This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Reality Check

  • National Cemeteries and Caskets

    I ran across a story today that leaves me with decidedly mixed feelings.

    Here’s a summary: some years ago a World War II veteran – Lawrence Davis, Jr. – died in Florida. He apparently had no family willing to make funeral arrangements for him.

    As a World War II veteran, Davis was authorized to be buried in a National Cemetery. VA regulations and Federal law in effect then and today allowed the VA to bury him. But those same laws and regulations did not allow (or require) the VA to provide him a casket.

    So Davis was buried without a casket. In Florida, that’s apparently still allowed; I don’t know how common that is in other states. He was later honored, per the cemetery’s policy, at a periodic ceremony held to honor veterans who die and are buried with no family present.

    The story has sparked predictable outrage. As the cited article notes, a bill has been introduced in Congress (the Dignified Burial of Veterans Act of 2012) mandating the VA “review its burial standards” and authorizing the VA to purchase caskets (or urns) for all veterans buried in National Cemeteries.

    As I said, I have mixed feelings.

    Obviously, everyone – veterans and non-veterans alike – deserve a dignified burial. But is it really the Federal government’s responsibility to provide a casket for each and every veteran who chooses to be buried in a National Cemetery? And what is inherently disrespectful about burial sans casket?

    I’ve also got serious concerns about how the bill “fixing” this will be implemented and funded if passed. What will the standards be for such government-provided caskets – and what will they cost? (I kinda doubt they’ll end up being the proverbial old-time “pine box.”) And just what else in the VA budget will get cut to free up the funds to buy them? ‘Cause if you think the VA budget will be increased to fund this – well, in that case I happen to have a bridge I’d like to talk to you about selling . . . .

    As a Veteran, my heart tells me the bill proposed to “fix” this is a good thing. But as a believer in limited government – and a fiscal conservative – my head tells me this could be a really bad idea. And it also tells me that maybe we’re trying to “fix” a problem that isn’t really a problem at all.

    What say you all?

  • Reality Check

    I seem to be at nearly 100% accurate at stating the obvious.

    Well, obvious to most readers here, at least. My only saving grace is that I’ve been doing it for quite a while.

    Aside: I rarely watch videos on-line because I’m on a satellite ISP.  So have probably missed someone already posting this here?

    Got this from MaryAnn on FB.

    Krauthammer: Obama military reforms a ‘road map of American decline’

     “This budget strategy is a road map of American decline,” Krauthammer said. “It is going to reduce our capacity. It does exactly what the president had said he was not going to do, which is it will adapt our capacity and our strategies to fit a budget.”

    One of the premises of the Obama strategy is the notion that the United States won’t be involved in another large-scale ground war. Krauthammer noted that such wars aren’t always planned for.

    “Sometimes a Pearl Harbor happens or an invasion of South Korea or a 9/11. Then ground war is thrust upon you. It’s not as if it’s a choice,” he said. “This is a budget that is going to reduce American capacity. It will make it extremely hard to carry on the role that we have for 70 years.”

    I sometimes earnestly disagree with Krauthammer, but not this time.  On the other hand? YMMV!