I fired the DAV yesterday

by the Major

Yes, I have had it. Working with the VA Regional Office (VARO) is bad enough, but the Disabled American Veterans (DAV) are  just as bad. What follows in the laundry list of reasons I fired them.

Lets start off by saying something good about the DAV. As service organizations go, it is one of the best, perhaps even the best. It's national service officers are trained by the VA during a two year training period.

The DAV is one of the few organizations that has access to VA claims data. The DAV is automated and networked into part of the VA claims system.That is the good news.

The best the DAV and other service organization can do with service members claims after the second level BVA or DRO review is about 30 per cent success rate. That means less than 1:3 claims are approved by the VA even with DAV or other service organization assistance. The DAV may be satisfied with this percentage, but veterans should not. A thirty percent success rate is hardly impressive.

The DAV seems to be too chummy with the VA. We recently met with  a DAV National Service Officer (NSO) who listened to our complaints about the VA. We strongly hinted we were about to bolt to an attorney, but the NSO suggested attorneys wouldn't have any better luck with the claim. The second time we met him he repeated verbatim the same pabulum we got back from the VA after a congressional inquiry.

The NSO also suggested we were just two retired people who spend all day working on our claim. This was the wrong thing to say to clients, particularly when my spouse works and I am politically active. I spend more time on my FB page and blog than on my VA claim. Perhaps someday that NSO will see this article and get a clue!

The DAV's activities are, for the most part, invisible to the veteran. The DAV rarely advises veterans of actions it takes on their behalf. If you fax or mail a letter to the DAV, you might get a letter back acknowledging the receipt and filing, if you are are lucky. They will also advise you of any hearings with the Decision Review Officer (DRO) or Board of veteran Appeals (BVA). That 's about it.

On well known VA blogger describes service organizations as mail rooms.He makes a good point.   

The NSO's abilities vary widely. There are NSOs and senior NSO's. The senior NSOs are excellent but most of the other NSO's have wide variations in ability. In the case of the St. Petersburg VARO, NSOs rarely last more than a year. In an 11 year period, my spouse estimates we have had a minimum of 30 NSOs. Every 90--120 days, the local DAV changes the NSO for a vet based on his or her Social Security number.

We recently found out that the St.Pete DAV has never been a training facility. This was a cover story for some sort of a management problem in this office for a long time. Of interest, the number two supervisor in the St. Pete DAV had been replaced in the last couple of months. A 17-year senior NSO also resigned.

Not only do the NSOs rarely correspond with vets, it is not common for them to return phone calls either. I can recall perhaps 4 times that the DAV returned a phone call in past 11 years. When my wife thought I was dieing in a hospital, she called 4 times and the St. Pete DAV never returned any of the calls. 

When my wife thought I was dieing in a hospital , she called 4 times and the St. Pete DAV never returned any of the calls. 

In New York, a service officer must have legal training. This is not the case in Florida. The St. Pete DAV has abysmal knowledge of 38USC, BVA and USCAVC rulings.

The DAV has a tough job, my attorney explained, because they listen to sad stories all day long. They function much like social workers.  It is a tough job with relatively low pay, about $48,000 per year.

After the major did a smack-down on the VARO during his last BVA hearing, one of the NSOs suggested at the time he apply for a job there because he was "knew more than anyone" in the DAV office.

Regardless, this would hardly be the kind of job a person with a technical background would want. You need a real people person as an NSO.

In Oct. 20l1 the major suggested the Veterans Benefit Administration (VBA) develop a checklist for veterans who were initiating claims. This was because the new claims process was so haphazard with the local DAV. 

Not long after that the VA developed the Disability Benefits Questionnaires (DBQ) which the major thinks will help more vets develop successful claims. In many respect, the checklist idea was a workaround for vets who are assigned  marginal NSOs.

Most of the NSOs appear to be former non-commissioned officers and some have an attitude toward officers. Others NSO's like to talk about their claims which wastes a vet's time.

The attorney is right. The NOS's are fundamentally social workers. Listening to the laments of vets who have been physically and mentally wounded wears you down over time. It's a tough job.

If fact, it's a job better for an attorney than a social worker. That's why the major fired the DAV. 

An attorney will return phone calls and you can send them email. An attorney will provide an organized presentation to the DRO. BVA or USCAVC something the DAV will not do. An attorney  will also suggest ways you can improve your claim, something that the service organizations rarely do.

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA 

 

Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

Why the VA sucks

I posted the initial article on the FB page, "The VA is lying."

The VA approves about 15 per cent of its claims overall. If you appeal to the BVA and prevail, about 30 per cent of VA claims make the cut.

If you appeal the BVA ruling to the USCAVC, about 70 per cent of those filings are overturned.. However, only a small percentage of vets who lose a BVA appeal, go to the USCAVC.

About 15 per cent of VA are fraudulent. This means when the dust clears, about 55 per cent of vets just give up. Perhaps the claim is poorly written or lacks appropriate medical documentation. Most vets just tire of the run-around.

If the VA makes an award, the award comes out of the local VA claims office's (VARO) hide. This is really a conflict of interest and may explain why the VA is so stingy.

About 40-45 percent of claims from Iraq and Afghan vets are being approved. Not bad.

However, if you are Vietnam era vet, it's about 2-4 per cent.

Is this a dual standard for vets? You betcha!

Essentially if 100 vets were to file claims, about 20 would be approved at the the VA Regional Office (VARO) level. If you are an Iraq and Afghan vet, a Purple Heart recipient, paralyzed or paraplegic, your odds improve. 

If you appeal to the Decision Review Officer (DRO) or the Board of Veteran Appeals (BVA), another 20 per cent of those appellants get approved. 

Keep in mind the DRO is bound by it VA Manual, M21-1. It does not consider precedent rulings from the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans' Claims (USCAVC) , the 38 CFR that is the VA directive or 38 USC that is public law.

The BVA will consider USCAVC precedent rulings that require a three panel judge, 38CFR and 38 USC. The BVA is legal administrative proceeding. the BVA will also consider the opinions of private practice physicians in letters and Disability Benefit Questionnaires. 

The VARO will gloss over private practice evidence if it conflicts with the Compensation and Pension (C&P) clinicians findings. Keep in mind that many of the C&P examiners are nurse practitioners and physician assistants. A board certified physician will hold more weight in front of the BVA. 

Make sure your key physicians have conducted record reviews of you military service records. This is important to the BVA.

However, the DRO or BVA base is smaller. Let's says that 50 of the 80 claimants who were rejected appeal. Only 10 would prevail at the DRO or BVA. At this point about 30 per cent of the claims have been approved. However, the BVA may only approve one of your 4 claims and remand the other three back to the VARO for development.

You are now playing remand ping pong with the your other three claims. 

We now have 40 claimants left who didn't make the cut at the DRO or BVA. These appellants can apeal to the USCAVC. If 10 appeal, about seven will prevail. 

These examples are hypothetical and based on limited data the VA has provided on claims. Much of this information was harvested from congressional testimony.

Of the 33 remaining claimants. about half (15) are fraudulent. If you file a fraudulent claim, you will most likely receive a quick reject. You can also be prosecuted.

It behooves the vet to appeal if he/she have a well grounded claim. The writer recently discovered he was very fortunate to prevail in front of the BVA without an attorney. Generally, once you get into appeals, you should probably hire an attorney. 

Refine your claim based on the attorney's advice and bring in new substantial evidence at the DRO and BVA levels, 

Once you appeal to the USCAVC, the claim is locked. You cannot introduce new evidence.

What do these statistics suggest. Appeal, young person, appeal!

Your odds of winning are highest at the USCAVC level, but you better have a solid claim. You cannot introduce new evidence once the BVA hearing is over. 

graphics: courtesy of AskNod blog.

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA 

 

Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

It's the veteran!

Rightrdia agrees. Our way of life and Bill of Rights has been protected by the veteran.

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA








Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

WH blog: "VOW to Hire Heroes Act"

This morning, President Obama signed the "VOW to Hire Heroes Act" into law, telling those in attendance:

Back in September, I sent Congress a jobs bill. And in it, I proposed a tax credit for any business that hires a veteran who’s been unemployed for at least four weeks. I proposed an even bigger tax break if a business hires a veteran who’s been unemployed for at least six months. And if a business hires an unemployed veteran with a disability related to their service, I proposed doubling the tax break that we already have in place.

Today, because Democrats and Republicans came together, I’m proud to sign those proposals into law. And I urge every business owner out there who’s hiring to hire a veteran right away.

The is just one of the intiatives the President has enacted in order to ensure that the country fulfills its obligation to our servicemembers and their families.

And it's just one part of the President's plan to put the American people back to work. At the bill signing, he told lawmakers that families all over the country are demanding the same kind of bold, bipartisan action.

"My message to every member of Congress is keep going," President Obama said, "Keep working.

The right wing likes to suggest wars stimulate the economy which is usually true because of deficit spending. After a war winds down, a recession invariably follows. 

So in the big picture, wars are bad for the economy. 

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA   

Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

Boston Police Attack Veterans for Peace

Uploaded by haveyoumetter on Oct 10, 2011

MORE COVERAGE #OCCUPYBOSTON:

http://digboston.com/think/2011/10/studentsoccupy-boston/
http://digboston.com/author/lauren-metter/

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA  

 

Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

For vets: Is your VA disability conjunctive ?

It is important for veteran to know where his or her claim file or c-file is. Normally this file will be retained by the local VA Regional Office (VARO).  However, if you have appealed your Local VARO's  decision, the c-file could be in the Appeals Management Center which for all intents and purposes is a specialized VARO in Washington DC handles Board of Veterans Appeals (BVA) remands.

After the local VARO and AMC finish with you c-file, the Board of Veterans Appeals (BVA) reviews the conclusions and can overrule both the VARO, the AMC and even a Decision Review Officer (DRO) decision.

The BVA makes decisions on the law and not VA regulations. Often some of the VARO raters make mistakes. For example, if you have diabetes mellitus., you must meet all of the examples in disability compensation for Diabetes Mellitus  DC 7913, you must meet all of the examples in this DC. This is because DC 7913 is rated conjunctively:

However, all DCs are not rated this way. For example, DC 7903, is not rated conjunctively. This means the raters must see the forest through the trees.

The UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS (USCavc), NO . 07-2728 DIANNE C.  TATUM , APPELLANT , (Argued July 15, 2009 Decided September 28, 2009) ruling explained this.

The USCAVC agreed with Ms. Tatum on her entitlement to a higher disability rating because it agreed with the appellant that all of the examples in DC 7903 did not need to be present for a higher level rating. The USCAVC said that the higher level examples in DC 7903 were inclusive of the lower level examples.

The USCAVC made it clear the laundry lists in in the CFR for disability rating are examples, not criteria. In the case of hypothyroidism, the VAROs will often deny a higher level claim for hypothyroidism if the veterans has not complained of being constipated. This is because a VARO may think DC 7903 is related conjuctively: 

Rightardia has reviewed both BVA and USCAVC cases in which the veteran lost the case over this issue. However, The Major found the Diane Tatum case and relized the VARO "constipation" issue was bogus. 

First, when you are hypothyroid, you my indeed suffer from constipation that may result in hemorrhoids. However, once you take a medication like Levthyrozxine, you will have the opposite problem, diarrhea   

Prednisone and hydrocortisone will also cause the some of the same symptoms when voiding.

The USCAVC concluded a veteran could potentially establish all of the criteria required for either a 30% or 60% disability rating, without establishing any of the criteria for a lesser disability rating.

The USCAVC considers the laundry lists in the 38 CFR for DC 7903 to be examples rather than criteria. In addition, the higher level examples are inclusive of the lower disability rating examples. Thus, DC 7903 is not conjunctive. Such disabilities that are not conjuctive are called "disjunctive." 

38 C.F.R. § 4.21 (2009), is federal regulation which explains that "it is not expected. . . that all cases will show all the findings specified [in an applicable DC (Rating category)]."

Is you VA disability conjunctive? Talk to your Disabled American Veteran, American Legion or other non-governmental rep to find out. If the VARO gave you the "don't meet all of the criteria two step" using an erroneous conjunctive style rating , appeal to BVA or the DRO. This is an important issue that the vet cannot afford to ignore. 

Regarding the c-file. Both the BVA and the AMC have fax numbers and Washington addresses that you can submit new information to. The Major has submitted new information to both the AMC and the BVA after recent doctor's appointments. You can also take this information to the VARO and eventually it will be attached to you c-file. However, if you know your disability is currently being reviewed by the BVA or AMC, send it directly to Washington. 

The Major just completed an important diagnostic test and he called the BVA and DAV Washington to see if the new information could be added to the c-file. Both organizations provided fax numbers 

The BVA said 'yes" and to add this line in the fax cover sheet or transmittal letter prior to faxing: 

I waive regional office (RO) consideration in the first instance for new evidence. 

This is why it is essential the veteran know where his or her c-file is. 

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA   Netcraft rank: 6627 http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com


Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Rewind: Getting justice from the VA

by The Major 

The Veteran's Administration (VA)  is not your friend. I have  heard this echoed by people within  and associated with the VA. The VA is actually a self licking bureaucracy that makes work for itself.

The initial rating by the VA Regional office is likely to be off the mark. If fact, you may be smarter to hold back key evidence from the VARO so they will process your claim quickly and reject it, which they are likely to do anyway.

Then introduce the best evidence during a de novo review which is conducted by a senior rating officer called the Decision Review Offer (DRO). Or wait until the Board of Veterans Appeals (BVA) review. During each review step, you must introduce "new evidence," even if the VARO has ignored earlier evidence and failed to acknowledge it.

If the VA were to provide more objective disability ratings earlier in the claims process, the number of appeals would be substantially reduced. Because the VA institutionally low balls veterans, the veteran is forced into a circular appeals process that takes four to 10 years or longer.

Rightardia is not and has never been an anti-government site. We think that the average American can expect more assistance form the government than they can from private enterprise.

But we feel obligated to advise other veterans that VA criticism is well-deserved. The VA has corrupted the rating process and has been institutionally  disregarding a precedent rulings from  the Court of Appeals for Veteran's Claims (USCAVC).

If the VA were to rate a Veteran for hypothyroidism, the rating officer would start at the bottom of the rating scale and work up in a lockstep fashion.

7903 Hypothyroidism

Cold intolerance, muscular weakness, cardiovascular involvement,

mental disturbance (dementia, slowing of thought, depression),

bradycardia (less than 60 beats per minute), and sleepiness--100

Muscular weakness, mental disturbance, and weight gain--60

Fatigability, constipation, and mental sluggishness--30

Fatigability, or; continuous medication required for control--10

For example if a vet did not produce medical evidence that he or she was constipated, the vet could not be rated higher than 10 per cent.

If the vet had bradycardia, an irregular heart beat and other cardiac conditions due to the hypothyroidism and sleep problems related to sleep apnea and insomnia, the VA would likely ignore these 'criteria" and render a 10 per cent rating.

Believe me, it happened to The Major and he saw this coming more than one year ago.

The VA likes to award the 10 per cent and 0 per cent ratings. In both cases, the Vet is now eligible for services at veteran's hospitals and clinics. He or she can also get service-connected medications for the specific condition. 

These 'lowball' awards provide more clients to the VA at low cost. Essentially, the VA is saying, 'you're OK now because you are on medication.'

In order for a vet to be rated 100 per cent disabled for hypothyroidism, the VA would need to see  every one of the following conditions for hypothyroidism (DC 7903):

Fatigability, require continuous medication, be constipated, have mental sluggishness, muscular weakness,  mental disturbance, weight gain, cold intolerance, muscular weakness, cardiovascular involvement, mental disturbance (dementia, slowing of thought, depression), bradycardia (less than 60 beats per minute), and sleepiness. 

This is why only 8.4 per cent of veterans are 100 per cent disabled. Although the VA rates this way, the Court of of Appeals for Veteran's Claims (USCAVC), has stated the VA is not following the law. 

A three judge panel released a precedent setting ruling that the VA is ignoring: See UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS, NO . 07-2728, DIANNE C. TATUM , APPELLANT , (Argued July 15, 2009 Decided September 28, 2009). 

Any veteran, who is writing a Notice of Disagreement or who has appealed to Board of Veteran Appeals (BVA)  or the USCAVC, needs to be familiar with this ruling or rulings more closely related to their particular disability.

The USCAVC publishes all of its rulings on the USCAVC web site. See http://www.uscavc.gov/ Several legal web sites also have legal briefs on recent rulings.

The BVA agreed with Ms. Tatum entitlement to a higher disability rating because it found that she that the constipation example was irrelevant and that a 60% disability rating did not need lower level hypothyroid symptoms.

Ms. Tatum argued that the Board erred in concluding that all three symptoms were necessary for the award of a 30% disability rating and that such a conclusion eviscerates the meaning of 38 C.F.R. § 4.7 (2009), which states:

"Where there is a question as to which of two evaluations shall be applied, the higher evaluation will be assigned if the disability picture more nearly approximates the criteria required for that rating." The VA Secretary disputed this argument.

The USCAVC concluded a veteran could potentially establish all of the criteria required for either a 30% or 60% disability rating, without establishing any of the criteria for a lesser disability rating.

The USCAVC considers the laundry lists in the 38 CFR to be examples rather than criteria. In addition, the higher level examples are inclusive of the lower disability rating examples.

38 C.F.R. § 4.21 (2009), is federal regulation which explains that "it is not expected. . . that all cases will show all the findings specified [in an applicable DC (Rating category)]."

VA to use Disability Benefits Questionnaires (DBQ)

Initially the disability Benefits questionnaires (DBQ) will be used for Fast track Agent Orange claims, but these questionnaires are being prepared for 19 other disabilities as well.

This is mentioned in the DAV Magazine, Jan.-Feb 2011 that the Major received yesterday.

The DBQs should help a lot. Besides the 19 new DBQs, another 57 will be available in the spring. The DAV indicated the DBQs have the potential to reduce medical exam times by 25 to 50 per cent.

Another DAV article titled,"Get the calm Decided Right the First Time" also addresses the DBQs.

Whether you submit the clam for VA disability online or through the veterans center or VA rep like the DAV, the forms are blank and the veteran's representative does not provide any information that indicates the type of documentation the vet needs to provide to prevail.

A special Veteran's Day message for rightards

courtesy of the Jon Stewart-Stephan Colbert DC rally

These  fellows look like they are from the Southland. 

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Netcraft rank: 8693 http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com

Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA) gave out 142 D and F grades to Republicans

By David Edwards
Friday, October 22nd, 2010 -- 9:53 am

A new report by a leading veterans group has awarded grades to members of Congress based on their support of veterans issues. One party failed miserably.

Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA) gave out 154 D and F grades. 142 of those went to Republicans and 12 to Democrats -- meaning that 92 percent of the D and F grades went to members of the GOP.

Of the 94 congressmen that received A or A+ grades, 91 are Democrats and three are Republicans.

The IAVA Congressional Report Card (.pdf) explains that grades were awarded solely on performance and not on party affiliation.

"IAVA Action Fund's 2010 Congressional Report Card reviews the achievements and failures of the 111th Congress," the report states.

"In the following pages, every member of Congress is graded on his or her leadership on the most critical issues facing Iraq and Afghanistan veterans as determined by our national membership.

In all, only 20 out of 535 legislators earned an A+ grade compared with 150 in the 2008 report card.

While elected Republicans didn't fare well, several GOP candidates may also expect to receive low scores on future report cards if they are elected.

Colorado Senate candidate Ken Buck and Nevada Senate candidate Sharon Angle have both suggested that Veterans' health care be privatized. They have since backed away from that position.

In an email to their members IAVA wrote, "As we head into the midterm elections, Americans must hold Congress accountable for their voting record.

Vets can't wait for the gridlock to clear in Washington. IAVA Action Fund is keeping our nation's lawmakers honest, and ensuring that Iraq and Afghanistan veterans remain a priority on Capitol Hill. This is what the Report Card is all about."

Here are the ratings of Florida Congressional and Senate politicians:

US House

US Senate

The Florida ratings are interesting because the two local congressman: Bill Young and Gus Billirakis have F and D ratings respectively. Bill Young is working on his 2Oth congressional term and if the Republicans take the House, he will head the House Armed Services Committee.

Can Florida afford to send Bill Young back to Washington with such a shameful record of support for vets? Both Young and Billirakis are Republicans.

Senator Bill Nelson only picked up a C, dropping from an A+ in his previous term. Nelson is a Democrat.

source: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/10/vets-group-142-republicans-d-f-vet...

source:

From: "Sid9" <s...@belsouth.net>

Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 18:19:39 -0400

Local: Fri, Oct 22 2010 6:19 pm Usenet: alt.politics

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiuNetcraft

rank: 8377
http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com

Veteran Unemployment Is 25 Percent – 11/12/09

by Doug Cunningham on November 11, 2009 - 4:03pm

Mark Ayers, Chairman of the Union Veterans Council, says unemployment among veterans now exceeds 25 percent. The Veterans Council is calling on Congress to quickly extend unemployment benefits and combine it with an effort to strengthen and enforce the Uniformed Services Employment And Reemployment Rights Act.

That law protects veterans by allowing them to claim their former jobs when they return from active duty. The Union Veterans Council says veterans need the assurance of satisfactory employment as they return to civil life.

The Union Veterans Council also wants to see state and local job training and employment counseling programs for vets expanded. The council says it’s “dumbstruck” that Congress is considering cutting funding for the Helmets To Hardhats program – which places veterans in good construction jobs.

 
Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Netcraft rank: 5559 http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com

POTUS proposes $250 payments to seniors, vets and the disabled

By POLITICO STAFF

President Obama wants $250 payments to seniors, veterans and the disabled since there will be to make up for the lack of a Social Security cost of living allowance (COLA) this year.

President Obama's made this comment on the proposed Economic Recovery Payment:

"Even as we seek to bring about recovery, we must act on behalf of those hardest hit by this recession. That is why I am announcing my support for an additional $250 in emergency recovery assistance to seniors, veterans, and people with disabilities to help them make it through these difficult times. These payments will provide aid to more than 50 million people in the coming year . . .

I want to compliment all the members of Congress who have been working to address these challenges, especially Senators Reid, Baucus, Sanders, and Lincoln, Speaker Pelosi, and Representatives Rangel, McCarthy, and DeFazio."

source: http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/1009/250_payments_4c01a09f-74f6-458d-ba43-a39d167a2575.html

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Netcraft rank: 7039 http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com

Post 9/11 GI Bill Education Benefits Calculator

If you are leaving the Armed Forces, it would be smart to get into school and wait out the recession. Use the Military.com calculator to estimate veteran's educational benefits.

Visit the link:  http://www.military.com/apps/reg/gi-bill-calc-reg?valve_redirect=http://www.military.com/gi-bill-calculator/&ESRC=090801SOL_airforce_v.se

Get 30 days of free traffic analysis simply by going to Web-Stat: http://www.web-stat.com/?id=2955

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Improve blog traffic with TrafficG http://trafficg.com/splash/splash01.php?uid=eelder1

Netcraft rank: 24118 http://toolbar.netcraft.com/stats/topsites?s=842818698226B7BA4A1D0E313F8F#24118