Excellent primer on new GI Bill education benefits that begin Aug. 1

[Okla-homey]

College without incurring student loan debt now possible for millions.

Check out this Tulsa World article. Especially cool is the fact a qualifying veteran can transfer the benefit to his/her spouse or child. Also very cool is the fact that more expensive private universities are leveling the field.

Think about it. Three years in uniform (regular or reserve component) now leads to a no-cost bachelors or graduate degree at virtually any university in the state for the veteran, his/her spouse or a child.


Colleges prepare for veterans

A new GI Bill and federal program are expected to boost veterans' enrollment starting this fall.

By SHANNON MUCHMORE World Staff Writer
Published: 7/12/2009 2:27 AM

The number of Oklahoma veterans attending college and universities is expected to increase by about 30 percent after the new Post 9/11 GI Bill goes into effect this fall.

Local private universities are taking part in a federal program under the new bill that will make it easier for veterans to attend the more expensive institutions.

The Yellow Ribbon program will help pay the difference between GI Bill benefits and tuition and fees for veterans attending The University of Tulsa and Oral Roberts University.

The Post 9/11 GI Bill, which goes into effect Aug. 1, is the first major rehaul of the law since World War II. Instead of a flat monthly stipend for veterans, the new bill will provide tuition money tied to each state's cost of public higher education.

"This is work I'm very happy to do," said Paula Hogard, TU's dean of lifelong learning. She helped get the university enrolled in the program and works to connect veterans with campus resources.

The benefits will vary widely from state to state. Students in Texas could qualify for as much as $20,000 a semester, while California students will get nothing for tuition, because public colleges there do not charge for enrollment. The amount Oklahoma veterans will receive starts at about $2,000a semester.

Up to 20 veterans choosing to attend TU will have their education paid for with the help of the Yellow Ribbon Program. The first 25 veterans at ORU will receive $4,000, leaving an average of $4,800 a semester for the veteran to pay out of pocket or with other scholarships.

Josh Butts, 27, will be using the new GI Bill and Yellow Ribbon Program to get his master's degree in fine arts at TU. Butts served in the Army from July 2000to August 2005, in Korea and Iraq. He achieved the rank of sergeant.

Butts signed up for the military, in part, for the GI Bill and other education opportunities.

"I came from a somewhat poor upbringing, and it was really my only viable option to make college affordable," he said.

He has family in Tulsa and said he chose TU because of the intimate environment and educational quality.

He got married about two weeks ago and just bought a house near the university. He has started his own graphic design company, JB Creative.

Butts is still learning about the new GI Bill but looks forward to the likelihood of more veterans on campus, he said.

"I can't imagine any organization at all not wanting veterans to be a part of what they're doing," he said.

About 10,000 veterans attended Oklahoma colleges and universities last school year. That number is expected to increase dramatically with increased benefits under the new bill, said Matt Stiner, who advises Tulsa Mayor Kathy Taylor on veterans affairs.

TU has about 60 veteran students, and ORU has about 36. Those numbers reflect enrollment under the old GI Bill.

Hogard said the new legislation is a much-needed update. She has five brothers and a nephew in the military and has worked closely with many of the TU veterans.

"They don't ask for a lot," she said. "It's very hard to get them to tell us they have a problem or an issue."

The new approach is a step in the right direction, and Hogard said she hopes TU will be able to continue or increase participation in the Yellow Ribbon Program.

"I think they (legislators) are on the right track," she said. "I just want them to stay on the right track."

Under the new bill, some veteran students will be able to qualify for a housing allowance and receive as much as $1,000 toward textbooks.

Another change in the new bill will allow those who serve in the National Guard or reserves to qualify for the same education benefits as active-duty soldiers. Oklahoma is one of the top-five states in Guard and reserve troops serving in Iraq, Stiner said.

All veterans will now be able to transfer these benefits to family members if they choose, he said.

"What if that Guard member doesn't want to go back to college? He can give it to his wife or his kids," he said.

TU just opened a veterans' resource center to help soldiers enroll and manage their education and benefits. The Albert E. Schwab Veterans Resource Center is named after Oklahoma's only Medal of Honor recipient, who attended TU before serving in World War II.

The center has a TV, computer, couch and microwave, and it is also filled with snacks and drinks free for veterans. A student association for veterans is also in the works.

Stiner said other universities should follow TU's example and set up places on campus where student veterans can feel comfortable and be assured they will receive help in graduating. Institutions need to get ready for an influx of student veterans, a special-needs population.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Facts about the Post 9/11 GI Bill
Takes effect Aug. 1

- Veterans who have served an aggregate 3 years of active duty after 9/11 are qualified

- Pays tuition and fees for qualified veterans to attend public colleges Pays the equivalent of tuition and fees at the most expensive public college in the state for veterans to attend private colleges (about $2,000 a year in Oklahoma)

- Allows private colleges that waive the remaining costs to be reimbursed by half

- Provides $1,000 a year for textbooks

- Guard and reserve members Receive the same benefits as activeduty soldiers

- Veterans can transfer their education benefits to family members

[StoopTroup]

So....can't the child get the same benefits if he or she serves in the Military?

[yermom]

maybe this way they will start as an officer ;)

[Okla-homey]

So....can't the child get the same benefits if he or she serves in the Military?

Of course, but this way, a military parent can give a precious gift to his or her child who might not otherwise be able to afford college without a crushing student loan debt load.

[StoopTroup]

Aren't they just giving tax money away to folks who never earned or worked for it?

[Frozen Sooner]

I would like to point out that John McCain opposed this addition to the GI Bill, abstained from voting on it, then showed up at the signing as an honored guest.

Then-Senators Clinton and Obama both voted for it. ;)

[SoonerStormchaser]

Where the hell was this BEFORE I racked up my loans at OU? Oh well...

[Okla-homey]

Aren't they just giving tax money away to folks who never earned or worked for it?

No. They earned it in spades by going into harm's way on behalf of the people of the United States. That's the greatest service a citizen can perform and it's only proper that the government make it possible for them to achieve thier educational goals. Also significantly, unlike most government bestowed benefits, the beneficiary doesn't get a dime unless he or she actually follows through and is admitted, enrolls in school, and performs academically. Otherwise, the money stays in the Treasury.

[Okla-homey]

Where the hell was this BEFORE I racked up my loans at OU? Oh well...

Oh hush. Now you can get a masters.

[yermom]

i think he means their kids Homey

[Okla-homey]

i think he means their kids Homey

Same diff. Spending it on their kids means they don't have to shell out of their pocket for little Johnny's schoolin'.

[yermom]

it's not quite the same, but it is pretty cool

have they talked about how they are going to pay for it?

[Frozen Sooner]

No. They earned it in spades by going into harm's way on behalf of the people of the United States. That's the greatest service a citizen can perform and it's only proper that the government make it possible for them to achieve thier educational goals.

Agreed. Not only that, but in many cases (particularly for NCOs) they did so at wages that work out on an hourly basis to be FAR below what they could have earned in the private sector with their skill set.

My list of things that should be provided to ANY honorably discharged combat veteran:

1. No-cost access to quality health care to include mental health care
2. A waiver of all tuition and fees to any public university.
3. Free registration of vehicles.
4. Waiver of sales tax.

If someone has taken a wound in service, I'd also include

5. Rescission of personal income taxes.

If you've taken a bullet for me, then you've done your part to serve the public good. No need to keep paying in.

If you're a distinguished medal winner, crap, I don't know. Exemption from property tax?

[Okla-homey]

it's not quite the same, but it is pretty cool

have they talked about how they are going to pay for it?

Pay for it? Pffft. Money has been little more than IOU's since we went off the gold standard.;)

But srsly, I have no idea of its cost, and I bet the gumbint doesn't either because it depends entirely on the number of vets who take the gubmint up on its offer. I bet participation will be pitifully low. I was always amazed how many troops didn't take advantage of the tuition assistance available to active-duty troops.

[Okla-homey]

Agreed. Not only that, but in many cases (particularly for NCOs) they did so at wages that work out on an hourly basis to be FAR below what they could have earned in the private sector with their skill set.

My list of things that should be provided to ANY honorably discharged combat veteran:

1. No-cost access to quality health care to include mental health care
2. A waiver of all tuition and fees to any public university.
3. Free registration of vehicles.
4. Waiver of sales tax.

If someone has taken a wound in service, I'd also include

5. Rescission of personal income taxes.

If you've taken a bullet for me, then you've done your part to serve the public good. No need to keep paying in.

If you're a distinguished medal winner, crap, I don't know. Exemption from property tax?

I would add to that list: two votes per man.:D

[StoopTroup]

Same diff. Spending it on their kids means they don't have to shell out of their pocket for little Johnny's schoolin'.

But aren't the Kids gonna be better off if they learn how to do it on their own?

[SoonerStormchaser]

Oh hush. Now you can get a masters.

Actually...I've got full tuition assistance to cover that when I start in January (and my goal is to finish it by the time I'm a 2-year Captain).
Maybe I can use the $$ to get a PPL...:rolleyes:

[soonerhubs]

I personally view this as one of the wisest investments made in America.

[King Crimson]

sounds like socialism to me.

[Okla-homey]

sounds like socialism to me.

Any program that facilitates veterans' conversion to civilian leadership positions in business, government, education and the professions is great for America. In fact, I can't think of a single enterprise, for profit or otherwise, that wouldn't benefit by having a few folks within the management of the organization who have wielded armed force abroad and received enemy fire in the service of their country.

[Okla-homey]

But aren't the Kids gonna be better off if they learn how to do it on their own?

nope. The difference is, now Sgt. Schmedlapp will be able to send his kid to college and pay her way like Lt. Col. Homey did. And that is good for America.

[King Crimson]

ok, sounds like martial rule or privilege to me. heh.

kidding, my dad was a ranger and my g-paw has a purple heart and air corps medal of honor....and i told you before, he flew Ploesti. he was one of 5 brothers who fought in both theaters in WW 2. they all came back (just luck), and all were decorated. turns out, the US could really use some Okies who *already* knew how to shoot guns. they don't make too many movies about those guys, just the jersey poets and ny city kids whose wise-cracking is how it all went.

i don't think many people ought to be spouting off against big government 24/7 about every little thing....when this kind of thing is in place. i don't draw a qualitative distinction just because it suits me. dig?

[Okla-homey]

ok, sounds like martial rule or privilege to me. heh.

kidding, my dad was a ranger and my g-paw has a purple heart and air corps medal of honor....and i told you before, he flew Ploesti. he was one of 5 brothers who fought in both theaters in WW 2. they all came back (just luck), and all were decorated. turns out, the US could really use some Okies who *already* knew how to shoot guns. they don't make too many movies about those guys, just the jersey poets and ny city kids whose wise-cracking is how it all went.

i don't think many people ought to be spouting off against big government 24/7 about every little thing....when this kind of thing is in place. i don't draw a qualitative distinction just because it suits me. dig?

I dig, but I also distinguish between the government repaying a debt to people who have made great sacrifices in its service from the government simply creating new entitlements.

[King Crimson]

I dig, but I also distinguish between the government paying a debt to people who have made great sacrifices in its service from the government creating new entitlements.

new entitlements is loaded language. a lot of people choose the military because they have no other option, it's better than their existing class position, they want the benefits, it wasn't war time, etc.

it's a career. i can find all kinds of articles about how as the economy goes down, military enlistment goes up. it's protected money that doesn't suffer the vicissitudes of the market as much as other professions.

i respect people's service, i just find it somewhat contradictory to see many of the military contingent at the SO "expert" their reason how so many other professions don't deserve this or that, or how evil unions are, or how so and so is stealing from taxpayers....or this or that group can't make it in the free-maket.

who pays their checks?

[StoopTroup]

nope. The difference is, now Sgt. Schmedlapp will be able to send his kid to college and pay her way like Lt. Col. Homey did. And that is good for America.

As a tax payer...shouldn't my kids have the same opportunity then?

[Okla-homey]

As a tax payer...shouldn't my kids have the same opportunity then?

Easy. Just stroll down to your local recruiter and tell him you want to shoulder a rifle and stand-to. In only three short years, your kids will have the same opportunity.

[Okla-homey]

new entitlements is loaded language. a lot of people choose the military because they have no other option, it's better than their existing class position, they want the benefits, it wasn't war time, etc.

it's a career. i can find all kinds of articles about how as the economy goes down, military enlistment goes up. it's protected money that doesn't suffer the vicissitudes of the market as much as other professions.

i respect people's service, i just find it somewhat contradictory to see many of the military contingent at the SO "expert" their reason how so many other professions don't deserve this or that, or how evil unions are, or how so and so is stealing from taxpayers....or this or that group can't make it in the free-maket.

who pays their checks?

apples and oranges. People choose serve for lots of reasons. The thing is, people who look at it as just a job usually don't last, and they hardly ever make good soldiers, sailors, airmen or Marines.

[King Crimson]

apples and oranges.

see but that's all you have to fall back on....the "qualitative difference" argument. so, you deserve and everyone else is a scumbag. there is no other social "good" that isn't the military that deserves public funding. everything else is free-market.

and, you maintain the right to comment on all other sectors of jobs as "stealing from the taxpayers" or "big government" with expertise but no one can criticize the military (because "they don't know"). it's BS.

[StoopTroup]

Homey....I did that in 1978.

As I was hit by a car when I was 10...I couldn't pass the physical. Even if they have changed their requirements now....I'm to old to enlist. Believe me...if they would have taken me...I would have loved to help our Military.

I think you should get your deals cut up front before enlisting not have them tagged on after you've put in your required agreed upon time. What your talking about are simply entitlements.

I don't mind doing what it takes to keep our military strong...I think giving a kid a free ride he or she didn't earn is going to drive kids away from serving. Eventually we'll be paying way to much for what used to be viewed as a sacrifice to get folks to enlist.

It just seems like a bad idea to me.

[King Crimson]

apples and oranges. People choose serve for lots of reasons. The thing is, people who look at it as just a job usually don't last, and they hardly ever make good soldiers, sailors, airmen or Marines.

you've edited here. and by good soldiers i take you to mean "professional soldiers" since Vietnam. because, we have a whole pantheon of cultural production (band of Brothers, Longest Day) and ancestors that speak that non-professional soldiers can be pretty good.

i really don't see that (as you frame it) as part of the point. in fact, it proves mine. this is not a meditation on what makes a "good soldier" but more that there are reasons to join for those who aren't. and those are taxpayers paid bennies. in any other scheme, on the SO, we'd hear long and hard about stealing from the taxpayers and big government with the highest and loudest sanctimony.

[SoonerStormchaser]

Any program that facilitates veterans' conversion to civilian leadership positions in business, government, education and the professions is great for America. In fact, I can't think of a single enterprise, for profit or otherwise, that wouldn't benefit by having a few folks within the management of the organization who have wielded armed force abroad and received enemy fire in the service of their country.

IMO, it should be a requirement to be Prez...if you wanna be CinC, you should have some knowledge of how things work in the arena of the men and women you are commanding.
But that's just me.

[Okla-homey]

see but that's all you have to fall back on....the "qualitative difference" argument. so, you deserve and everyone else is a scumbag. there is no other social "good" that isn't the military that deserves public funding. everything else is free-market.

and, you maintain the right to comment on all other sectors of jobs as "stealing from the taxpayers" or "big government" with expertise but no one can criticize the military (because "they don't know"). it's BS.

There are most certainly other "social goods that deserve public funding." I think public or private health care professionals who agree to work in rural and/or remote areas for a set period of years deserve education reimbursement. I think the fact federally guarenteed student loan forgiveness is possible for people who agree to work in certain public sector jobs for ten years is a good thing.

The thing is KC, my belief that so much of the stuff the government does should be in the private sector is grounded in my basic belief that government's role in our lives has become absurdly swollen over the last century. The federal government was established to provide for the common defense and to administer a national transportation infrastructure and economic common market. The farther afield government gets from those things, the more likely such involvment is wasteful. I also beleive the government only does two things better than the private sector; 1) fight wars, and; 2) collect taxes.

[Okla-homey]

Homey....I did that in 1978.

I think you should get your deals cut up front before enlisting not have them tagged on after you've put in your required agreed upon time. What your talking about are simply entitlements.

I don't mind doing what it takes to keep our military strong...I think giving a kid a free ride he or she didn't earn is going to drive kids away from serving. Eventually we'll be paying way to much for what used to be viewed as a sacrifice to get folks to enlist.

It just seems like a bad idea to me.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this. I think its a well-earned benefit in partial compensation for agreeing to do something 95% of the population simply will not do and then doing so honorably. The thing is, and I'm reasonably certain of this, unfortunately, the majority of those eligible won't take advantage of the program. I also think my kid would argue she sacrificed herself a bit being a military brat. Especially that cross-country move between her sophomore and junior year in high school. All tolled, she went to eight different schools during her twelve years of primary and secondary education and was essentailly fatherless for several months at a time every couple years or so. Ditto my spouse. That's not to say the American people owe them anything, but it is to say it isn't all rainbows and cotton candy for military kids and spouses who may now have the benefit passed to them by a spouse or parent. Remember, its a finite amount of educational assistance. The vet either uses it himself, or passes it to his spouse or child, or a combination thereof.

Read this and tell me you honestly still think this thing is an entitlement:


Paying for College with a Tour in Afghanistan

The new Post-9/11 GI Bill could mean more veterans start enrolling in higher education, from community colleges to Ivy League institutions.

By Kay Steiger
June 29, 2009

The original Montgomery GI Bill funded the educations of 14 Nobel Prize winners, three Supreme Court justices, three presidents, a dozen senators, and two dozen Pulitzer Prize winners, according to Edward Hume’s book on the history of the GI Bill. But a recent study by shows that because the buying power of the GI Bill has diminished over time, current benefits are most often applied to community colleges.

Those statistics could change this fall as increased benefits under a new version of the GI Bill will help veterans cover a larger portion of the cost of four-year colleges and universities. The Post-9/11 GI Bill, sponsored by Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) and signed into law by President Bush last June, is designed to cover the full cost of veterans attending in-state public institutions. The legislation is a major step in making the GI Bill progressive again, but it still has some major kinks that need to be worked out.

“What I think is going to happen is not that there’s going to be a mass exodus from community colleges, but rather people are going to finish their four years of school,” says Patrick Campbell, legislative director of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, a lobbying group that counts more than 125,000 veterans and supporters among its members. “Instead of getting their associate’s at a community college and then stopping, they’re going to move from there to a four-year university, or some will just go straight to a four-year university to begin with.”

Veterans currently make up about 3 percent of all undergraduates, but under the Post-9/11 GI Bill, that number may increase. Veterans are now eligible for the maximum benefit of full in-state tuition coverage after 36 cumulative months of active duty; a lesser benefit is available to those who have served less active duty time. For the many veterans who have served multiple tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, this means they’ll be better able to afford a four-year degree. Veterans can also collect on the new GI Bill benefit for up to 15 years after they are discharged from service.

These new benefits are more generous than the old Montgomery GI Bill, which paid veterans a standard rate based on time served. For instance, individuals who served more than three years in the Army received a standard fee to cover tuition, fees, housing, and books. But this payment had several problems: It often did not cover the cost of attending a four-year institution, failed to capture geographic cost differences, and required congressional action to adjust the benefit to keep up with increasing costs, leaving benefits subject to political pressures.

Instead, the new GI Bill is dynamic. For example, a veteran of more than three years living in *Texas* could enroll in the University of *Texas* at Austin (or any other less-expensive public college in the state) and would have the Veterans Administration (VA) cover all of his or her tuition this year, a $4,477 benefit plus fees. The new GI Bill also provides separate housing benefits, calculated based on cost of living in the area, and up to $1,000 a year for textbooks. Veterans attending an out-of-state college, private institution, or graduate program with higher tuition will receive a benefit equal to the cost of their state’s most expensive public school, but are responsible for making up the difference.

Private and out-of-state colleges want to attract veterans as well, but doing so requires lessening the burden of the finding thousands of dollars to pay tuition not covered by the new GI Bill. The Yellow Ribbon Program is designed to help close that gap for some veterans. “We felt it important to put in place some measure that would provide sufficient funding to enable veterans to consider private colleges and universities as well as out of state charges at public institutions,” outgoing Dartmouth President James Wright said this February at the annual meeting for the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities (NAICU) in Washington, D.C. “We wanted to give them as many options as possible, just as the 1944 GI Bill and the Vietnam era bill did for those veterans.”

Veterans can always apply their benefits to a more expensive out-of-state or private college, but the Yellow Ribbon Program is for colleges and universities that want to use institutional scholarships to make up the difference for veterans. (A state-by-state list of participating schools can be found here). NAICU, which lobbies for private, non-profit colleges and universities, estimates that “at least 575 private, nonprofit colleges and universities have submitted Yellow Ribbon participation agreements,” according to a statement they released this week.

“These numbers really are pretty excellent for the first year of a new program,” says Susan Hattan, senior consultant at NAICU. “We’ve been really pleased with the results.”

Still, the way the VA calculated benefits for the GI Bill and the Yellow Ribbon Program can have an adverse effect on some veterans. California is particularly problematic because it has a unique way of calculating tuition. Because California public schools don’t charge tuition (instead charging thousands of dollars in “fees”), the applied tuition benefit to veterans attending private California schools is essentially $0.

“The way that VA came up with these [figures] is arbitrary,” Campbell says. “They used an arbitrary rule that was not in the legislation or in the regulations. That ruling needs to change. We believe we need to create a fair, equitable, and generous benefit that applies across the board.”

This isn’t the first time national higher education benefits had to undergo changes to adapt to California’s unique tuition system. The Higher Education Act even had to amend its language to say tuition and fees were the same thing in California, Hattan says. But the GI Bill didn’t explicitly address California schools. Because of the disparities in the way the VA calculated the benefits, highlighted by the problem in California, it’s likely that the legislation will be opened up again for a public policy debate.

A second concern about the new GI Bill is that benefits can’t be applied retroactively to classes taken before Aug. 1, 2009. For veterans such as Campbell, who recently finished his law degree, this means he will derive little advantage from the new benefits. “I owe over $100,000 in student loan debt and that debt is going to be with me for the next 10 to 15 years,” he says. “Of course I wish I had that [new] GI Bill. … I’d be able to look at jobs that I’m not able to look at now.” (The ability to transfer the new GI Bill benefit to spouse or child also isn’t retroactive.)

While still imperfect, the new GI Bill is an important step to finally helping them keep up with the skyrocketing costs of higher education, especially by encouraging more veterans to complete a four-year education. Perhaps the Millennial generation of veterans, thanks to this legislation, will produce more Nobel Prize winners.

Kay Steiger is the associate editor of Campus Progress.

[King Crimson]

let's pretend there was a mandate for a public media set of networks across various platforms (net, TV, radio) that was insulated from the pressures of the marketplace (no infotainment or sensationalism) and undue political manipulation by a public guarantee of funding regardless of party in the executive office or legislative branch majority.

this would be straight news, deadly boring as Charlie Rose for anyone born after about 1980 but objective insofar as it's possible and keeping with 4th estate functions to be a little adversarial to any sitting government in the classic Liberal (with a big L) tradition of the Enlightenment....with a mission statement to provide the crucial political communications that make or break open government and commit to the idea of an informed, active and educated populace in the "Open Society".

would you be in favor of that? because, it's clear that throwing the realm of political information to the market produces a lot LCD stuff and the worst of shameless party hackery.

[King Crimson]

i'd also say that it's debatable whether the public sector fights wars better or more often than the private. and not only in the sense of framing and executing the question of "why" we fight.

[Okla-homey]

let's pretend there was a mandate for a public media set of networks across various platforms (net, TV, radio) that was insulated from the pressures of the marketplace (no infotainment or sensationalism) and undue political manipulation by a public guarantee of funding regardless of party in the executive office or legislative branch majority.

this would be straight news, deadly boring as Charlie Rose for anyone born after about 1980 but objective insofar as it's possible and keeping with 4th estate functions to be a little adversarial in the classic Liberal (with a big L) tradition of the Enlightenment....with a mission statement to provide the crucial political communications that make or break open government and commit to the idea of an informed, active and educated populace in the "Open Society".

would you be in favor of that? because, it's clear that throwing the realm of political information to the market produces a lot LCD stuff and the worst of shameless party hackery.

No. We don't need a BBC in the US.

[King Crimson]

No. We don't need a BBC in the US.

it WAS kind of a trick question, but from now on you've lost your right to complain about the media or the crap on TV since you've re-affirmed the "market will decide" principle of consumer demand. "we" are the enemy, if it's on TV it's because that's what we want. no one else to blame. the consumer is always right. ratings=news.

:D

[Okla-homey]

it WAS kind of a trick question, but from now on you've lost your right to complain about the media or the crap on TV since you've re-affirmed the "market will decide" principle of consumer demand. "we" are the enemy, if it's on TV it's because that's what we want. no one else to blame. the consumer is always right. ratings=news.

:D

Horse-hockey. The consumer is most definitely not always right. Consumers buy GM cars, watch daytime TV and reality shows. How stupid is that?:D

[King Crimson]

Horse-hockey. The consumer is most definitely not always right. Consumers buy GM cars, watch daytime TV and reality shows. How stupid is that?:D

pretty stupid. but, yer rights to curmudgeonly attitudes are rescinded.

the market will decide.

just on the by and by, i didn't think Public Enemies was very good. i wanted to like it and it "looked" pretty nifty but nothing really happens in it. i saw it in the afternoon maybe Wednesday of last week and forgot that i had seen it later in the day. wasn't a real memorable 2 1/2 hours.

[AggieTool]

IMO, it should be a requirement to be Prez...if you wanna be CinC, you should have some knowledge of how things work in the arena of the men and women you are commanding.
But that's just me.

I used to think the same way until I took a second look at what our founding fathers intended.

The whole point of our system was to NOT have the military influence the presidency. Rather...the other way around.

That's why we have SEC DEF, JCS etc.

But if we do have a vet as president, I'd rather they have served honorably (in spite of what the missing paperwork says).;)