Really? They receive free health care, free meals and free training.

Ask Steve if he turned down the free health care while in the military and paid for his own health insurance. If that's not subsidized health care, then what is it?

By choosing the join the military Steve obligated the taxpayer to support their own health care, their family's health care as well as Steve's health care for 20 years.

By choosing the join the military Steve obligated the taxpayer to feed themselves, their own family as well as pay for Steve's meals.


In the real-world we need to train ourselves. I didn't walk into my employer and demand that they pay for a marketing degree. I had to pay for that myself. My employer didn't pay for computer courses. I had to learn Word and Excel myself. I had to pay for courses. Steve didn't. His training was paid for by the government, provided by the taxpayer.

How many people here go to work and receive free food every day? How many people here have had their employer pay for 20 years worth of education and training?

So why is Steve entitled to all of this taxpayer support but will support the vetoing of a bill for taxpayer subsidized health care for children? That's blatant hypocrisy. It would take an extreme bias to perceive it otherwise.