In the world of politics, it is quite rare to find a man who is willing to listen to both sides of an issue, choose the side that makes the most sense and vote accordingly. Mostly, politicians put their finger in the wind to decide an issue, voting for whichever side will help their own career the most. Or, they blindly listen to only one side and vote with that side regardless of the merit of any given issue.
Texas is fortunate to have that rare politician that I listed first. Sen. John Cornyn is no one’s water bucket boy, voting with the courage that only a well researched, well reasoned argument can provide. I noted here that I strongly disagreed with his vote in favor of the pork laden farm bill. To his staff’s credit, they didn’t budge an inch, simply noting that they will choose to disagree with me and that, on the whole, it was the best deal that the senator could get for Texas and was a good thing for his constituents.
This Memorial Day weekend, Sen. Cornyn and his staff are going to face a torrent of criticism that will make his vote against conservatives on the farm bill seem like a walk in the park. You see, Sen. Cornyn was one of only 22 senators to vote against the update of the GI Bill. Talk about a no-brainer. If ever there was a bill that a senator up for re-election should vote for, it would be a support our troops measure shortly before we remember those who gave their all for us.
His opponent in the election is a decorated Lt. Col. that is currently serving in the reserves. Lt. Col. Noriega will certainly use Sen. Cornyn’s vote to his own advantage politically and in fact, has already started.
“Senator Cornyn’s vote is an insult to our troops who have sacrificed so much to serve our country. Texas families deserve better,” said Rick Noriega. “Supporting our troops is about more than photo opportunities and speeches. Our brave men and women give their all on the battlefield and they deserve our full support when they return home. But today John Cornyn voted against a GI bill that would ensure our veterans receive the same sort of education benefit that their grandparents received after World War II. Worse yet, Cornyn signaled his support for a presidential veto, which would rob a large and deserving group of veterans of the tools they need to succeed in civilian life after serving our nation.”
That Lt. Col. Noriega would choose such a solemn weekend for his own political gain speaks volumes about his character.
So why didn’t Sen. Cornyn simply vote yea on this bill? Why hand Lt. Col. Noriega an issue on a gold platter?
Because, as I said above, Sen. Cornyn is that rare politician that is willing to listen to both sides of an issue, choose the side that makes the most sense and vote accordingly. Lt. Col. Noriega is that other kind of politician.
Let’s take a look at some of Sen. Cornyn’s reasoning behind his vote.
“Clearly, an overhaul to the Montgomery G.I. Bill is long overdue and something that our troops deserve for their heroic service in the defense of freedom. I am hopeful that the final product of this legislation will reflect some form of bipartisan compromise and we can move forward with this important effort,” Senator Cornyn said.
Hmm. That sounds like he is for the update, doesn’t it? Only one problem. This really wasn’t a bi-partisan bill at all. It was a shove it down your throat bill, typical of the Democratic lead Congress.
According to a recent Congressional Budget office report, Senator Webb’s bill could decrease retention rates as much as 16 percent. At a time when our troops are fighting on two fronts, and the Department of Defense is increasing the size of the Armed Forces to give troops more time at home between deployments, a drop in retention would have serious impacts on our All Volunteer Force.
Retention is a very serious issue in a voluntary military. There were many alternatives proposed that would have enhanced retention, particularly to long-term, career armed services members. But, in typical Democrat fashion, they only think short term. As in November, 2008 election short term.
Did Sec. Robert Gates think this bill was the right bill to help him oversee the nations defense? No, he didn’t.
Our first objective is to strengthen the All-Volunteer force. Accordingly, it is essential to permit transferability of unused education benefits from service members to family. This is the highest priority set by the Service Chiefs and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, reflecting the strong interest from the field and fleet. Transferability supports military families, thereby enhancing retention. Second, any enhancement of the education benefit, whether used in service or after retirement, must serve to enhance recruiting and not undercut retention.
Third, significant benefit increases need to be focused on those willing to commit to longer periods of service .. hence the Department’s interest in at least six years of service to be eligible for transferability. Re·enlistments (and longer service) are critical to the success of the All-Volunteer Force. Fourth, the program should provide participants with benefits tailored to their unique situation, thereby broadening the population from which we retain and recruit. This includes those whose past educationalachievements have resulted in education debt through student loans, and those seeking advanced degrees and who may have earned undergraduate degrees with Department of Defense support.
Did Sec. of Veteran’s Affairs James Peake think this was the right bill to help him and his department? No, he didn’t.
For that reason, and because of other concerns stated in this letter, we are unable to support S.22.
He also noted that the grandstanders voting for this amendment didn’t bother to fund its implementation and will make it effective before any regulations about it are written.
The bill would become effective on the date of enactment. VA does not now have a payment system or the appropriate number of trained personnel to administer the program. S. 22 does not contain provisions to fund VA for the significant additional general operating and information technology expenses required to administer this program. Furthermore, several of the provisions in the bill require VA to prescribe regulations. If the bill is to become effective on the date of enactment, all necessary rules for administering the program should be contained in the bill.
Typical of politicians that do not bother with the details and un-intended consequenses of their finger-in-the-wind principles.
So my hat is off to Sen. Cornyn and I wish him well this weekend. It’s going to be a rough one but he and his staff can be comforted in the knowledge that principled stands, while not fun, are built upon a solid foundation.
Politicians that stick their fingers in the wind stand in sinking sand.
Filed Under Front Page · · · · 
Print This Post
··
Comments
42 Responses to “Sen. John Cornyn Stands Tall”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...
Politicans like Noreiga will spin anything they can for political gain. That is what some politicians will do to get elected. Hopefully the voters will see thru this and vote according to the facts and of course their conscience. But we know that the “race card” is going to be played by Noreiga because he can’t win on character or substance.
Seems to me Cornyn would be a good choice for McCain’s VP. He would carry Texas and would be putting him in a position for a Presidential run. Sen Cornyn is the type of Republican we need in the White House.
How long will it take HoustonDem to spin this into a lie about cutting benefits?
“That Lt. Col. Noriega would choose such a solemn weekend for his own political gain speaks volumes about his character.”
LOL. Come on Beej. 90% of the people (yes I made up the number but you get the point) will be out at a barbeque or 2 this weekend eating and drinking lots of beer or will be going to the beach or will hit a Memorial Day sale at the mall. Do you really believe anyone is going to explore the solemn nature of this weekend? Yes maybe a few will but sadly most will not. For most people it’s just a another day off…
#3 - Not going to do it. Spin, spin, spin. We will end up going around and around. You have your numbers and your sources, I have mine. It’s an issue we will just have to agree to disagree.
No disagreement. The numbers prove you are wrong. The fact that you refuse to recognize it proves again that liberals just can’t grasp the concepts of logic and common sense - or truth and hard facts for that matter. Yesterday we nailed you from 50 different directions, ripping your sources, and providing credible facts. You couldn’t refute any of them, so you shut up and walked off. Case closed.
Still makes it hard to want to embrace a babe that finally showered & put on deodorant this one instance for memory of all the other times she didn’t and stunk up the joint.
Actually i posted a link showing that vet benefits were being cut from 2009-2012. You convenitnly ignored it. Good Night.
Personally I have this “thing” about people saying something and either slamming to door or hanging up on you. I look at it as they are not intelligent enough to respond to the matter at hand.
“You convenitnly ignored it. Good Night.” just fell in that catagory. Rude also.
This is not the first criticism that TCO Noriega has leveled against Cornyn. Fully two weeks ago, I found a blog on the Huffington Post by none other that LTC Noriega. He blasted Cornyn for this vote and appealed no doubt to the masses at HuffPo. Being the conniving conservative troll that I am, I posted a scathing comment to the blog defending Sen. Cornyn. My points were uncontested for the most part and the conversation fizzled. HA HA. After all, I am a Texan and a vet who took full advantage of the GI Bill. I finished my undergraduate work at The real University of Texas (TAMU) in large part to the GI Bill. And now, thanks to the Hazlewood Act, I might use my STATE OF TEXAS VETERANS BENEFITS even more so. (Google it: I dare you.)
The State of Texas has chosen to reward its veterans well. If another state chooses to not honor their soldiers, like Oregon or California, why should I pay FEDERAL dollars on top of my STATE dollars for that?
I cannot say with full certainty that the retention and transferability to family are or are not needed. But, I am proud of this senator who will stand on principle when his constituents are already being cared for better than average.
I didn’t see that post. Could you put it back up here again so we can rip this one to shreds like your other sources please? Thank you.
He put that one up yesterday as a source. Went you delved into the website, I found it was one guy, whose “group” had an income of $44,000, and he took out $38,000 in salary and benefits. Give it to HoustonDem - he knows how to dig up top notch groups to back his position - Pfffft.
#7 No, actually you posted a link showing that there was a projected decrease in per annum growth in Veterans’ benefits in 2009-2012 and you falsely claimed it was a cut.
I found it interesting on some of his pictures that he’s wearing a combat infantryman’s badge on some, and on others he is not - during the same time period. Maybe it’s not a requirement for the Army to be worn all the time.
Democrats do not care about the troops or the war. They see them as pawns to use agains their political opponents. All they care about is being in power. They lie-lie-lie-lie to get into office and unfortunately their lies get our soldiers killed. Democrats want to pretend to pass legislation for our soldiers, but they load the bills with crap. They can’t even get a budget for the troops in harms way across because of all the the pork shoved into it. Democrat lies embolden our enemies and cause them to hang on and kill more and more hoping we will run like the dhimmis want us to do. Shame on you democrats, shame!!
If you notice, the peak in troop deaths concurred with the elections where Democrats promised to “bring ‘em home”. The Democrats have the blood of American soldiers and Iraqi citizens on their hands!
There’s a word called honor that very few Democrats understand.
#14 fasternu, you forget one thing: a lot of the troops ARE Democrats, and they are enthusiastic about voting for Barack Obama. They know which side their bread is buttered on far better than you or I.
Hamous, so HoustonDem is caught in ANOTHER lie. They have no shame. I guess if they did, they couldn’t stand being liberals.
Only in the twisted recesses of their cranial cavities (note the omission of the word “brains”) is a reduction in the rate of growth called a cut. Dems just can’t help lying I guess.
“you forget one thing: a lot of the troops ARE Democrats, and they are enthusiastic about voting for Barack Obama.”
I don’t think so, I forget nothing. The troops know who is on their side, and it isn’t Obama. They are not enthused about him at all. I don’t know where that came from (unless you forgot the sarc tag). I’ll guarantee that I am around more troops than most people and very few like Obama (and that crosses all racial lines!). They area afraid he’ll knife them in the back and cause us to lose the war. He’s toxic to the troops! They aren’t stupid.
Ghost Rider. My home is 1 mile from Wheeler Field and Schofield Barracks. All my neighbors are military. The people at the store are military. The people at the dog park are military. My customers are military. I do NOT KNOW ONE SINGLE ONE who is voting for Obama.
Oh, my nephew is a Marine in Iraq, and he doesn’t know anybody who is voting for Obama or Hillary.
Now Ghost Rider, you just look at news clips of how the troops greet Pres. Bush and Senator McCain. Then look at how the troops greet ANY democrat. The troops loathe the Democrats. They have ZERO respect for Democrats. It’s because they know Democrats think they are dumb and suckers. It’s as simple as that too.
And it’s why the Dems tried so hard (successfully) to block the military absentee votes in Florida in 2000. Shameful, but typical of Dems disregard for our troops.
hamous and 45 - If you read what I wrote about the link I acknowledge the numbers are as a % of GDP. And here is a little more info about the numbers, per an article on CNN -
“Bush is using the cuts, critics say, to help fulfill his pledge to balance the budget by 2012. But even administration allies say the numbers are not real and are being used to make the overall budget picture look better.
After an increase sought for next year, the Bush budget would turn current trends on their head. Even though the cost of providing medical care to veterans has been growing rapidly — by more than 10 percent in many years — White House budget documents assume consecutive cutbacks in 2009 and 2010 and a freeze thereafter.
The proposed cuts are unrealistic in light of recent VA budget trends — its medical care budget has risen every year for two decades and 83 percent in the six years since Bush took office — sowing suspicion that the White House is simply making them up to make its long-term deficit figures look better.
“Either the administration is willingly proposing massive cuts in VA health care,” said Rep. Chet Edwards of Texas, chairman of the panel overseeing the VA’s budget. “Or its promise of a balanced budget by 2012 is based on completely unrealistic assumptions.”
Edwards said that a more realistic estimate of veterans costs is $16 billion higher than the Bush estimate for 2012.
In fact, even the White House doesn’t seem serious about the numbers. It says the long-term budget numbers don’t represent actual administration policies. Similar cuts assumed in earlier budgets have been reversed.
The veterans cuts, said White House budget office spokesman Sean Kevelighan, “don’t reflect any policy decisions. We’ll revisit them when we do the (future) budgets.”
The number of veterans coming into the VA health care system has been rising by about 5 percent a year as the number of people returning from Iraq with illnesses or injuries keep rising. Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans represent almost 5 percent of the VA’s patient caseload, and many are returning from battle with grievous injuries requiring costly care, such as traumatic brain injuries.
All told, the VA expects to treat about 5.8 million patients next year, including 263,000 veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan.
The cuts come even as the number of veterans from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars is expected to increase 26 percent next year.”
HoustonDem, you sure are a slow learner.
What critics? What allies? What are their reputable sources? None of this is provided. Typical CNN garbage spew - can’t call it reporting.
This is the same network that new about the rape and torture rooms in Iraq, but said nothing to keep their bureau open there.
Again HoustonDem, OF COURSE IT’S BEEN GROWING EVERY YEAR FOR TWO DECADES! It’s the 16 million aging WW2 vets we had. The majority of them are dead now, and they are dying now at the rate of about 4,000 per day. So the NEED is going to go down. I explained this yesterday, but you just can’t grasp the concept. We have far fewer veterans, they are not as advanced in age, and many are covered by private medical and do not use the VA.
Chet Edwards knows this and is just demagoging the situation for Dems political gain, and there is no basis in fact for keeping those budgets that high.
Soldiers love Democrats
“many are covered by private medical and do not use the VA.”
Precisely. Most of the vets I know that use the VA were either injured while serving or are pretty old Korea/WWII Era, a few Vietnam vets I know go to Va, but they were injured while serving. My father went to the VA here in Houston. The care was pretty good. Not the nightmare I expected (from all the rhetoric). He died there, but was well taken care of. The Dhimmicrats only use soldiers as props, nothing more. The bloodier the prop, the better.
Fasternu, just to be sure, Snopes says that was not a staged picture in your #24.
http://www.snopes.com/photos/military/crossed.asp
Cough up Hal so I can prove Fasteru’s #24 is accurate.
Well, the VA in Houston killed one of my old friends with their incompetence. Prostate cancer. They were supposed to remove ALL of the prostate, but only removed part of it. My mom worked as a nurse with the VA doctor’s wife, and she knew he was a drunk.
BigJolly,
I gotta disagree with you on this one. I benefitted from the original G.I. Bill that paid for my college education.
I left the USMC as Viet-Nam was winding down…I probably could have stayed and knowing what we know now…my next big conflict before retirement would have been Grenada. It is possible that I would have seen service in Desert Storm as a SgtMaj or Master-Gunnery Sgt, but who knows.
Yes restoring those benefits that I enjoyed would impact retention rates, but it would also provide us with a fresh crop of professionals in the civilian market. We need educated professionals just as much as we need soldiers.
I really disagree with McCain on this one and Cornyn too. Kudos to both on having principled positions. I have known about McCain’s position for weeks. My support of him was tepid at best..this is pushing me to do a write-in.
Simple
My father died waiting for doctors at the VA hospital to attend to him after a heart attack. Sadly, there was another hospital right across the street I could have taken him to but, silly me, I thought he would get better care at the VA Hospital. He was only 40 years old.
And now the Dems want to turn everyone’s healthcare over to the government? Thanks, but no thanks.
Simple,
I think that the biggest difference is timing, the gross amount would have been worked out. The one voted on provides full benefits after 3 years, the alternative was 6. There are a few other differences, one of the key ones being the transferability.
But hey, if everyone agreed all the time, it’d be a boring place!
The transferability part seems like a good idea to me.
27
Big I’ve seen that it is true too on snopes. That’s the sign for distress/duress in case anyone doesn’t know.
The current GI bill is good. There’s a program where you join the National Guard but do a full active enlistment first. There’s up to a $60,000 bonus PLUS THE GI BILL! If you think the current GI bill is bad, you might ought to check it out!
This is all posturing to use the troops as props.
Simple, in 1978 I was on Okinawa, and did a survey on 1,000 retired Marines who had passed away. Regardless of whether it was a 20 year career or a 30 year career, the AVERAGE age at death was 55. The Marine Corps is just plain hard on a body.
The only problem with Sen Cornyn is that you have to watch him on every vote or he will always gravitate to the dark side. Remember the immigration stuff he actually sponsored (introduced I think). Now KBH, with her cheerleading degree from UT might be expected to miss some of the finer analytical points in a bill and vote the wrong way from time to time, but Sen Cornyn at times seems to want to hold his constituents hostage until they overpower him to vote the right way. It just seems to take an inordinate amount of time and attention to keep an eye on him when we should reasonably expect a solid conservative vote every time with a big hassle.
#30 Hamous, I am way our of my league with this topic and so haven’t said anything except to say, I am so sorry you lost your dad this way. What a waste……. but definately not your fault. How were you to know…. the government would let him down?
#30 Hamous…I am so sorry you lost your daddy in this way…..my heart goes out to you. It sounds like you did everything you could…..rest well.
34, Please let me dispell that “Hazelwood Act” misconception for you.
I used the Hazelwood Act for my post graduate work. It pays for tuition…no argument.
It does not pay for:
Building Use Fees
Lab Fees
Books
Any other fees the University System deems to implement to soak the student. In reality, the tuition was less than half of my bill.
The G.I. Bill paid me about $550.00 per month when I got out, which was Sargent E-5 pay at the time. The wife worked and I took a part time job and we did ok. Didn’t live the high life, but we made it.
This is one point that I really disagree with Mssrs McCain and Cornyn. We have spent Trillions of US$ on that #$#%$#@%$ speck in the desert for a %$#$%^%$ people that kill each other and can only agree on one thing….how much they despise us.
We need to build this country and I remember how the Universities were full of returning Vets, who went on to be teachers, accountants, lawyers, and yes engineers.
The only argument against this program is the cost….well cut some of the other #$#$ in the federal budget and let us reward some folks who have “earned” the benefit.
Simple
AW & Boxie - Thanks. I moved past any guilt a while ago. I’ve even moved past blaming the VA. My Pops was a Marine. He was nearly cut in half by a Korean rifle, then shot again while he was being carried off the battlefield at the age of 18. He deserved better. As big45 and others have pointed out, the VA is a civilian run government bureaucracy that doesn’t work. No matter how much money you throw at it, it still won’t work. Military hospitals provide excellent care for our armed forces. Yet Dems are hellbent on providing the rest of us the same poor health care they provide our Veterans. Its disgusting.
35, Big45,
I know too well….I remember us doing those 3-4 mile runs in combat boots, which had little or no padding.
One had to have a chit from Sick Bay to run in sneakers at the time.
I began and ended every run with two aspirins and generous application of Ben-Gay. I remember a lame USMC movie that Clint Eastwood did many years ago. He came out to the platoon formation and remarked that it smelled like a Ben-Gay factory…Hell I never took part in one that did not.
The only time I did not do a post application of Ben-Gay was when I had to change into summertime Tropicals. Best thing the USMC did was to get rid of those $#%$ hard to maintain things.
My knees are wrecked from the abuse of those years, but I would do it all over if I could.
Simple
Now Slick Rick has an opinion piece in the Comical on memorial day attacking the integrity and patriotism of Senator Cornyn on this issue.
Drop by and leave your comments.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/outlook/5801443.html