[LibertineR]

Thank you for confirming that there really is no difference between liberals and conservatives.

I guess you think that because its YOUR pork, that its better than the pork that comes from the liberal side?

Chu is right. No matter your military service, there was NEVER a promise of military retirement pay ON TOP of VA benefits. That would be double dipping.

Instead of trying to justify YOUR pork, just because our pretender president seems to have no problem giving pork to everyone else, why not get on the side of NO PORK for ANYONE?

[Militiaman7]

We newbie (member since June 11, 2002) now that you've put your 2 cents in why don't to tell us alittle about your self so we can craft a response to your idiotic rant.

[fogarty]

Did I say I was justifying pork? My point remains this: the President has gone literally hog-wild in spending money on pork on virtually every program. So much so, he is outdoing Clinton in his first two years as President.

So with all this spending going on, the ONE item he decides he wants to veto is an extra spending bit for veterans. Sure, makes a heck of lot of sense to me.

It is the height of hypocrisy for Chu to say "we need to tighten the reigns on spending" to justify axing this bill, meanwhile spending 100 of times more on third world condom giveaways and illegal immigrant subsidies.

And if you can't realize that, then you're not seeing the forest through the trees.