HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » HAB911 » Journal
Page: 1

HAB911

Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: Atlanta, Gerogia
Home country: USA! USA! USA!
Current location: Tampa, Florida
Member since: Wed Sep 7, 2016, 06:45 AM
Number of posts: 7,926

About Me

Alias - HABanero(passion) E-9-1-1(career, retired telco engineering) HHC 3rd Bde, 2nd Inf Div, Korea DMZ HHC 197th Bde, 3rd Army, Ft. Benning Ga

Journal Archives

GOP senators block bill expanding care for veterans exposed to toxins

Republican lawmakers blocked passage of a bill in the U.S. Senate Wednesday that expands healthcare coverage for military veterans who were exposed to toxins and burn pits during their service.

All Democrats and eight Republicans voted for the Sgt. 1st Class Heath Robinson Honoring Our PACT Act, but the 55 yes votes fell short of the 60 needed to end a filibuster in the Senate. Three Senators did not vote.

The PACT Act, which the House passed earlier this month, would enable additional healthcare coverage for more than three million veterans who were exposed to toxic burn pits and Vietnam-era veterans exposed to the deadly herbicide Agent Orange.

https://news.yahoo.com/gop-senators-block-bill-expanding-032616654.html


February 2011, the Veterans Administration published its final regulation regarding the PRESUMPTION OF HERBICIDE EXPOSURE (AGENT ORANGE) as it pertains to veterans who served in or near the Korean DMZ during the Vietnam War. Specifically, VA now PRESUMES HERBICIDE EXPOSURE for any veteran who served on the DMZ between September 1, 1967 and August 31, 1971.

I was assigned to HHC 3rd Brigade 2ID from March 1970 to March 1971 on the DMZ. I am awaiting confirmation of prostate cancer.

Time for my two cents worth

By default the approval mechanism for entries falls mostly on the winner of the previous contest with input from the public facing moderator. As the winner of a few contests, I have had the occasion to deny entries because the SUBJECT matter did not qualify, not because I deemed the vision and method of the photographer to not be to my liking.

My personal opinion, and I have stated this many times, is that the subjects listed should be open to the ARTIST'S interpretation and vision. The subsequent judging by the larger population of the General Discussion Board is then responsible for determining the applicability of that vision to the subject listed and if that population doesn't like the entry they are free not to vote for it. But to be told that one's vision is not photography is ludicrous.

I understand not everyone holds this opinion and would want a more strict interpretation of subject matter, and might feel any change to the photo as received by the sensor or surface of the film to be an abomination. I disagree however. Would you stand before a painting and turn to the artist and admonish them for using the blue and not red and claim this is not painting?

I pre-approved Andy's photo and I stand behind my decision.


ADDENDUM FOR SECOND THOUGHTS

the winner of the previous contest is free to stipulate anything they want, i.e. no photoshop, major photoshop only and let your freak flag fly, (the kids don't still say that do they?) no noise cleanup, virtually anything.
thank you

LOL, Morton's DC YELP page


Go to Page: 1