Cheney Group hijacked foreign policy for the worse

[FlaSoxxJim]

Are you saying that guardsmen are being cheated out of something they were promised?

 

Evidence please.

 

The link is above, but here's the whole piece.

 

When a bonus isn’t a bonus, Murray fires

 

LES BLUMENTHAL; The News Tribune

Published: October 16th, 2005 12:01 AM

 

WASHINGTON – The Pentagon has reneged on its offer to pay a $15,000 bonus to members of the National Guard and Army Reserve who agree to extend their enlistments by six years, according to Sen. Patty Murray (D-Seattle). The bonuses were offered in January to Active Guard and Reserve and military technician soldiers who were serving overseas. In April, the Office of the Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs ordered the bonuses stopped, Murray said.

 

“This is outrageous,” the senator said in a telephone interview. “It makes me angry that this administration has broken another promise to our troops.”

 

A Pentagon spokeswoman, Lt. Col. Ellen Krenke, confirmed the bonuses had been canceled, saying they violated Pentagon policies because they duplicated other programs. She said Guard and Reserve members would be eligible for other bonuses.

 

Krenke said some soldiers had been paid the re-enlistment bonuses, but she was unsure how many or whether the money would have to be repaid. Murray’s office said that as far as it knew, no active Guard or Reserve members had received the bonuses.

 

A Murray spokeswoman, Alex Glass, said Krenke’s explanation was unacceptable.

 

“They can spin it anyway they want,” Glass said. “But this is a promise they are trying to explain away.”

 

The bonus offer was part of the Pentagon’s effort to retain Guard and Reserve members at a time of declining enlistments in the regular Army.

 

Army officials have said they face the toughest recruiting climate since 1973, when the draft was dropped and replaced with an all-volunteer military.

 

Roughly 3,400 members of the Washington National Guard’s 81st Armor Brigade were serving in Iraq at the time the bonuses were offered.

 

The bonuses were tax-free because they involved soldiers stationed overseas.

 

“As in the private sector, bonuses are quite effective in keeping talented people with high demand skills,” Krenke said in an e-mail response to questions.

 

Murray, a leading Capitol Hill critic of management of the Pentagon and the Department of Veterans Affairs, said she didn’t know why the bonuses were dropped but suspected it was connected to the tight federal budget.

 

“It feels like every day I wake up to something else gone wrong,” she said. “And it all goes back to this administration not planning adequately for the Iraq war.”

 

Krenke said the decision to end the bonus program had nothing to do with budgeting.

 

The senator said she first learned the bonus program had been canceled this summer from members of the Washington National Guard. In late August she wrote officials of the Pentagon’s National Guard Bureau demanding an immediate explanation.

 

The decision to cancel the bonuses had caused “tremendous uncertainty” among Guard members who had been counting on the money after they decided to re-enlist, Murray said in her August letter.

 

In a two-paragraph reply to Murray, Donna Warren, the National Guard Bureau’s congressional liaison, said the bonus program had been scrubbed by order of the Office of Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs. Warren said it had been discovered that Defense Department regulations prohibited such bonuses, but she offered no elaboration.

 

Warren said the bonuses remained a “critical issue” and that officials of the Guard bureau were “aggressively engaged” in discussions with the defense secretary’s office.

 

Murray said Warren’s response was inadequate. Earlier this month she wrote Thomas Hall, assistant secretary of defense for reserve affairs. Murray asked not only for a further explanation, but also asked Hall to reverse himself and reinstate the bonus program.

 

Krenke said the Pentagon would have no comment on Murray’s letter to Hall.

 

Murray said she expected a quick response and would pursue the matter further if Hall’s response were insufficient.

 

Les Blumenthal: 202-383-0008

[email protected]

[Steff]

I don't think he was saying they were 107% up, I think Nuke was saying it was 107% of the goal, which means they hit their goal plus 7% over that number IIUC.

 

I know what he was saying.. if you look at the article I posted it's clear on the goal.

 

My uncles # still wasn't near that high.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

You equate an extramarital blowjob with the s*** Cheney's office is "allegedly" involved with that led to knowingly ovberstating the case for war and the tresonous outing of a CIA operative?

 

Alrighjty then.  god love ya'.  :rolly

 

 

Id rather focus on the fundamental weaking of the nations defenses that went on during Clintons watch. The gutting of the military & the restrictions placed on the intelligence agencies to name a couple of things.

 

Id rather focus on the lack of action on the Kobhar Towers bombing, the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania and the near sinking of the USS Cole which signaled to Bin Laden and his cohorts that we were weak and opened the door for 9-11 to happen.

 

Id rather focus on the fact that the US had numerous chances to eliminate or capture Bin Laden, a man who formally declared war on the United States, because they either didn't care or worried about whether eliminating a known terrorist was legal or not.

 

Id rather focus on those more fundamental problems with the Clinton Administration than some stupid blow job.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Id rather focus on those more fundamental problems with the Clinton Administration than some stupid blow job.

 

Good for you, although you seem to be largely alone on that.

[southsider2k5]

You equate an extramarital blowjob with the s*** Cheney's office is "allegedly" involved with that led to knowingly ovberstating the case for war and the tresonous outing of a CIA operative?

 

Alrighjty then.  god love ya'.  :rolly

 

No, but thanks for proving my point.

 

More accurately I consider insider trading, whoring out the white house, selling of pardons, murder allegations, influence peddling to forgein nationals for campaign funding (treason really depending on who you believe the money came from), repeated sexual harassment, etc, IMO are more than "just a blow job".

 

I don't get how many of the same people who bounce with glee and awe from Bush scandal to scandal think that we need to go back to the Clinton years where the same exact kinds of corruption were taking place, if not worse. Heck IMO the only difference between Bush and Clinton was 9-11 opened a few more doors for the guys propping up Bush to get into trouble, that Clinton never had the chance at.

[FlaSoxxJim]

No, but thanks for proving my point.

 

More accurately I consider insider trading, whoring out the white house, selling of pardons, murder allegations, influence peddling to forgein nationals for campaign funding (treason really depending on who you believe the money came from), repeated sexual harassment, etc, IMO are more than "just a blow job".

And out of all that the GOP focused on the blow job.

 

Sounds like penis envy.

[Balta1701]

Id rather focus on the fundamental weaking of the nations defenses that went on during Clintons watch.  The gutting of the military & the restrictions placed on the intelligence agencies to name a couple of things.

Here is a link to a few graphs of spending on defense. There was a slight decrease (roughly $25 billion a year) during the early clinton years, but overall, from the start of Bush 1, military spending basically remained constant.

 

Id rather focus on the lack of action on the Kobhar Towers bombing,  the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania and the near sinking of the USS Cole which signaled to Bin Laden and his cohorts that we were weak and opened the door for 9-11 to happen.

Ok, now that's one I'm not going to let you get away with. According to the 9/11 commission report, the first good evidence about the ID of the Cole attackers started coming out of Yemen in mid-to-late November, 2000. The CIA gave a preliminary report to the president in late December, 2000, saying that they had connected the bombing to 1 person they believed to be connected to Al Qaeda, but the President didn't feel he would be able to go forward with an attack based only on a preliminary report.

 

When the Bush Administration took over, Mr. Clarke immediately requested a principles-level meeting on Al Qaeda, one of the goals of which was to decide "when and how . . . to respond to the attack on the USS Cole.” The CIA gradually began to believe their case was stronger during the next few months, but during the entire period up until 9/11, there was never any real decision or discussion about what exactly do to in response to the Cole.

[southsider2k5]

And out of all that the GOP focused on the blow job.

 

Sounds like penis envy.

 

There was GOP focus on all of the issues, they wanted to get him for anything they could, much like the Dems are trying to get the Bush people for anything they can. The media only focused on the BJs and the sexual harassment, so that was the only case that got off of the ground. Stained dresses are way more interesting than Johnny Chung. If the media had put as many headlines up about connections between campaign donations and pardons, maybe those investigations would have gone somewhere. Its the samething in this administration. No one really gave much into these allegations until the media headlines kept coming, and then it was time to do some series investigating.

 

Also remember many of these same Dems who felt lying to Congress wasn't important now feel that lying about these leaks is pretty damned important all of the sudden, and we haven't had anyone even under oath yet.

[Balta1701]

Also remember many of these same Dems who felt lying to Congress wasn't important now feel that lying about these leaks is pretty damned important all of the sudden, and we haven't had anyone even under oath yet.

Actually quite a few people have testified under oath before Fitzgerald. Bush and Cheney did not testify under oath, but virtually everyone else on the list has done so.

[kapkomet]

There was GOP focus on all of the issues, they wanted to get him for anything they could, much like the Dems are trying to get the Bush people for anything they can.  The media only focused on the BJs and the sexual harassment, so that was the only case that got off of the ground.  Stained dresses are way more interesting than Johnny Chung.  If the media had put as many headlines up about connections between campaign donations and pardons, maybe those investigations would have gone somewhere.  Its the samething in this administration.  No one really gave much into these allegations until the media headlines kept coming, and then it was time to do some series investigating. 

 

Also remember many of these same Dems who felt lying to Congress wasn't important now feel that lying about these leaks is pretty damned important all of the sudden, and we haven't had anyone even under oath yet.

And it too shall happen - meaning - if Bush had a "D" behind his name (and he very well could if it weren't for that pesky old abortion issue) there wouldn't be ANY of this in the news. I wonder why?

[FlaSoxxJim]

And it too shall happen - meaning - if Bush had a "D" behind his name (and he very well could if it weren't for that pesky old abortion issue) there wouldn't be ANY of this in the news.  I wonder why?

Probably because he wouldn't have been spoiling for the Iraq war so much that he'd need people to manufacture false premises and get rid of anybody who challenged those premises.

[kapkomet]

Probably because he wouldn't have been spoiling for the Iraq war so much that he'd need people to manufacture false premises and get rid of anybody who challenged those premises.

Meh. Wars are fabricated all the time. Hell, FDR knew we were going to war.

 

Billy Clinton liked the Balkans.

 

 

I know what you're saying, but my point is this s*** goes on ALL THE TIME, and yet, because there's a "republican" in the White House, all of a sudden it all gets amplified.

 

That's southsider's point too. It doesn't matter who you are, they all are guilty of this crap. It's whether or not you get caught.

 

And then, when stuff like this does go down, some people are almost gleeful when it happens. And that in and of itself is a damn shame.

 

Our country is so corrupt. I don't care who our president is, it's all corruption, money, lies, and political hackery.

[The Ginger Kid]

Bush and his followers are nothing but lying cheats, rapers, stealing thugs, who know how to solve all the world's problems but choose not to, kick puppy dogs right in the teeth, drink the blood that comes out of those teeth, and then goes on tv at night to talk about how good the blood tastes.

 

Is that about right?

they kick puppies? assholes!

[Kyyle23]

Our country is so corrupt.  I don't care who our president is, it's all corruption, money, lies, and political hackery.

 

I think we all can agree on that. I know I do.

[KipWellsFan]

And out of all that the GOP focused on the blow job.

 

Sounds like penis envy.

 

Republicans hate tha playa, Democrats hate tha game.

Edited October 20, 2005 by KipWellsFan