This is totally ludicrous. Soldiers don’t even bring home enough money to live on. What does the Pentagon, DoD, and White House expect them to live. They send them over to Iraq based on lies to die to protect our freedoms (of course, all a lie), and then they don’t even pay them enough. Budget woes my butt. Some of these politicians need to get off their high horses and take the pay cuts themselves. I don’t believe a single politician anymore when they say they are having budget problems when they in turn vote for a huge raise for themselves each year. I just will not believe them and now the government is starting to make me sick!
WTF did you expect? Us civilians are getting it up the ass from the Bush administration. The poor saps in Iraq are getting it without lube. Do you think Bush cares any for what he considers tools of the administration?
One thing on the bright side though, at least they still have a job.
I know some of you will call me a Bush apologist or whatever because that’s just the cut of your jib, but I don’t care. Here’s what I think about this:
The article calls it a “pay cut” just for the emotional impact of that term. What really happened is that service members were awarded a pay increase in April that phases out automatically in September unless something is done to reinstate it, and now the administration is thinking of not doing what needs to be done to reinstate it. That’s a lot different than the administration lowering their salary or something like that, which is what the term “pay cut” conjures up.
The article linked to is a blatant attempt to play on the emotions of readers by discussing things that are totally unrelated to the pay situation (e.g., quoting a woman who is worried about her son, quoting soldiers about how scared they are, etc.) which I find repulsive.
We have a winner! With the election only what, 15 months away, the administration will NOT want to piss off one of their primary voting blocks: members of the armed services.
This ‘bonus pay’ is as temporary as a out-of-work brother-in-law. Not only will it be re-approved there won’t even be much resistance to it.
This most likely answers my other question. Since this is a no brainer to pass, no one is being vocal about this, because there isn’t anyone against it that they can contrast themselves against and look better.
Because a “pay cut” to me means that the employer takes something away from the employee. Here, the administration is not taking anything away from the soldiers. The program passed in April was a temporary pay increase that automatically phased out.
Say I say to you that you can drive my car around for a week if you mow my lawn. You mow my lawn, and I give you my car. A week later, I go to your place and want my car back. Can you say in this situation that I am taking your car or that I’m divesting you of some right you acquired? No way.
All you got was the use of the car for a week. Similarly, all the soldiers got was a pay increase from April to September. It’s not as simple as you make it out to be above.
Jesus. I give up on you people. We’d need lots more facts than those given in this article to determine if the bonus was improper or anything like that.