Military Update: Rumsfeld team stumbles over pay issue (Stars N' Stripes)

[RamboLiberal]

http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=17174

Defense Department officials have characterized as “absurd” the notion that they support a pay reduction Oct. 1 for troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. The notion arose, however, within the department itself.

Despite a hurried news conference Aug. 14 to ease the impact on troop morale, Defense officials still couldn’t explain in detail how U.S. occupation forces would avoid a pay cut if Congress follows the Bush administration’s own advice and allows up to $225 a month in special pay raises to expire.

In July, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and staff corresponded with the chairmen of the armed services committees to give guidance to House-Senate conferees on resolving differences in separate versions of the 2004 defense bills. Among items Rumsfeld and staff opposed were “unrequested” increases in pays and allowances including a $150-a-month increase in Family Separation Allowance and a $75-a-month boost in Imminent Danger Pay.

Congress enacted both raises last April, and made them retroactive to October 2002, as a “thank you” to deployed servicemembers, particularly those fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. The special pay increases, however, are set to expire Sept. 30 unless Congress votes to extend them.

[Saintgermane]

1. "Liberal spin....

the author writes: (italics mine)

....."along with scathing editorials and {\feigned outrage by Democrats including nine declared presidential candidates for 2004."

Why is outrage by democrats "feigned"?

Y'know, I am known by all those who know me as slow, very slow, to anger, but this type of absurd, bullshit spin gets my blood to boiling.

Does the author intend to imply that if the the democrats successfully wrangle a permanent raise in these (still woefully inadequate)special pays, it is due to political maneuvering?

I have been trying to convince my comrades in arms for at least a decade that, while the republicans talk a good game concerning care for servicemembers, actions speak louder than words.

Comments like this, from allegedly independent journalists, only add to my argument that the 'liberal media' is a myth.

[grasswire]

2. spank the reporter

[email protected]

[juajen]

3. I believe servicemen and women are becoming more and more aware,

and in conversations with my career military brother, most vets on pensions are not voting for *. There has also been a shift among current military. As more becomes know, hopefully, more and more servicemen and women will vote against *.

[DulceDecorum]

4. Who cares how the servicemen vote

when Diebold programms the voting machines?