue, as the New York Times noted:
Lawyers who have examined the topic say there is not just confusion about the provision [regarding natural-born citizenship status] itself, but uncertainty about who would have the legal standing to challenge a candidate on such grounds, what form a challenge could take and whether it would have to wait until after the election or could be made at any time.
A lawsuit challenging Senator McCain's eligibility is pending in Federal District Court in Concord, New Hampshire, but whether that lawsuit will be allowed to proceed is questionable:
In the motion to dismiss the New Hampshire suit, Mr. McCain's lawyers said an individual citizen like the plaintiff, a Nashua man named Fred Hollander, lacks proof of direct injury and cannot sue.

Daniel P. Tokaji, an election law expert at Ohio State University, agreed. "It is awfully unlikely that a federal court would say that an individual voter has standing," he said. "It is questionable whether anyone would have standing to raise that claim."
In April 2008 the Senate approved a non-binding resolution declaring John McCain eligible to be president, one which stated that "There is no evidence of the intention of the framers or any Congress to limit the constitutional rights of children born to Americans serving in the military nor to prevent those children from serving as their country's president." However, that resolution has no legal effect.

Two constitutional lawyers (Laurence Tribe and Theodore Olson) who have studied the issue at the request of Senator McCain found in his favor, but another law scholar recently declared he had determined just the opposite:
In the most detailed examination yet of Senator John McCain's eligibility to be president, a law professor at the University of Arizona has concluded that neither Mr. McCain's birth in 1936 in the Panama Canal Zone nor the fact that his parents were American citizens is enough to satisfy the constitutional requirement that the president must be a "natural-born citizen."

The analysis, by Prof. Gabriel J. Chin, focused on a 1937 law that has been largely overlooked in the debate over Mr. McCain's eligibility to be president. The law conferred citizenship on children of American parents born in the Canal Zone after 1904, and it made John McCain a citizen just before his first birthday. But the law came too late, Professor Chin argued, to make Mr. McCain a natural-born citizen.

"It's preposterous that a technicality like this can make a difference in an advanced democracy," Professor Chin said. "But this is the constitutional text that we have."
If a consensus on the matter can be said to exist, it is that if John McCain is not a natural-born citizen under the law, it's only because of an exceptional and narrow gap in the law that was subsequently corrected and was never intended to exclude someone in his circumstances from natural-born citizenship status, so it would be unfair to declare him ineligible for the presidency on that basis:
"No court will get close to it, and everyone else is on board, so there's a constitutional consensus, the merits of arguments such as [Professor Chin's] aside," said Peter J. Spiro, an authority on the law of citizenship at Temple University.

"You'd have to think a federal court would look for every possible way to avoid deciding the issue," [said election law expert Daniel P. Tokaji].

Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and one of Mr. McCain's closest allies, said it would be incomprehensible to him if the son of a military member born in a military station could not run for president.

"He was posted there on orders from the United States government," Mr. Graham said of Mr. McCain's father. "If that becomes a problem, we need to tell every military family that your kid can't be president if they take an overseas assignment."
Last updated: 23 July 2008

Urban Legends Reference Pages © 1995-2012 by Barbara and David P. Mikkelson.
This material may not be reproduced without permission.
snopes and the snopes.com logo are registered service marks of snopes.com.
Sources Sources:

Hulse, Carl. "Senate Says McCain Is Qualified."
The New York Times. 1 May 2008.

Hulse, Carl. "McCain's Canal Zone Birth Prompts Queries About Whether That Rules Him Out."
The New York Times. 28 February 2008.

Liptak, Adam. "A Hint of New Life to a McCain Birth Issue."
The New York Times. 11 July 2008.

Associated Press. "McCain: My Citizenship Not an Issue."
USA Today. 29 February 2008.

Associated Press. "McCain Says Citizenship Issue Settled 44 Years Ago."
USA Today. 29 February 2008 (p. A6).

The Denver Post. "McCain Says His Birthplace Isn't an Issue."
USA Today. 29 February 2008 (p. A6).
 
#9 ·
HorizontalMike: this John McCain thing kind of goes both way according to factcheck.org he is a U.S. citizen adn 100% capable of being President (well maybe I should say legally allowed to be President not "capable")
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/john-mccains-presidential-eligibility/

Q: How can Panamanian-born McCain be elected president?

A: Though born abroad, he is considered a natural-born U.S. citizen.

FULL QUESTION:

I understand John McCain was born in Panama. Doesn't that make him ineligible to be president? I thought the Constitution said you had to have been born in a state.

FULL ANSWER:

John McCain's father was an admiral in the U.S. Navy who was stationed in Panama in 1936, when McCain was born. This has led to speculation as to whether McCain is a U.S. citizen and whether he can be elected president, a question that was raised during McCain's run for the Republican nomination in 2000 as well.

Section 1, Article II of the U.S. Constitution states:

Article II: "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

But McCain is a natural-born citizen, even though he was not born within this country's borders, since his parents were citizens at the time of his birth. As a congressional act stated in 1790:

Congress: "And the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens."

Another congressional act in 1795 issued a similar assurance, though it changed the language from "natural born citizen" to "citizen."

But the State Department clarifies the issue, saying that the 1790 language is honored under section 301© of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

This is not the first time the question has been broached in a presidential election. Fellow Arizonian Barry Goldwater was born in the Arizona territory before it was a state. And Mitt Romney's father, George, ran for president in 1968, though he was born in Mexico. Like McCain, both were born to U.S. citizens and, therefore, considered to be American citizens.

However, both of those candidates were unsuccessful in their bids - and so a smidgen of uncertainty remains. If McCain wins the presidency, the constitutionality of these congressional statutes could be challenged in the courts. Members of Congress have expressed this fear and proposed a more explicit law, or even a Constitutional amendment. Neither has been adopted.

-Justin Bank

Update, June 16: This article originally didn't note the distinction in language between the 1790 and 1795 congressional acts.

Sources
Rudin, Ken. "Citizen McCain's Panama Problem." Washington Post, 9 July 1998.

"An Act to Establish a Uniform Rule of Naturalization." 1st U.S. Congress, 2nd Session, 26 Mar. 1790.

"An Act to Establish a Uniform Rule of Naturalization; and to repeal the act heretofore passed on that subject." 3rd U.S. Congress, 2nd Session, 29 June 1795.

Olson, Elizabeth. "U.S. Congress moves to clarify the rules : Just how 'American' must a president be?" International Herald Tribune, 2 June 2004.

But back to the OP I do think that it is kind of crazy that we spend 750,00 on a soccer field in Gitmo hell I think it would be crazy for the US gov to spend that on a soccer field in America!!!
 
#11 ·
Yank,

I am in the same boat (Navy Vet). I would not however believe one thing that came from that web address. I belong to several very politically active veteran organizations. When they come out and tell us who to blame, I will lead the charge against those messing with veteran benefits.
 
#12 ·
But BOTH of John McCain's parents were NATURAL born US citzens. Can the "Usurper in Chief" say the same? NO HELL NO! Like the Clintons, BHO HATES the military. He and his Marxist cronies have nothing but CONTEMPT for the military and veterans. They want to take the money away from the retired and active duty military families but feel we have to pay for contraception for Georgetown law school coeds and all the other college coeds that are "going broke" trying to maintain their sex lives. Obama Favors Students Getting Paid to Screw While Screwing Over Troops By Lucy Emerson, a military wife. I wonder what the out cry would be like if funding/services for public employees health care was cut the same?
 
#13 ·
How is it the political spin machine can keep painting this as paying students to have sex? You do know that some people need birth control for actual medical reasons? My wife went on birth control when she was 14 for medical reasons and was in a lot of pain for several months in a row while trying to get pregnant and her condition isn't rare. So we shouldn't require insurance companies to pay for this? So plenty of girls will use it to have birth control so they can sleep around, beats paying for abortions or dropping one more unwanted kid into the system. Birth control pills aren't that expensive, I had to pay for my wife's for 3 years while we didn't have insurance, the companies are already over charging so they can give their CEOs far more then they are worth. Let them pony up some cash and pay for the pills, they can cut back on the bonuses this year before hiking the rates again next year.

How is Obama an "usurper in chief" any more then Bush who effectively stole two elections? He ran, he won, he had the birth certificate so get over it; on the plus side you'll probably have 4 more years to work on your insults for the president since the Republicans can't seem to produce anyone worth voting for that will make it to the actual election. Nothing like rounding up the biggest bunch of losers out there to hand Obama the reelction on a silver platter.
 
#14 ·
#16 ·
I am fed up with all the broken promises that the goverment has dished out to military people over the years. The politicians treat the military in the same terms as welfare recipients for the most part.

I want to see the draft reinstated. I want to see a politicians face when thier son or daughter comes home missing limbs. I want to see a politician cope with a son or daughter with PTSD.
 
#18 ·
Mike,

I really like your way of thinking!!

ShipWreck,

I was in the Navy when all services became volunteers. We had some fine men and women. I would love to see the draft return to equalize service of all americans. I know this wouldn't be popular but I feel everyone should serve their country in some way for at least 2 years. It would give people a whole new outlook. Too many people just sit back and complain when they have done nothing to earn the right. Just my opinion but I know I'm right!

Ken Fitzpatrick, Retired U. S. Navy/DAV
Volunteered before I was drafted - my choice
U. S. Navy Feb 67-Apr 80
 
#19 ·
I entered bootcamp on January 13, 1977 and entered the "fleet reserve" on February 1997. After Clinton took office, it was nothing more than social engineering. I loved my first 10 years, but could not wait to retire during the last 10. I was lucky enough to be down in the enginerooms and I avoided most of the modern surface warfare politics. Nobody cares about military creases in you're shirts or spit shined boots when the engineroom is a 120 degrees and the machinery has to keep running. Most sailors/officers avoided the enginerooms at all costs due to the heat, grease, and fuel smells…... so we had our own little universe to ourselves. :)

John Lannon
En1/SW (Engineman 1st Class)
Jan 77 - Feb 97
 
#20 ·
@HMike And you wanna be a Birther about Obama being born in Hawaii but McCain born in Panama is OK…'shore…**
are you referring to my post from factcheck.org? I find it funny that you throw out your third party info and expect us to take it as the gospel, but you do not bother to verify your information or accept the fat that other just as "reputable" sites have a contradicting idea.
Just for clarification I never said that Obama was not a US citizen I was simply just trying to point out that their is reputable documentation to contradict what your post said. I fully believe that he is an American citizen.
 
#21 · (Edited by Moderator)
I NEVER said that Obama is not a "citizen" either. But I will say this. According to the terms that specify "Natural born citizen", HE IS NOT! He admitted in his own book that his father was born in Kenya and was never even naturalized. In fact he was KICKED OUT of the USA by INS.

Article 2 section 1:
"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

US Senate Resolution 511
 
#22 ·
Just for the record from where all this started, and a little history. I am a retired Air Force veteran, on social security, a VA study in Agent Orange (3 back-to-back tours in VietNam), shot at in Tunisa, in Libya at Wheelus AB, 1967, during the 6 day war, Cape Town, South Africa, where I got caught up in the riots, Argentina, 1974, under martial law and was within 4 hours of being kidnapped by anti-government insurgents when the National Guard rescued us (we had no idea this was going to happen), shot at in the Philippines by insurgents, in the middle of the Laos invasion, 1971, with the 1/5 Army who, somehow, made our way into Tchepone, and many other things I will not mention. This argument started out as an increase in Tricare for the military. As stated, I am retired, and the Tricare system is CHEAP, $430 a year for a family, as compared to the rest of the world, and you want to bitch because of a raise in premimums?! With all the trials and tribulations I had while on active duty, I will not complain about a SMALL increase in access to what the Government gives us. I will bet anything in the world, anybody else out there would give their left %#@ to pay what we pay. So, what this all breaks down to is exactly what I stated in my first statement: BIGOTRY, because all you right wing skin heads cannot accept a person of color who became our leader. BIG DAMN DEAL! LIVE WITH IT! You don't like it, take your ilk, and move to Timbuctu where you will be most happy.

rosebudjim, USAF (retired)
1965-1985
ADC, NORAD, TAC, USAFE, SOCOM, PACAF, SAC, ATC, 7AF, and 1/5 ARMY (I Corp)
 
#24 ·
What makes me laugh is the division of the american people. Both democrat and republican parties are killing this country. People take up sides with either party, declaring the other side to be idiots. Both parties are full of cowardly career minded politicians, and they will do what ever it takes to stay in office. The latest birth control issue is just the latest example of intentional distraction. We have kids still dying in Afghanistan. The economy is about 6 years away from picking up. People who have worked hard are still losing thier homes. Gas is over 4 dollars a gallon. The goverment keeps sending billions of borrowed dollars overseas to aide the very people who hate us. It is no wonder that the younger people have no sense of who to trust in thier elders when we act the way we do. This thread is a excellent example.
 
#25 ·
There are a lot of intelligent people here that "get it". Rosebud, Mike and Shipwreck are at the top of that list. Ti all of the vets here, Thanks for your service!! It seems we served at different times but serve we did and the last place any custs should be made is from any active duty or veterans retirement benefits.

For a good part of the time I was on active duty, we "the military" had to lead the way by example and suffer pay freezes over long periods of time. It's time for all that crap to stop. Lets keep our promises to those who served, since as many have pointed out, its only 1% of america that has. We were never in the 1% that are being asked to pay their fair shair now.

Regardless of what is said here, lets all remember that it is our freedom that lets us say it. On this note, I'm going back to woodworking. The diversion was stimulating but "I love the smell of sawdust in the morning"
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top