ConservativeChristianRepublican-Report - 20091202

Motivational-Inspirational-Historical-Educational-Political-Enjoyable

Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!



"Daily Motivations"

What happens when you believe something with all your heart? Belief fuels enthusiasm, and determined enthusiasm explodes into passion. It fires our souls and lifts our spirits. -- Mac Anderson

"Carpe diem! Rejoice while you are alive; enjoy the day; live life to the fullest; make the most of what you have. It is later than you think." -- Horace



"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)

God blesses those who are humble, for they will inherit the whole earth. (Matthew 5:5)

Mother Teresa entered the Senate Caucus Room on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. Immediately the top leaders of the most powerful country in the world, along with the other esteemed guests, rose to their feet and applauded. Many had tears in their eyes.

The wife of a United States Senator later said, "She looked so tiny and out-of-place in her blue-and-white habit, old gray sweater, and sandals that had obviously carried her many miles. I was struck with the contrast. I thought, Lord, this frail woman has more power than I see in the Halls of Congress. She reflects Jesus everywhere she goes, and everyone is strangely moved."

Mother Teresa never owned anything; she never held up her fist to demand rights for herself. Yet she was raised to a pinnacle of recognition for her work with the destitute and dying in Calcutta, India. A shining example of selflessness, she proved the power of God's love to transform people and touch a starved world.

This is real power, and, unlike that of the world, it confounds the wise and humbles the mighty. It is the power of God working through ordinary men and women for His glory.

When we are filled with His Spirit, we have that same power inside of us. But He wants us to be vessels of His mission. Then people will not see us, but will see Him in us. Like Mother Teresa, we will display a power the world does not know. But His Spirit working in us will draw others to Himself.

Your View of God Really Matters …

When people look at you, who do they see? Jesus or you? The only way people will ever see Jesus in you is if you focus on Him. It's not enough to act right. You must focus right. Today focus on Jesus, and allow His Spirit to live through you.



"The Patriot Post"

"All men having power ought to be distrusted to a certain degree." -- James Madison



Political Futures

"Here's a new maxim: Nothing good ever happens when the Congress is in session on a Saturday night. As you know, Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid (D-Nev) cajoled, coerced, and co-opted Senators Mary Landrieu (D-La) and Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark) into adding the 59th and 60th necessary votes to prevent a GOP filibuster of Reid's health reform bill. Reid and Obama Administration officials relied on the time honored method (used by Republicans and Democrats) of getting recalcitrant Members to vote a certain way: Bribery which, in the real world, is a felony but in Washington it is called 'hardball.' In Sen. Landrieu's case the bribe was $300 million in Medicaid benefits to Louisiana. It's not even a close call. According to the website 'Total Criminal Defense,' 'Bribery is an attempt to influence another person's actions, usually a government or public official employee, by offering a benefit in exchange for the desired decision.' Three hundred million in return for a vote to proceed. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck... Landrieu is a better bribee than she is an accountant. She said in her floor speech that there was $100 million in the bill specifically to pay for Medicaid in Louisiana and only Louisiana. Talking to reporters afterward, she said, 'I will correct something. It's not $100 million, it's $300 million, and I'm proud of it and will keep fighting for it.' No reports, yet, on how angry White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel was when he found out she had been satisfied with the $100 million and he overpaid by a factor of three." -- political analyst Rich Galen



Liberty

"The 'reformers' in the White House and the House of Representatives have made all too plain their vision of the federal government's power to coerce individual Americans to make the 'right' health-care choices. The highly partisan bill the House just passed includes severe penalties for individuals who do not purchase insurance approved by the federal government. By neatly tucking these penalties into the IRS code, the so-called reformers have brought them under the tax-enforcement power of the federal government. The Congressional Budget Office stated on October 29 that the House bill would generate $167 billion in revenue from 'penalty payments..' Individual Americans are expected to pay $33 billion of these penalties, with employers paying the rest. Former member of Congress and Heritage Foundation fellow Ernest Istook has concluded that for this revenue goal to be met, 8 to 14 million individual Americans will have to be fined over the next ten years, quite an incentive for federal bureaucrats. ... By transforming a refusal or failure to comply with a government mandate into a federal tax violation, the 'progressives' are using the brute force of criminal law to engage in social engineering. This represents an oppressive, absolutist view of government power. ... The idea of imprisoning or fining Americans who don't knuckle under to an unprecedented government mandate to purchase a particular insurance product should outrage anyone who believes in the exceptional promises and opportunities afforded by our basic American freedoms. ... Unless this paternalistic juggernaut is stopped, Americans will lose some of their most fundamental freedoms, and the power of the federal government to impose novel requirements in every facet of our personal lives will have become virtually unlimited." -- Brian W. Walsh & Hans A. von Spakovsky of the Heritage Foundation



Opinion in Brief

"By the time Obama came to office, KSM was ready to go before a military commission, plead guilty and be executed. It's Obama who blocked a process that would have yielded the swiftest and most certain justice. Indeed, the perfect justice. Whenever a jihadist volunteers for martyrdom, we should grant his wish. Instead, this one, the most murderous and unrepentant of all, gets to dance and declaim at the scene of his crime. [Attorney General Eric] Holder himself told The Washington Post that the coming New York trial will be 'the trial of the century.' The last such was the trial of O.J. Simpson." -- columnist Charles Krauthammer



For the Record

"[There are] uncanny parallels between George W. Bush and Herbert Hoover: Both were president during a time of economic crisis; both presided over vast expansions of government that helped cause the crisis or at least make it worse than it might have been otherwise; finally both were (inaccurately) portrayed by their political opponents as dogmatic free market advocates, when in fact both were highly statist. After leaving the presidency, Bush is unconsciously imitating Hoover in yet another way -- by rhetorically supporting free markets and criticizing the even more interventionist policies of his Democratic successor (which in both cases built on the expansions of government initiated by the Republicans who preceded them).... Bush's belated support for free markets follows in Hoover's footsteps. After leaving office in 1933, Hoover wrote books and articles defending free markets and criticizing the Democrats' New Deal. Some of his criticisms of FDR were well-taken. Many New Deal policies actually worsened and prolonged the Great Depression by organizing cartels and increasing unemployment. But by coming out as a free market advocate, the post-presidential Hoover actually bolstered the cause of interventionism because he helped cement the incorrect impression that he had pursued free market policies while in office, thereby causing the Depression. Bush's post-presidential conversion creates a similar risk: it could solidify the already widespread impression that he, like the Hoover of myth, pursued laissez-faire policies which then caused an economic crisis. ... The greatest contribution Bush can now make to free market policies is to dispel the impression that he pursued them while in office." -- Ilya Somin, Associate Professor at George Mason University School of Law



Faith & Family

"[W]hy is religious freedom such a concern to us as Christians? Freedom of religion is called the first freedom for a reason. Our Founding Fathers recognized that without freedom of conscience, no other freedom can be guaranteed. Christians, in fact, are the greatest defenders of religious freedom and human liberty -- not just for Christians, but for all people. Compare religious freedom in those countries with a Christian heritage to the state of religious freedom in Islamic nations, Communist countries, and Buddhist and Hindu nations, and you will see my point. The reason that Christians place such a high value on human freedom is that freedom itself is part of the creation account in the Bible. God made humans in His image. He gave us a free will to choose to love, follow, and obey Him, or to follow our own way. That free will, given us before the Fall, is part of human nature itself. Perhaps more than anything else, it was this understanding of individual freedom that turned me into the kind of patriot who would willingly give his life for his country. It was the words of the Declaration of Independence that inspired me to join the Marines: 'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.' So this question of human freedom goes to the very heart of who we are as Christians and as Americans." -- author Chuck Colson



The Last Word

"Whether it's the academic community, the media elite or politicians, there is a great tolerance for the ideas of socialism -- a system that has caused more deaths and human misery than all other systems combined. Academics, media elites and leftist politicians both in the U.S. and Europe protested the actions and military buildup of President Ronald Reagan and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher that led to the fall of the Berlin Wall and ultimately the breakup of the Soviet Union. Recall the leftist hissy fit when Ronald Reagan called the Soviet Union the evil empire and predicted that communism would wind up on the trash heap of history. ... [T]he reason why the world's leftists give the world's most horrible murderers a pass is because they sympathize with their socioeconomic goals, which include government ownership and/or control over the means of production. In the U.S., the call is for government control, through regulations, as opposed to ownership. Unfortunately, it matters little whether there is a Democratically or Republican-controlled Congress and White House; the march toward greater government control continues. It just happens at a quicker pace with Democrats in charge. You say, 'Come on, Williams, there will never be the kind of socialist oppression seen elsewhere here!' You might be right because Americans have become very compliant with unconstitutional and immoral congressional edicts. But what do you think would happen if some Americans began to rise up and heed Thomas Jefferson's admonition 'Whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force.' and decided to disobey unconstitutional congressional edicts?" -- George Mason University professor Walter E. Williams



"Liberty Counsel"

Online version easier to read? Go to www.LC.org

Humanist Organization Tries to Undermine Christmas with its "Godless" Campaign

When most people are celebrating the Christmas spirit of joy and love, the American Humanist Association is playing the role of Scrooge by placing anti-God ads on city buses. They feature an image of people wearing Santa hats and the words: "No God? …No Problem. Be good for goodness sake."

The American Humanist Association is waging war against Christmas, but its temper tantrum is doomed to fail. Most Americans believe in God and celebrate Christmas.

Liberty Counsel is fighting back with our seventh annual Friend or Foe Christmas Campaign, which is designed to educate and, if necessary, to litigate to make sure that Christian aspects of Christmas are not censored.

As part of the campaign, we have included our "Naughty & Nice List" of stores that either censor or recognize Christmas. We thank God for this campaign's successfulness.

We also offer a Help Save Christmas™ action pack, which includes educational legal memoranda to accurately inform government officials, teachers, parents, students, private businesses, employees, and others that it is legal to celebrate Christmas.

Read our News Release for more details.

Listen to Radio Programs About Christmas

You can listen online to recent radio programs for more about Christmas and the culture wars. Just follow the links below:

Faith & Freedom is an 11-minute weekday program covering hot topics impacting your family and your world.

Freedom's Call is an informative 90-second weekday radio program providing commentary and a quick synopsis of commentary about religious liberty, life and family.

These inspiring programs will encourage you to take a stand.

Help Save CHRISTmas!

Don't let the "grinches" take away your joy when millions of people around the world celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ. You can help Liberty Counsel preserve the meaning of Christmas. Order our Help Save Christmas Action Pack® from our online store for a donation of $25.00 or call toll-free to order: 800-671-1776.

Help Save Christmas Action Pack

Your Action Pack includes:

"I Helped Save Christmas" button
"I Helped Save Christmas" bumper sticker
"I Love CHRISTmas"® button and window cling
"I Love CHRISTmas"® bumper sticker
Full-Page Christmas Ad to print in your local newspaper
"The Memo that Saved Christmas" - 2 legal memoranda about Christmas in public and the workplace.

In addition, you can find many exciting gift ideas in our online store. We have listed several suggestions on our Christmas Gift Ideas page that have proven popular to our supporters. In addition to finding the perfect gift for family and friends, you will have the assurance that you are helping Liberty Counsel fight for your religious freedom.

All the suggested donation amounts listed above include shipping and handling costs. All items can be ordered online.

Receive our Liberty Alerts via RSS

Follow us on and

Forward this Liberty Alert to your entire e-mail list of family and friends, and encourage them to subscribe.

Liberty Counsel does not charge clients for representation, so we depend on individuals, groups and churches that care about advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of human life and the traditional family. Liberty Counsel is recognized by the IRS as a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization that accepts tax-deductible donations. Donate or order resources from the Liberty Counsel online store.

Mathew D. Staver - Founder and Chairman
Anita L. Staver - President
Liberty Counsel - 1-800-671-1776
PO Box 540774 - Orlando, FL 32854



"The Web"

Principles before GOP politics

Jim Brown - OneNewsNow

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=784098

The vice chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC) is promoting a proposed resolution that would warn 2010 GOP candidates that if they do not respect the party's "conservative values," they will not receive the financial backing or endorsement of the RNC.

The "Proposed RNC Resolution on Reagan's Unity Principle for Support of Candidates" was drafted by Jim Bopp, vice chairman of the RNC. It requires that GOP candidates prove not only with their campaign speeches, but also with their voting record that they embrace at least eight of ten conservative principles (listed below).

Bopp tells OneNewsNow he has yet to get RNC chairman Michael Steele's opinion on his proposal because the resolution was leaked prematurely by "people who are trying to undermine the effort." He says the resolution is designed to ensure the party puts its money where its mouth is.

"The Republican Party needs to reclaim its conservative bona fides," argues Bopp. "The problem is that we lost our way on fiscal conservative policies at the end of the Bush administration with expanding government and increasing debt, and then support of bailouts. So we need to show that we are serious about governing as conservatives."

Bopp says the Republican Party's message is compromised when the party supports liberal Republican candidates like DeDe Scozzafava in the 23rd Congressional District of New York.

The ten conservative principles, as distributed by the RNC, are as follows:

(1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama's "stimulus" bill.

(2) We support market-based healthcare reform and oppose Obama-style government-run healthcare.

(3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap-and-trade legislation.

(4) We support workers' right to secret ballot by opposing card check.

(5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants.

(6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges.

(7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat.

(8) We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act.

(9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing healthcare rationing and denial of healthcare and government funding of abortion.

(10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership.



Obama invites a nightmare

Peter Heck - Guest Columnist

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=791004

The storyline is hauntingly familiar: terrorist detainees were moved to a major city to await trial. While there, fellow Islamic terrorists decided to make a daring and dastardly attempt to gain their release, not by attacking the well-protected courtroom or the heavily guarded detention facility (they are bloodthirsty but they are not stupid), but by going for a more tantalizing target.

Thirty-five bomb-laden Muslim terrorists stormed a crowded middle school full of parents, teachers, and children. By doing so, they immediately gained what they desired most: the eyes of a watching world paralyzed with fear at what they might do. And the world had reason to fear. Over the course of this three-day massacre, the terrorists barricaded doors and tied up authorities in "negotiations" that were used only to buy them the time they needed to coldly execute the stronger men hostages, rape young girls in front of their watching mothers, and rig explosives throughout the complex to ensure that when the authorities stormed the building there would be massive casualties.

This horrific drama played out in the quiet Russian town of Beslan just five short years ago. In the end, 394 lay dead (over half of them children) with another 704 injured.

And stunningly, Barack Obama has just invited the same carnage to our shores.

When the President's Attorney General Eric Holder announced the administration's breathtakingly ignorant decision to bring 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM) and five compatriots to New York City to stand trial in civilian court for their act of war, there was undoubtedly a collective gasp in the small towns outside New York. The citizens there surely must recognize that the high-profile status of KSM alone is enough to tempt every terror cell this side of Basra to consider making their rural middle schools the stage for Beslan: Act Two.

Why any president sworn to protect the lives of his fellow citizens would take such an outrageously absurd and completely unnecessary risk is unfathomable. And make no mistake...it is unnecessary. KSM and his fellow terrorists were already being tried by military commissions far away from American children and out of the international spotlight that they so desperately crave. Many, including KSM, had already pled guilty and requested execution.

But Barack Obama halted these commissions when he came into office, apparently more concerned with bolstering his image as a "citizen of the world" than protecting his own people. He then passed the buck to Eric Holder who announced that the terrorists would be brought to one of America's largest cities for the trial of the century.

The negative consequences of this decision are plentiful. From endangering innocent Americans to gift-wrapping a perfect propaganda opportunity for the terrorist world, this decision is inexcusable. And considering that the choice to try these monsters in civilian courts was to supposedly ensure that justice would be done, this decision becomes incomprehensible. (How, for instance, will these show trials result in any better or more just outcome than a guilty plea and execution sentence – something that the military commission had all but secured?)

In short, this is about to be a circus. [Editor's Note: Results from a related OneNewsNow poll question appear at the end of this column.]

Obama and Holder have now given constitutional "rights of the accused" to these terrorists (something that has never been done throughout all of American history). And if you don't think that their lawyers are going to bring up the manner of their detainment, the circumstances surrounding their capture, any perceived threats or mistreatment, any notion of coerced confessions, their lack of immediate access to attorneys, demand for relocation, complaints about a biased jury, calls for mistrials, and the need for an extensive appeals process, you aren't thinking...sort of like the Obama administration.

With a decision this bad – one that is receiving scorn across the country from angry Americans of all political backgrounds – one might hope that Team Obama would come to its senses and reverse course. Not likely.

When announcing this preposterous decision Holder stated, "To the extent that there are political consequences, I'll just have to take my lumps."

Frankly, sir, the grisly images of Beslan are a little too fresh in our minds to be overly concerned with your personal political consequences. We're a bit more concerned about the potentially deadly consequences this ragingly incompetent administration may have just brought on innocent American citizens.

Vice President Joe Biden once criticized Barack Obama's lack of preparedness for the serious responsibilities associated with the job of president by saying that the presidency was "not something that lends itself to on-the-job training." God forbid that we're about to see just how right he was.



Rep. Gohmert: ‘We Don’t Have Forensic Wagons To Gather Evidence on the Battlefield’ for Civil Court Trials of Terrorists

By Nicholas Ballasy, Video Reporter

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=57709

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the self-proclaimed Sept. 11 mastermind, shown shortly after his capture in Pakistan in this March 1, 2003 photo. He and four other Guantanamo Bay detainees will be sent to New York to face trial in a civilian federal court. (AP File Photo)

(CNSNews.com) - Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), who opposes the Obama administration’s decision to try 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammad in a civilian court instead of a military tribunal, told CNSNews.com that U.S. troops do not have “forensic wagons to pull up on the battlefield when we’ve got people in harm’s way” to collect evidence as is done for civil court cases.

“[T]o require the same types of standards of a civilian court to be applied to a war setting where our guys, our men and women are in harms way, is to require our military to lose their lives to gather evidence like DNA, finger prints,” said Gohmert at a Nov. 17 press conference. “We don’t have forensic wagons to pull up on the battlefield when we’ve got people in harm’s way.”

At the press conference, held to discuss Republican criticism of big government, CNSNews.com asked the following question: “You mentioned the Obama administration’s handling of terrorism and national security issues. The Obama administration has announced it will try the alleged mastermind behind the attack on the U.S.S. Cole in a military commission. Do you believe he can get a constitutionally legitimate and fair trial in a military commission?”

In response, Rep. Gohmert said: “To say that these guys cannot get a fair trial is to say that anyone who is tried in a military court does not get a fair trial and that is simply not true. When I was at Fort Benning for four years, there were acquittals there.”

“Those were done under the same UCMJ [Uniform Code of Military Justice], so certainly they can get a fair trial,” said Gohmert, “but it’s a different type trial when you are talking about someone who is not a U.S. citizen. And to require the same types of standards of a civilian court to be applied to a war setting where our guys, our men and women are in harm’s way, is to require our military to lose their lives to gather evidence like DNA, finger prints. We don’t have forensic wagons to pull up on the battlefield when we’ve got people in harm’s way.”

“There’s a different standard for a reason,” he said. “And this administration and those in Congress who would encourage this have so little regard for the people in New York City that they would bring terrorists to the most densely populated areas in this country, and it is outrageous.”

Gohmert, a member of the House Judiciary Committee and former Texas appeals court judge, said the decision to try Khalid Sheik Mohammad in civilian court derives from the Obama administration’s “desire to look good” in foreign countries.

“They’re [The Obama administration] putting a desire to look good in foreign countries ahead of the oath we take to defend this country against all enemies foreign and domestic and it comes back to the pink slip issue,” he said.

“[W]e have some people who are in Washington, both in the executive and legislative branch who have deaf ears to what Americans are saying,” said Gohmert. “We want you, they say, to be more concerned about your oath to follow the Constitution and to protect us than to go feel good in front of some liberal at some foreign cocktail party. The obligation is here in America and that’s why people are fed up with it.”



Our GIs Earn Enough

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33607-2000Jan11.html

By Cindy Williams

Wednesday, January 12, 2000; Page A19

This month every member of the U.S. military is getting a 4.8 percent pay raise, the biggest inflation boost the military has seen in 18 years. The ink on the paychecks is not yet dry, but already some politicians and lobbyists are clamoring for bigger raises in future years. Just this week the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) reported that most military people feel they are not paid fairly.

Proponents of additional hefty raises argue that even after this month's raise, the military suffers a 13 percent "pay gap" relative to the private sector. But in fact there is no pay gap worthy of the name; our armed forces are already paid very well compared with the rest of America. It makes no sense to pour money into outsized pay raises. The 25 percent pay hike that some proponents are backing would cost taxpayers more than $12 billion a year.

The "gap" of 13 percent does not measure the relative levels of military and civilian pay. Rather, it is supposed to reflect the differences between military and private sector raises since 1982. The calculation is set up to make the differences seem as large as possible. For example, it includes the growth in what the military calls "basic pay" but not the growth in allowances for food and housing. And it compares the military and civilian raises over separate time periods. Just correcting for those two problems cuts the result in half.

Comparing raises and calling it a pay gap makes no sense anyway. If you get a 5 percent raise this year and your neighbor gets 10 percent, it hardly means your pay has fallen behind your neighbor's: If you earned twice as much as your neighbor to start with, you still earn more than he does. Wage data show that our troops typically earn more money than 75 percent of civilians with similar levels of education and experience.

For example, after four months in the Army, an 18-year-old private earns about $21,000 a year in pay and allowances. In addition, he or she gets a tax advantage worth about $800, because some of the allowances are not taxed. That's not bad for a person entering the work force with a high school diploma. By way of comparison, an automotive mechanic starting out with a diploma from a strong vocational high school might earn $14,000 a year. A broadcast technician or communications equipment mechanic might earn $20,000 to start but typically needs a year or two of technical college.

At the higher end of enlisted service, a master sergeant with 20 years in the Marine Corps typically earns more than $50,000 a year--better than a senior municipal firefighter or a police officer in a supervisory position, and comparable to a chief engineer in a medium-sized broadcast market. Among the officers, a 22-year-old fresh out of college earns about $34,000 a year as an ensign in the Navy--about the same as the average starting pay of an accountant, mathematician or a geologist with a bachelor's degree. A colonel with 26 years makes more than $108,000.

In addition to these basic salaries, there are cash bonuses for officers and enlisted personnel with special skills. There are also fringe benefits: four weeks of paid vacation, comprehensive health care, discount groceries, tuition assistance during military service and as much as $50,000 for college afterward. Enlistment and reenlistment bonuses can run to $20,000 and more.

Advocates of additional big raises maintain that military people should be paid more because they are more highly qualified--they exceed national averages in verbal and math skills and percentage of high school graduations. But while these facts may help explain why the majority of our soldiers already earn more money than 75 percent of Americans, they don't explain why their future raises should exceed civilian wage growth by a large amount.

Some advocates contend that we need a large boost in military pay because the services are finding it difficult to attract and keep the people they need. But recruiting can be improved much less expensively by pumping up advertising, adding recruiters and better focusing their efforts and expanding enlistment bonuses and college programs. Pay is not necessarily the most important factor in a person's decision to stay in or leave the military. We might get better results by reducing the frequency of deployments, relaxing antiquated rules and improving working conditions.

Proponents of higher pay also note that military people put up with hardships such as long hours and family separations. Yet many civilian occupations make similar demands, and firefighters, police and emergency medical personnel, like many in the military, risk their lives on the job.

The report that CSIS released this week points to problems of morale and dissatisfaction across the military. But those problems are not all about pay. According to CSIS, they reflect concerns about training and leadership, the demands of frequent overseas deployments and unmet expectations for a challenging and satisfying military lifestyle.

Higher pay will not fix these problems.

The writer, a senior research fellow at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was assistant director for national security in the Congressional Budget Office from 1994 to 1997.


Military pay too high?

Read this letter from Airman Michael Bragg

http://www.swapmeetdave.com/United/Airman.htm

This letter was written in response to an Op/Ed piece that appeared in the Washington Post on Jan. 12, 2000 written by a Ms. Cindy Williams of MIT (not of the Laverne and Shirley TV show) denouncing the pay raise(s) coming servicemembers' way this year -- citing that the stated 13% wage increase was more than they deserve.

A young airman from Hill AFB responded to her article as follows. (He ought to get a bonus for this!)

Ms. Williams:

I just had the pleasure of reading your column, "Our GIs earn enough" and I am a bit confused. Frankly, I'm wondering where this vaunted overpayment is going, because as far as I can tell, it disappears every month between DFAS (The Defense Finance and Accounting Service) and my bank account. Checking my latest leave and earnings statement (LES), I see that I make $1,117.80 before taxes. After taxes, I take home $874.20. When I run that through Windows' Calculator, I come up with an annual salary of $13,413.60 before taxes, and $10,490.40 after.

I work in the Air Force Network Control Center (AFNCC), where I am part of the team responsible for the administration of a 5,000-host computer network. I am involved with infrastructure segments, specifically with Cisco Systems equipment. A quick check under jobs for Network Technicians in the Washington, D.C. area reveals a position in my career field, requiring three years experience with my job. Amazingly, this job does NOT pay $13,413.60 a year, nor does it pay less than this. No, this job is being offered at $70,000 to $80,000 per annum. I'm sure you can draw the obvious conclusions.

Also, you tout increases to Basic Allowance for Housing and Basic Allowance for Subsistence(housing and food allowances, respectively) as being a further boon to an already overcompensated force. Again, I'm curious as to where this money has gone, as BAH and BAS were both slashed 15% in the Hill AFB area effective in January 00.

Given the tenor of your column, I would assume that you have NEVER had the pleasure of serving your country in her armed forces. Before you take it upon yourself to once more castigate congressional and DOD leadership for attempting to get the families in the military's lowest pay brackets off AFDC, WIC, and food stamps, I suggest that you join a group of deploying soldiers headed for AFGHANISTAN, I leave the choice of service branch up to you. Whatever choice you make, though, opt for the SIX month rotation: it will guarantee you the longest possible time away from your family and friends, thus giving you full "deployment experience."

As your group prepares to board the plane, make sure to note the spouses and children who are saying good-bye to their loved ones. Also take care to note that several families are still unsure of how they'll be able to make ends meet while the primary breadwinner is gone -- obviously they've been squandering the vast piles of cash the DOD has been giving them.

Try to deploy over a major holiday; Christmas and Thanksgiving are perennial favorites. And when you're actually over there, sitting in a DFP (Defensive Fire Position, the modern-day foxhole), shivering against the cold desert night; and the flight sergeant tells you that there aren't enough people on shift to relieve you for chow, remember this: trade whatever MRE (meal-ready-to-eat) you manage to get for the tuna noodle casserole or cheese tortellini, and add Tabasco to everything. This gives some flavor.

Talk to your loved ones as often as you are permitted; it won't be nearly be long enough or often enough, but take what you can get and be thankful for it. You may have picked up on the act that I disagree with most of the points you present in your op-ed piece. But, to borrow from Voltaire, "I will defend to the death your right to say it." You see, I am an American fighting man, a guarantor of your First Amendment rights and every other right you cherish. On a daily basis, my brother and sister soldiers worldwide ensure that you and people like you can thumb your collective nose at us, all on a salary that is nothing short of pitiful and under conditions that would make most people cringe.

We hemorrhage our best and brightest into the private sector because we can't offer the stability and pay of civilian companies. And you, Ms. Williams, have the gall to say that we make more than we deserve?

Rubbish!

A1C Michael Bragg, Hill AFB AFNCC



"The e-mail Bag"

THE DONKEY

One day a farmer's donkey fell down into a well. The animal cried piteously for hours as the farmer tried to figure out what to do. Finally, he decided the animal was old, and the well needed to be covered up anyway; it just wasn't worth it to retrieve the donkey.

He invited all his neighbors to come over and help him. They all grabbed a shovel and began to shovel dirt into the well. At first, the donkey realized what was happening and cried horribly. Then, to everyone's amazement he quieted down.

A few shovel loads later, the farmer finally looked down the well. He was astonished at what he saw. With each shovel of dirt that hit his back, the donkey was doing something amazing. He would shake it off and take a step up.

As the farmer's neighbors continued to shovel dirt on top of the animal, he would shake it off and take a step up. Pretty soon, everyone was amazed as the donkey stepped up over the edge of the well and happily trotted off!

MORAL :

Life is going to shovel dirt on you, all kinds of dirt. The trick to getting out of the well is to shake it off and take a step up. Each of our troubles is a steppingstone. We can get out of the deepest wells just by not stopping, never giving up! Shake it off and take a step up.

Remember the five simple rules to be happy:

1. Free your heart from hatred - Forgive.

2. Free your mind from worries - Most never happens.

3. Live simply and appreciate what you have.

4. Give more.

5. Expect less from people but more from God.