• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Shutdown outrage: Military death benefits denied to families of fallen troops

apdst said:
Those families probably didn't know.
Click to expand...

Then that is a failure of their commands. They should have known. My own command and my husband's give us info about these things all the time, and at the very least, spouses should have a command contact when given notification of death if they need any assistance. Major command failure.
 
When i think of how we need to gut the military budget, this isn't what i have in mind, hitting the survivors with a fat bill just to get to the funeral, at the time they need support the most. It seems like there's some new, unforeseen outrage every day thanks to this shutdown.
 
ernst barkmann said:
what opinions, are you referring to, who knows more about the constitution and the bill of rights then Madison.

since he laid the foundation of the constitution, before the constitutional convention, and wrote the bill of rights.
Click to expand...

Attributing the constitution to a single person is foolish, and declaring this person has the only valid opinion is worse.

The scope of the Federal government's power was a huge point of debate then, as it is now, and opinions varied wildly.
 
Deuce said:
Attributing the constitution to a single person is foolish, and declaring this person has the only valid opinion is worse.

The scope of the Federal government's power was a huge point of debate then, as it is now, and opinions varied wildly.
Click to expand...

you did not answer, i asked who you were referring too. i referred to Madison, becuase no one has contributed more to the constitution and the bill of rights, the whole interpretation of the constitution.......no one
 
roguenuke said:
The death benefits were most likely not a part of the bill signed in that paid normal pay to soldiers.
Click to expand...

I find ot hard to believe that death bennies weren't a part of spending that wasn't effected by the shutdown. If so, we have a SECDEF that's as evil and/or incompetant as the president.
 
apdst said:
I find ot hard to believe that death bennies weren't a part of spending that wasn't effected by the shutdown. If so, we have a SECDEF that's as evil and/or incompetant as the president.
Click to expand...

Why do you find that hard to believe? It isn't something people think about really. Both sides are being petty. They knew they had to ensure that the military was paid, but there are plenty of things that go beyond just our monthly pay and direct monthly benefits. They didn't think about those other things, only the immediate, basic pay and allowances.

We have a Congress who is too busy fighting and being petty to notice the extra things.
 
roguenuke said:
Why do you find that hard to believe? It isn't something people think about really. Both sides are being petty. They knew they had to ensure that the military was paid, but there are plenty of things that go beyond just our monthly pay and direct monthly benefits. They didn't think about those other things, only the immediate, basic pay and allowances.

We have a Congress who is too busy fighting and being petty to notice the extra things.
Click to expand...

How hard would it have been for the President to write a single sentence executive order to fix this if he cared about the fallen or their families.
 
washunut said:
How hard would it have been for the President to write a single sentence executive order to fix this if he cared about the fallen or their families.
Click to expand...

And again, how hard would it be for the President to write a single executive order to fund Medicaid or some other government funded program with an executive order? But how legal is that again?
 
washunut said:
How hard would it have been for the President to write a single sentence executive order to fix this if he cared about the fallen or their families.
Click to expand...

Of all the ridiculous nonsense going around, this easily tops them all.
 
roguenuke said:
And again, how hard would it be for the President to write a single executive order to fund Medicaid or some other government funded program with an executive order?
Click to expand...

Medicaid is non-discretionary spending. Its automatic. As well as Food Stamps, Medicare and Social Security. Funny that death benefits for fallen military members don't fit that category.
 
Fishstyx said:
Medicaid is non-discretionary spending. Its automatic. As well as Food Stamps, Medicare and Social Security. Funny that death benefits for fallen military members don't fit that category.
Click to expand...

All they have to do is change the law, ALL spending except interest on the debt is discretionary. Non-discretionary is a political term used to describe the lack of will by politicians.
 
roguenuke said:
And again, how hard would it be for the President to write a single executive order to fund Medicaid or some other government funded program with an executive order? But how legal is that again?
Click to expand...

Well, since Obama rejected special funding to fix this, we know that it's more about his hatred of the country and our soldiers, than anything.
 
Fishstyx said:
Medicaid is non-discretionary spending. Its automatic. As well as Food Stamps, Medicare and Social Security. Funny that death benefits for fallen military members don't fit that category.
Click to expand...

They probably do, but Obama closed military funerals like he closed the national parks.
 
apdst said:
They probably do, but Obama closed military funerals like he closed the national parks.
Click to expand...

I find it interesting though that food stamps is non-discretionary and death benefits for military members isn't. The behavior of the National Park Service is nauseating. When this is done, I hope Congress puts them through the ringer. We get it, its a shutdown but adding personnel to sites otherwise unmanned to maintain closure is ridiculous. It costs more money to keep these places closed then it does to leave them open. Just stupid, I'd be damned ashamed if I worked for NPS.
 
roguenuke said:
And again, how hard would it be for the President to write a single executive order to fund Medicaid or some other government funded program with an executive order? But how legal is that again?
Click to expand...

You're still trying this phony comparison. How disgusting and pathetic.

Obama's job as Commander in Chief is not the same thing as your perception he is everyone's Daddy

reinoe said:
Of all the ridiculous nonsense going around, this easily tops them all.
Click to expand...

Why? He knew days in advance it was going to happen and purposely interpreted a law to allow them to go without benefits

If Obama and Hagel had souls the situation never would have reached the point where those military families didn't receive their death benefits

Obama also won't sign the bill that funds these families. They are still reliant upon private funding at this point
 
Fishstyx said:
I find it interesting though that food stamps is non-discretionary and death benefits for military members isn't. The behavior of the National Park Service is nauseating. When this is done, I hope Congress puts them through the ringer. We get it, its a shutdown but adding personnel to sites otherwise unmanned to maintain closure is ridiculous. It costs more money to keep these places closed then it does to leave them open. Just stupid, I'd be damned ashamed if I worked for NPS.
Click to expand...

We have tyrannt for a president, who hates America.
 
Bronson said:
You're still trying this phony comparison. How disgusting and pathetic.

Obama's job as Commander in Chief is not the same thing as your perception he is everyone's Daddy
Click to expand...

And since you don't want to answer it, you simply to insult and make random pointless comments.

The thing is you know that the answer is that you would not support Obama signing an executive order that paid for something he supported and you didn't, but complain when he doesn't sign one that you want, no matter on his personal feelings about whether either should be done.
 
roguenuke said:
And since you don't want to answer it, you simply to insult and make random pointless comments.

The thing is you know that the answer is that you would not support Obama signing an executive order that paid for something he supported and you didn't, but complain when he doesn't sign one that you want, no matter on his personal feelings about whether either should be done.
Click to expand...

It's been answered a hundred times. You just don't like the answer.

The President (As Commander in Chief) has certain responsibilities to honor the fallen and make sure their families are taking care of. This has nothing to do with your perception Obama is daddy and needs to give everyone food stamps and welfare

If The President is allowing military families of KIA to go without benefits and not providing funding for them to go the funerals (especially when The Government has taken in 50+ billion in taxes since the shutdown and is running at 85% capacity) then it's deliberate, evil and purposeful.

Why should these families go without their benefits while Obots legions of takers continue to use their Obamaphones, swipe their EBT cards and get their welfare checks?
 
Bronson said:
It's been answered a hundred times. You just don't like the answer.

The President (As Commander in Chief) has certain responsibilities to honor the fallen and make sure their families are taking care of. This has nothing to do with your perception Obama is daddy and needs to give everyone food stamps and welfare

If The President is allowing military families of KIA to go without benefits and not providing funding for them to go the funerals (especially when The Government has taken in 50+ billion in taxes since the shutdown and is running at 85% capacity) then it's deliberate, evil and purposeful.

Why should these families go without their benefits while Obots legions of takers continue to use their Obamaphones, swipe their EBT cards and get their welfare checks?
Click to expand...

The President, along with the entire government, has responsibilities toward all citizens.

And death benefits are not something that anyone should be relying on to come in so quickly. Most families in fact do not even know about these. The very fact that it had to be explained to many on here that there was a difference between a "death benefit" and "SGLI" proves that most here didn't even know it existed. They just found out that this was something that military family members got.
 
roguenuke said:
The President, along with the entire government, has responsibilities toward all citizens.

And death benefits are not something that anyone should be relying on to come in so quickly. Most families in fact do not even know about these. The very fact that it had to be explained to many on here that there was a difference between a "death benefit" and "SGLI" proves that most here didn't even know it existed. They just found out that this was something that military family members got.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the irrelevant post

Now tell everyone why Obama and Hagel allowed these families to go without their benefits on purpose. Why Obama still won't sign a bill that funds their benefits.

Thanks
 
Bronson said:
Thanks for the irrelevant post

Now tell everyone why Obama and Hagel allowed these families to go without their benefits on purpose. Why Obama still won't sign a bill that funds their benefits.

Thanks
Click to expand...

We shouldn't fund the government one bill at a time. It would mean that one group of people have control of this country by using blackmail and emotional appeals to convince others that the other side is harming this group or that.

But then again you are simply behind. Obama signed that bill yesterday, so maybe you should stop and check things before you run your mouth about things you don't even know.

Obama signs bill to pay death benefits to families of fallen soldiers | Fox News
 
roguenuke said:
We shouldn't fund the government one bill at a time. It would mean that one group of people have control of this country by using blackmail and emotional appeals to convince others that the other side is harming this group or that.

But then again you are simply behind. Obama signed that bill yesterday, so maybe you should stop and check things before you run your mouth about things you don't even know.

Obama signs bill to pay death benefits to families of fallen soldiers | Fox News
Click to expand...

Oh great good to hear Obama finally signed the bill that Jay Carnival barker claimed was "unnecessary"

Guess the optics looked bad enough for The Fuhrer to sign his name. Hilarious you're still here defending the fact he let the benefits lapse

Appropriations is the way Government used to be funded btw. The concept of a "continuing resolution" (blank check) is only recent and clearly not an efficient and responsible way to manage the people's money.
 
Bronson said:
Oh great good to hear Obama finally signed the bill that Jay Carnival barker claimed was "unnecessary"

Guess the optics looked bad enough for The Fuhrer to sign his name. Hilarious you're still here defending the fact he let the benefits lapse

Appropriations is the way Government used to be funded btw. The concept of a "continuing resolution" (blank check) is only recent and clearly not an efficient and responsible way to manage the people's money.
Click to expand...

It honestly wasn't "necessary". It was ensuring that people didn't look bad. If the House Republicans cared so much about it, then they should have ensured that it wasn't overlooked in the first bill that made sure the military got paid. The House has hundreds of Congressmen, vice one President. One of them should have caught it before it was passed, should we be looking to place blame as many currently are.
 
roguenuke said:
It honestly wasn't "necessary". It was ensuring that people didn't look bad. If the House Republicans cared so much about it, then they should have ensured that it wasn't overlooked in the first bill that made sure the military got paid. The House has hundreds of Congressmen, vice one President. One of them should have caught it before it was passed, should we be looking to place blame as many currently are.
Click to expand...

You just can't help yourself

It wasn't overlooked in the first bill. Only a dictator tyrant a%%hole would have interpreted it that way to where he didn't have to pay them

You're a shill for that dictator tyrant a%%hole

Nothing more needs to be said :2wave:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom