Obama reelection campaign to target a new voter set: militar

Obama reelection campaign to target a new voter set: military families

President Obama and the first lady will greet soldiers at Fort Stewart in Hinesville, Ga., on Friday at a time when his reelection campaign is focused more intently than ever on a novel and potentially fruitful voter set: military families.

On Thursday, Vice President Biden delivered a speech in which he made clear that the president’s record winding down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan — contrasted with Republican Mitt Romney’s position of wanting to stay longer in both countries — would be a central argument of the reelection campaign.

The message from Obama and Biden is clear: They will campaign on the president’s foreign policy record and actions to bolster services for veterans while aggressively criticizing Romney on the same subjects — and issuing pointed examples of the Republican’s lack of proposals to assist returning veterans and their families.

“Governor Romney is counting on our collective amnesia,” Biden said in a campaign speech in New York on Thursday billed as the first of many that will highlight what advisers deem the shortcomings of Romney’s foreign policy proposals. ...

" ... and it sure takes attention off our miserable failures on Jobs, the Economy, the Debt, ..."

Damn, they're living in their own little bubble. Veteran services have really gone to shit for the not-so-politically-connected.

In a related story, Republicans will target unemployed urban black youth.

Damn, they're living in their own little bubble. Veteran services have really gone to shit for the not-so-politically-connected.

Nice VA you got there, shame if something happened to it. But if you vote the right way.....

Damn, they're living in their own little bubble. Veteran services have really gone to shit for the not-so-politically-connected.

When I see commercials for the Wounded Warriors organization, I can't help but wonder why it is necessary. I thought GIs wounded in combat were taken care of by military facilities and vet services. Why fund a parallel organization plus pay taxes for the same thing?

Damn, they're living in their own little bubble. Veteran services have really gone to shit for the not-so-politically-connected.

When I see commercials for the Wounded Warriors organization, I can't help but wonder why it is necessary. I thought GIs wounded in combat were taken care of by military facilities and vet services. Why fund a parallel organization plus pay taxes for the same thing?

Because the VA is incompetent at best and mendacious at worst.

Damn, they're living in their own little bubble. Veteran services have really gone to shit for the not-so-politically-connected.

Nice VA you got there, shame if something happened to it. But if you vote the right way.....

Nice VA? On what planet?

Damn, they're living in their own little bubble. Veteran services have really gone to shit for the not-so-politically-connected.

Nice VA you got there, shame if something happened to it. But if you vote the right way.....

Nice VA? On what planet?

Tells you how out of touch Obama really is!

Obama signs executive order to protect troops from for-profit college deceptive practices
The troops cheer!



Yeah, riight.

I don't understand why so many people demonize "for-profit" schools. They are no better or worse than non-profits, IMO. And because they are in it for the money, they have an incentive to turn out a superior product geared toward real-world applications.

My wife earned her doctorate from a for-profit school (Walden), and considering the number of teaching positions she holds (at mostly non-profits) she got her money's worth.

If you're in the market to get an education, one would think you'd do a bit of research to determine the quality of the school you're considering.

I don't understand why so many people demonize "for-profit" schools. They are no better or worse than non-profits, IMO. And because they are in it for the money, they have an incentive to turn out a superior product geared toward real-world applications.

My wife earned her doctorate from a for-profit school (Walden), and considering the number of teaching positions she holds (at mostly non-profits) she got her money's worth.

If you're in the market to get an education, one would think you'd do a bit of research to determine the quality of the school you're considering.

Ready, fire, aim!

This will snag the military vote!

Higher fees for Tricare still on the table

The House armed services subcommittee on military personnel has refused to give the Obama administration new authority it sought to phase in higher Tricare fees on military retirees over the next four years and to peg future Tricare fee hikes to medical inflation nationwide.

But in marking up its version of the fiscal 2013 defense authorization bill, the subcommittee did not adopt discreet language, as it has in the past years, that would block any Tricare fee increases.

It also did not include language, as it has previously, that would prohibit the Department of Defense from using existing authority to raise co-pays on prescription drugs for dependents and retirees who use neighborhood pharmacies or the Tricare mail order pharmacy program.

This will snag the military vote!

Do you have to make a pun out of everything you post?

I don't understand why so many people demonize "for-profit" schools. They are no better or worse than non-profits, IMO. And because they are in it for the money, they have an incentive to turn out a superior product geared toward real-world applications.

My wife earned her doctorate from a for-profit school (Walden), and considering the number of teaching positions she holds (at mostly non-profits) she got her money's worth.

If you're in the market to get an education, one would think you'd do a bit of research to determine the quality of the school you're considering.

For profit schools are a mixed bag. Some are vocational. Some offer advanced degrees. My big beef is the business model of many vocationals. Their fees are often equal to the maximum amount that can be borrowed as a federal student loan. And these are for programs to get some type of certification. For example, my wife wanted training as a pharmacy technician. This program is not offered in any state school. None of the community colleges offer it. So you have to go to a private school.

They wanted ~$12K for a 6 month program that leads to certification. And certification is now a requirement in FL. It just happens that such tuition is about equal to the max you could get for a student loan. She did find an on line program that was $600. The only difference was that she did not get a student rotation through various working pharmacies. Rather, she got her certification and volunteered in a hospital pharmacy and was then offered a job.

My point is that there are a lot of occupations that require training and certification but the state schools won't touch such subjects. But the private schools are taking advantage of people by getting them to take out 5 figure loans for training in jobs that pay only $10-14 per hour.

I firmly believe that this practice is a big contributor to the bubble in higher education. This training isn't politically correct at government schools. Those schools push useless liberal arts programs. By relying on federal loans for tuition, schools get paid and the financial risk is entirely born by the students. Its the same kick-the-can loan system that lead to the housing collapse. The people being paid by loan money have no skin in the game.

I don't understand why so many people demonize "for-profit" schools. They are no better or worse than non-profits, IMO. And because they are in it for the money, they have an incentive to turn out a superior product geared toward real-world applications.

My wife earned her doctorate from a for-profit school (Walden), and considering the number of teaching positions she holds (at mostly non-profits) she got her money's worth.

If you're in the market to get an education, one would think you'd do a bit of research to determine the quality of the school you're considering.

profit is evil. Anything nice is evil. We must all sacrifice for the common good.

This will snag the military vote!

Do you have to make a pun out of everything you post?

It's purely voluntary.

This will snag the military vote!

Do you have to make a pun out of everything you post?

One could only hope.

I don't understand why so many people demonize "for-profit" schools. They are no better or worse than non-profits, IMO. And because they are in it for the money, they have an incentive to turn out a superior product geared toward real-world applications.

My wife earned her doctorate from a for-profit school (Walden), and considering the number of teaching positions she holds (at mostly non-profits) she got her money's worth.

If you're in the market to get an education, one would think you'd do a bit of research to determine the quality of the school you're considering.

My husband got a MBA from a certified for-profit school; government loves advanced degrees and treats them all equally without any regard for what topic they are in.

The school had a longstanding physical presence since the 70s, so we thought it was more reputable than the others. But half the people in his class could barely type, spell, or write, and yet I'm sure they got their MBAs in the end.

But, I did go to a non-profit liberal arts college that had a good reputation in liberal arts fields, and I routinely had my intelligence insulted there, too. It wasn't any more challenging. Professors never appreciate critical thinking. Suck their ideological cock, and they won't factcheck it and will go much easier on spelling.

The general population isn't too bright in the first place. It shows up more in online classes where a premium is placed on "participation," exposing typing and spelling errors to the world in general.

The general population isn't too bright in the first place.

Why, half of them have an IQ below 100! It's disgraceful, bless their hearts.

Damn, they're living in their own little bubble. Veteran services have really gone to shit for the not-so-politically-connected.

When I see commercials for the Wounded Warriors organization, I can't help but wonder why it is necessary. I thought GIs wounded in combat were taken care of by military facilities and vet services. Why fund a parallel organization plus pay taxes for the same thing?

Because the VA is incompetent at best and mendacious at worst.

Hey, it's a goobermint run health care system...how bad can it be?

Because the VA is incompetent at best and mendacious at worst.

Hey, it's a goobermint run health care system...how bad can it be?

We don't know. It's not done yet.

Hey, it's a goobermint run health care system...how bad can it be? /sarcasm

That better?

Hey, it's a goobermint run health care system...how bad can it be? /sarcasm

That better?

<chortle>
He got it, C/RJ, he got it.

Because the VA is incompetent at best and mendacious at worst.

Hey, it's a goobermint run health care system...how bad can it be?

We don't know. It's not done yet.

well, I do know, from experience. Go thee for a root canal without a painkiller. And when they break a hand drill bit in your root canal and cement the broken off piece in there, you will know it in full detail, just like I do.

Jimmuh tried to get the military vote in 1980 by arranging a large pay increase for military members. Most military members said "Thank you very much", and voted for Reagan anyway. As it turned out, much of the pay increase was counteracted by increases in costs for goods on military bases within a few years. Before the big pay increase, items at the BX (PX) and commissary cost roughly one half what civilians paid. A few years later, these prices had risen to almost on par with costs to civilians.

I started my military career in 1980, and I think old timers told me costs had been rising for a while before that. But I think the price increases accelerated after the pay raise.