Republicans and democrats act the same way towards veterans as they do towards every domestic health care issue. Republicans attempt to spend less than is needed and democrats attempt to spend more than is needed.
Maybe my knowledge of the VA is just anecdotal... but I've got a sister-in-law (disabled during Desert Storm) an uncle (who's also my godfather) (wounded in Vietnam) and a brother-in-law (retired from the active Army) all of whom have seen the quality of the VA go to pot in the past 3-4 years. They sent my uncle to "pain management" courses when the pain in his shoulder became too much instead of surgery because surgery for this war injury wasn't funded.
The backlog for new veterans' attempting to get services is now at about half a year waiting time... to me, that's unconscionable. The reason for this is that the budgets passed during the past 4-5 years, even though the democrats have found ways to pile more money onto the amounts the President has put in his budgets, still haven't met the amounts determined by the VA to meet the needs it is expected to provide for. Even Principi told the OMB that his office needed $1.2 billion more than the President had put in his 2005 budget...
Has President Bush tried to "cut the VA budget?" No. Has his proposed budgets been less than was needed to fund veterans' health services? Yes. Has that meant some veterans have not received the health services their service warrants? Yes. Does this settle whether President Bush is a prudent fiscal budgeter or a veteran hater? No. It is simply what it is. I don't think President Bush hates veterans... but, at the same time, it is unwarranted praise to say he's done anything extra special for them as far as the VA budget is concerned.
I'm wondering though... do you have a link to Psychoblues' original statement?
