Told ya so

| December 11, 2008

A few weeks ago I wrote a post about the Democrats pushing for a 25% spending cut in defense. Today TSO sent me an article (without a link) about our favorite Congressman, John Murtha, who thinks a good place to start cutting expenses in the Defense Department is military bonuses;

“What I’m saying is, there’s going to be less defense spending,” House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman John Murtha, D-Pa., said in a speech at the Center for American Progress on defense priorities. “I’m not going to predict how much of a change we’ll see in the coming years, but I do know that defense spending is going to be under severe pressure.”

[…]

Murtha said the Army and Marine Corps spent about $2 billion on enlistment and re-enlistment bonuses since 2007 — incentives lawmakers and service officials deemed necessary to help meet recruiting and retention goals.

But Murtha said bonuses were one area that could produce savings as forces are drawn down in Iraq. “If we draw down, we ought to be able to get rid of the bonuses,” he said.

I wrote before the election that when Democrats talk about cutting defense spending, it’s code for cutting personnel costs. They passed a great big GI Bill this year that encouraged people to leave the military, and now they’re talking about cutting the incentives to stay.If I didn’t know better, I’d think Murtha is planning to reduce the effectiveness of the military. But that can’t be it, can it?

You’d think they’d cut back on useless weapons programs, wouldn’t you? But not when Murtha controls the purse strings and needs to send that money to his district;

But he said the military could find savings by reforming its healthcare system, addressing military compensation, and reducing operations and maintenance costs.

All personnel cuts. It’s always the troops who pay for the social programs the Democrats need to buy votes. Murtha has proven time and again that the military doesn’t affect his success in his district. He can call them murderers and criminals, heck, he can even call his constituents a bunch of redneck racists and they’ll still vote for him as long as he can keep dragging Federal dollars to his district. So why shouldn’t he cut bonuses, healthcare and eventually the troops pay – there’s no incentive for him to stop.

Remember back during the Winter Soldier hearings when Maxine Waters told Kristopher Goldsmith that he was braver than the troops who are fighting in the wars right now, and that she is going to get the same benefits as someone who served their full tour without misbehaving? Where do you think she’s going to get the money to pay for Goldsmith’s college education?

Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, John Murtha, Liberals suck, Support the troops

Comments (19)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. defendUSA says:

    Ay-yep. Murtha, buddy fukker extraordinaire.

  2. LT Nixon says:

    This is what happens when you have such a small percentage of the citizenry in uniform. Since we live in a democracy where “antyhing goes as long as it gets teh votes”, pols just see the military as another voting bloc and don’t understand the contractual obligation to pay the military well and give them health benefits if injured / retired. Like I said election night, Game Over Man!

  3. Eddie Willers says:

    It doesn’t surprise me they are considering cutting military bonuses. This is a rational economic response to swelling ranks within the military.

    As the country’s economic woes continue to worsen (and will worsen even quicker under an Obama regime) more and more people will seek reliable, stable employment. There’s no more reliable, stable employer than the government – and I expect more and more people to be driven into the military and government sectors, their reasoning couched in the familiar “just want to serve” rhetoric…even though they mean nothing of what they say.

    Military bonuses are offered for one reason: to compete with private employers for employees. As the private sector shrinks the incentive to offer the bonuses decreases. The cynical side of me sees this newfound “patriotism” as exactly the tool Obama needs to swell the ranks of his ridiculous civilian national security force.

    In the end, what drives people to do anything is not patriotism, but economics. Not duty, but need. It’s unfortunate the State has become large enough so as to become the only viable option for those seeking an honest day’s pay for an honest day’s work.

  4. Ray says:

    “In the end, what drives people to do anything is not patriotism, but economics”

    Eddie, That’s horsesqueeze, and I can refute that with two words.

    Pat Tillman

  5. LT Nixon says:

    Yeah, Eddie, the military is a great place to get rich quick. I’m eating caviar and sleeping on a bed of naked ladies right now!

  6. TSO says:

    Last I heard Nixon, you were eating sushi of a strippers arse every night. Still the case?

  7. UpNorth says:

    “In the end, what drives people to do anything is not patriotism, but economics. Not duty, but need”.
    Eddie, two more words, Marcus Luttrell. But, then we could go on and on with names. Your hypothesis is shot full of holes.

  8. YatYas says:

    This is the big problem I have with the majority of today’s Democrats. They always want to throw money at people they consider victims, which veterans are to them. There has to be a balance with the funds available bewteen a strong military and taking care of veterans. When I started in the seventies, junior troops did not make much, but the great majority of us were young and single, with a meal card and living in the barracks. All we needed was enough money to get laid and drunk, not necessarily in that order and a few comfort items. Most wouldn’t admit it, but in their actions demonstrated they served out of a sense of duty.

  9. LT Nixon says:

    TSO,

    Not in this country, it’s too damn expensive.

  10. ArmySergeant says:

    Yeah, but now people are getting married and having kids really fast. The whole ‘young, single thing’ doesn’t really apply nearly as much when the culture encourages you to marry people as quick as you can.

  11. Eddie Willers says:

    Ahhh, but you misunderstand my usage of the word economics. Economics does NOT mean profit, it means personal gain. It doesn’t matter whether or not you’re eating sushi off of a strippers’ arse – the real question is, if I weren’t in the military, what would be the alternatives? In most cases, the military is the best financial option for people…the inherent government-woven safety nets providing much needed employment insurance in an uncertain job market.

    I suspect the military will have no trouble exceeding recruiting goals so long as the private sector continues to prove to be uncertain. Be careful before you determine someone’s motives for serving to be patroitism, though – chances are, that person would not have served for free (nor should they)…as the nebulous term patriotism mistakenly implies.

  12. defendUSA says:

    Eddie
    In the military we had a saying…never ASS-u- me. And, I am telling you never assume to underestimate what making it through boot camp and AIT and other potential Army schools can do to a person.

    The effects are many and one of them is thinking that they join for the stability,only to find, that SOB, this IS bigger than them and they do indeed think that serving is better than any money they can make. I know that several of my friends who have college degrees and still serve as enlisted folk wouldn’t change a thing.

    Cynics will say it’s all about stability and others will plainly tell you that you’re full of it. You presume too much.

  13. Fox News Zombie says:

    “only to find, that SOB, this IS bigger than them and they do indeed think that serving is better than any money they can make.”

    “training” (indoctrination) complete! Fox News just got another loyal watcher!

  14. defendUSA says:

    FNZ..STFU…You get through all that shit by your own voliton and nothing else. What you come away with is the sense that we give back what we get. Nobody beat my ass at night and told me I must be patriotic to serve this Country. The only indoctrinating/brainwashing going on was the DI’s telling us we were Mama’s girls/boys and we were going to fail.
    Hence, a person who believes he can succeed makes it, with a little reverse psychology. You must be a real SFB leader. I shudder at the thought that you are another chest-puffer, thinking yourself so superior to those who really do believe in serving their Country for the simple fact that they get it. I suspect you don’t. It would suck to be you.

  15. UpNorth says:

    Damn, you beat me to it, defendUSA. Why do trolls like fnz assume that anyone, other than koskidz, movinonup, and du want to read their BS?
    Jonn, maybe you can borrow Moe Lane’s blam stick over at Redstate to handle trash like that?

    Jonn wrote: Believe it or not, he’s in the Navy, or at least he’s using a Navy internet connection in Jacksonville, FL.

  16. UpNorth says:

    Wi-Fi connections have been pirated in the past, Jonn. Not saying he did, just saying. And if he’s in the navy, my comment about kos, moveon and du still stands.

  17. YatYas says:

    ArmySergeant:
    You don’t know your culture very well. Years ago, people got married younger and there was plenty of out of wedlock children. It was hard for young married people to get the waiver to get in though. I had to get a waiver from the Corps because I was married with one child. That was after getting out of the Air Force with 8 years. I was 19 when I got married, but had 2 1/2 years service and was close to picking up SRA(E-4)in 1979. The culture today is more like make babies and don’t get married. I see plenty of it through my current employment.

  18. TeineMoni says:

    i heard somewhere through the grapevines that Obama is planning on cutting the Army Enlistment bonuses from $ 20,000 to $ 10,000. Is this true??? please respond.

    Jonn wrote: We won’t know until he gets in office, I suppose.