| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Harry Hope" |
| Date: |
16 May 2007 08:59:06 PM |
| Object: |
Republican White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise for troops |
From Army Times, 5/16/07:
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/05/military_whitehouse_opposeraise_070516w/
White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise
By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Troops don’t need bigger pay raises, White House budget officials said
Wednesday in a statement of administration policy laying out
objections to the House version of the 2008 defense authorization
bill.
The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent military raise for
Jan. 1, 2008, enough to match last year’s average pay increase in the
private sector.
The House Armed Services Committee recommends a 3.5 percent pay
increase for 2008, and increases in 2009 through 2012 that also are
0.5 percentage point greater than private-sector pay raises.
The slightly bigger military raises are intended to reduce the gap
between military and civilian pay that stands at about 3.9 percent
today.
Under the bill, HR 1585, the pay gap would be reduced to 1.4 percent
after the Jan. 1, 2012, pay increase.
Bush budget officials said the administration “strongly opposes” both
the 3.5 percent raise for 2008 and the follow-on increases, calling
extra pay increases “unnecessary.”
____________________________________________________
Yup
Harry
.
|
|
| User: "Bob Eld" |
|
| Title: Re: Republican White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise for troops |
17 May 2007 11:58:13 AM |
|
|
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:5ndn43hskg3q6cs7m78mkcpq21bnmo2ap0@4ax.com...
From Army Times, 5/16/07:
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/05/military_whitehouse_opposeraise_070516
w/
White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise
By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Troops don't need bigger pay raises, White House budget officials said
Wednesday in a statement of administration policy laying out
objections to the House version of the 2008 defense authorization
bill.
The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent military raise for
Jan. 1, 2008, enough to match last year's average pay increase in the
private sector.
The House Armed Services Committee recommends a 3.5 percent pay
increase for 2008, and increases in 2009 through 2012 that also are
0.5 percentage point greater than private-sector pay raises.
The slightly bigger military raises are intended to reduce the gap
between military and civilian pay that stands at about 3.9 percent
today.
Under the bill, HR 1585, the pay gap would be reduced to 1.4 percent
after the Jan. 1, 2012, pay increase.
Bush budget officials said the administration "strongly opposes" both
the 3.5 percent raise for 2008 and the follow-on increases, calling
extra pay increases "unnecessary."
____________________________________________________
Yup
Harry
Of course they oppose any pay raises for the troops or any other working
poor in America, they're REPUBLICANS, what do you expect? To pay the troops
more would mean more deficit or they'd have to reduce the tax breaks to
Exxon and their other wealthy friends. They can't do that. Remember, that's
the way repugs support the troops, by fucking them over.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kevin Cunningham" |
|
| Title: Re: Republican White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise for troops |
18 May 2007 11:55:54 AM |
|
|
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:5ndn43hskg3q6cs7m78mkcpq21bnmo2ap0@4ax.com...
From Army Times, 5/16/07:
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/05/military_whitehouse_opposeraise_070516w/
White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise
By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Troops don't need bigger pay raises, White House budget officials said
Wednesday in a statement of administration policy laying out
objections to the House version of the 2008 defense authorization
bill.
The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent military raise for
Jan. 1, 2008, enough to match last year's average pay increase in the
private sector.
The House Armed Services Committee recommends a 3.5 percent pay
increase for 2008, and increases in 2009 through 2012 that also are
0.5 percentage point greater than private-sector pay raises.
The slightly bigger military raises are intended to reduce the gap
between military and civilian pay that stands at about 3.9 percent
today.
Under the bill, HR 1585, the pay gap would be reduced to 1.4 percent
after the Jan. 1, 2012, pay increase.
Bush budget officials said the administration "strongly opposes" both
the 3.5 percent raise for 2008 and the follow-on increases, calling
extra pay increases "unnecessary."
____________________________________________________
Yup
Harry
Of course we should pay the troops more. We should pay them tons more but
now Bush is getting cheap. Of course he never served so how would he know.
The troops need increased wages and they need improved health cares. Good
luck in getting it.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lamont Cranston" |
|
| Title: Re: Republican White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise for troops |
17 May 2007 08:55:10 PM |
|
|
Harry Hope wrote:
From Army Times, 5/16/07:
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/05/military_whitehouse_opposeraise_070516w/
White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise
By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Troops don’t need bigger pay raises, White House budget officials said
Wednesday in a statement of administration policy laying out
objections to the House version of the 2008 defense authorization
bill.
The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent military raise for
Jan. 1, 2008, enough to match last year’s average pay increase in the
private sector.
The House Armed Services Committee recommends a 3.5 percent pay
increase for 2008, and increases in 2009 through 2012 that also are
0.5 percentage point greater than private-sector pay raises.
The slightly bigger military raises are intended to reduce the gap
between military and civilian pay that stands at about 3.9 percent
today.
Under the bill, HR 1585, the pay gap would be reduced to 1.4 percent
after the Jan. 1, 2012, pay increase.
Bush budget officials said the administration “strongly opposes” both
the 3.5 percent raise for 2008 and the follow-on increases, calling
extra pay increases “unnecessary.”
____________________________________________________
Yup
Harry
So, "Daniel," tell us how the Repugs "support the troops"
and the Dems don't. Please explain.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patriot Games" |
|
| Title: Re: Republican White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise for troops |
18 May 2007 01:50:52 PM |
|
|
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Cranston@TheShadowKnows.com> wrote in message
news:%H73i.376407$6P2.78065@newsfe16.phx...
Harry Hope wrote:
From Army Times, 5/16/07:
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/05/military_whitehouse_opposeraise_070516w/
White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise
By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Troops don’t need bigger pay raises, White House budget officials said
Wednesday in a statement of administration policy laying out
objections to the House version of the 2008 defense authorization
bill.
The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent military raise for
Jan. 1, 2008, enough to match last year’s average pay increase in the
private sector. The House Armed Services Committee recommends a 3.5
percent pay
increase for 2008, and increases in 2009 through 2012 that also are
0.5 percentage point greater than private-sector pay raises.
The slightly bigger military raises are intended to reduce the gap
between military and civilian pay that stands at about 3.9 percent
today. Under the bill, HR 1585, the pay gap would be reduced to 1.4
percent
after the Jan. 1, 2012, pay increase.
Bush budget officials said the administration “strongly opposes” both
the 3.5 percent raise for 2008 and the follow-on increases, calling
extra pay increases “unnecessary.”
____________________________________________________
Yup
So, "Daniel," tell us how the Repugs "support the troops" and the Dems
don't. Please explain.
What part of "The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent military
raise" don't you understand?
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Pretzel" |
|
| Title: Re: Republican White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise for troops |
18 May 2007 02:03:47 PM |
|
|
Patriot Games wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Cranston@TheShadowKnows.com> wrote in message
news:%H73i.376407$6P2.78065@newsfe16.phx...
Harry Hope wrote:
From Army Times, 5/16/07:
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/05/military_whitehouse_opposeraise_070516w/
White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise
By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Troops don’t need bigger pay raises, White House budget officials said
Wednesday in a statement of administration policy laying out
objections to the House version of the 2008 defense authorization
bill.
The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent military raise for
Jan. 1, 2008, enough to match last year’s average pay increase in the
private sector. The House Armed Services Committee recommends a 3.5
percent pay
increase for 2008, and increases in 2009 through 2012 that also are
0.5 percentage point greater than private-sector pay raises.
The slightly bigger military raises are intended to reduce the gap
between military and civilian pay that stands at about 3.9 percent
today. Under the bill, HR 1585, the pay gap would be reduced to 1.4
percent
after the Jan. 1, 2012, pay increase.
Bush budget officials said the administration “strongly opposes” both
the 3.5 percent raise for 2008 and the follow-on increases, calling
extra pay increases “unnecessary.”
____________________________________________________
Yup
So, "Daniel," tell us how the Repugs "support the troops" and the Dems
don't. Please explain.
What part of "The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent military
raise" don't you understand?
What part of "He got 3.5 percent military raise instead and "strongly
opposes" the raise" do YOU NOT UNDERSTAND eh, Rightard?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patriot Games" |
|
| Title: Re: Republican White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise for troops |
21 May 2007 12:14:18 PM |
|
|
"The Pretzel" <pretzel@chokeonit.org> wrote in message
news:464df893$0$4723$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
Patriot Games wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Cranston@TheShadowKnows.com> wrote in message
news:%H73i.376407$6P2.78065@newsfe16.phx...
Harry Hope wrote:
From Army Times, 5/16/07:
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/05/military_whitehouse_opposeraise_070516w/
White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise
By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Troops don’t need bigger pay raises, White House budget officials said
Wednesday in a statement of administration policy laying out
objections to the House version of the 2008 defense authorization
bill.
The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent military raise for
Jan. 1, 2008, enough to match last year’s average pay increase in the
private sector. The House Armed Services Committee recommends a 3.5
percent pay
increase for 2008, and increases in 2009 through 2012 that also are
0.5 percentage point greater than private-sector pay raises.
The slightly bigger military raises are intended to reduce the gap
between military and civilian pay that stands at about 3.9 percent
today. Under the bill, HR 1585, the pay gap would be reduced to 1.4
percent
after the Jan. 1, 2012, pay increase.
Bush budget officials said the administration “strongly opposes” both
the 3.5 percent raise for 2008 and the follow-on increases, calling
extra pay increases “unnecessary.”
____________________________________________________
Yup
So, "Daniel," tell us how the Repugs "support the troops" and the Dems
don't. Please explain.
What part of "The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent military
raise" don't you understand?
What part of "He got 3.5 percent military raise instead and "strongly
opposes" the raise" do YOU NOT UNDERSTAND eh, Rightard?
That's fine. I think the "follow-on increases" was an issue. Normally
military pay increases are evaluated as needed and NOT planned for in
advance.
So, apparently Bush WAS supporting the troops and the original author was
just lying....
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lamont Cranston" |
|
| Title: Re: Republican White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise for troops |
21 May 2007 01:39:57 PM |
|
|
"Patriot Games" <Crazy_Bastard@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Krk4i.3929$TU1.2153@trnddc07...
"The Pretzel" <pretzel@chokeonit.org> wrote in message
news:464df893$0$4723$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
Patriot Games wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Cranston@TheShadowKnows.com> wrote in message
news:%H73i.376407$6P2.78065@newsfe16.phx...
Harry Hope wrote:
From Army Times, 5/16/07:
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/05/military_whitehouse_opposeraise_070516w/
White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise
By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Troops don’t need bigger pay raises, White House budget officials said
Wednesday in a statement of administration policy laying out
objections to the House version of the 2008 defense authorization
bill.
The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent military raise for
Jan. 1, 2008, enough to match last year’s average pay increase in the
private sector. The House Armed Services Committee recommends a 3.5
percent pay
increase for 2008, and increases in 2009 through 2012 that also are
0.5 percentage point greater than private-sector pay raises.
The slightly bigger military raises are intended to reduce the gap
between military and civilian pay that stands at about 3.9 percent
today. Under the bill, HR 1585, the pay gap would be reduced to 1.4
percent
after the Jan. 1, 2012, pay increase.
Bush budget officials said the administration “strongly opposes” both
the 3.5 percent raise for 2008 and the follow-on increases, calling
extra pay increases “unnecessary.”
____________________________________________________
Yup
So, "Daniel," tell us how the Repugs "support the troops" and the Dems
don't. Please explain.
What part of "The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent military
raise" don't you understand?
What part of "He got 3.5 percent military raise instead and "strongly
opposes" the raise" do YOU NOT UNDERSTAND eh, Rightard?
That's fine. I think the "follow-on increases" was an issue. Normally
military pay increases are evaluated as needed and NOT planned for in
advance.
So, apparently Bush WAS supporting the troops and the original author was
just lying....
Apparently, the Dems support the troops more than Bush does.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patriot Games" |
|
| Title: Re: Republican White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise for troops |
22 May 2007 09:49:18 AM |
|
|
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Cranston@NeoconEvilFighter.com> wrote in message
news:f2soum$d96$1@news.albasani.net...
"Patriot Games" <Crazy_Bastard@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Krk4i.3929$TU1.2153@trnddc07...
"The Pretzel" <pretzel@chokeonit.org> wrote in message
news:464df893$0$4723$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
Patriot Games wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Cranston@TheShadowKnows.com> wrote in message
news:%H73i.376407$6P2.78065@newsfe16.phx...
Harry Hope wrote:
From Army Times, 5/16/07:
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/05/military_whitehouse_opposeraise_070516w/
White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise
By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Troops don’t need bigger pay raises, White House budget officials
said
Wednesday in a statement of administration policy laying out
objections to the House version of the 2008 defense authorization
bill.
The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent military raise for
Jan. 1, 2008, enough to match last year’s average pay increase in the
private sector. The House Armed Services Committee recommends a 3.5
percent pay
increase for 2008, and increases in 2009 through 2012 that also are
0.5 percentage point greater than private-sector pay raises.
The slightly bigger military raises are intended to reduce the gap
between military and civilian pay that stands at about 3.9 percent
today. Under the bill, HR 1585, the pay gap would be reduced to 1.4
percent
after the Jan. 1, 2012, pay increase.
Bush budget officials said the administration “strongly opposes” both
the 3.5 percent raise for 2008 and the follow-on increases, calling
extra pay increases “unnecessary.”
____________________________________________________
Yup
So, "Daniel," tell us how the Repugs "support the troops" and the Dems
don't. Please explain.
What part of "The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent
military raise" don't you understand?
What part of "He got 3.5 percent military raise instead and "strongly
opposes" the raise" do YOU NOT UNDERSTAND eh, Rightard?
That's fine. I think the "follow-on increases" was an issue. Normally
military pay increases are evaluated as needed and NOT planned for in
advance.
So, apparently Bush WAS supporting the troops and the original author was
just lying....
Apparently, the Dems support the troops more than Bush does.
Apparently the Dems just want to ***** away more taxpayer more....
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lamont Cranston" |
|
| Title: Re: Republican White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise for troops |
22 May 2007 11:22:01 AM |
|
|
"Patriot Games" <Crazy_Bastard@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:OpD4i.7179$xV.2980@trnddc05...
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Cranston@NeoconEvilFighter.com> wrote in message
news:f2soum$d96$1@news.albasani.net...
"Patriot Games" <Crazy_Bastard@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Krk4i.3929$TU1.2153@trnddc07...
"The Pretzel" <pretzel@chokeonit.org> wrote in message
news:464df893$0$4723$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
Patriot Games wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Cranston@TheShadowKnows.com> wrote in
message news:%H73i.376407$6P2.78065@newsfe16.phx...
Harry Hope wrote:
From Army Times, 5/16/07:
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/05/military_whitehouse_opposeraise_070516w/
White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise
By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Troops don’t need bigger pay raises, White House budget officials
said
Wednesday in a statement of administration policy laying out
objections to the House version of the 2008 defense authorization
bill.
The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent military raise for
Jan. 1, 2008, enough to match last year’s average pay increase in
the
private sector. The House Armed Services Committee recommends a 3.5
percent pay
increase for 2008, and increases in 2009 through 2012 that also are
0.5 percentage point greater than private-sector pay raises.
The slightly bigger military raises are intended to reduce the gap
between military and civilian pay that stands at about 3.9 percent
today. Under the bill, HR 1585, the pay gap would be reduced to 1.4
percent
after the Jan. 1, 2012, pay increase.
Bush budget officials said the administration “strongly opposes”
both
the 3.5 percent raise for 2008 and the follow-on increases, calling
extra pay increases “unnecessary.”
____________________________________________________
Yup
So, "Daniel," tell us how the Repugs "support the troops" and the
Dems don't. Please explain.
What part of "The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent
military raise" don't you understand?
What part of "He got 3.5 percent military raise instead and "strongly
opposes" the raise" do YOU NOT UNDERSTAND eh, Rightard?
That's fine. I think the "follow-on increases" was an issue. Normally
military pay increases are evaluated as needed and NOT planned for in
advance.
So, apparently Bush WAS supporting the troops and the original author
was just lying....
Apparently, the Dems support the troops more than Bush does.
Apparently the Dems just want to ***** away more taxpayer more....
Paying the troops is pissing away taxpayer money? How Republican of you.
Maybe by paying the troops a little more, we could reduce the number of
military families who have to rely on food stamps (currently 1 in 5
according to a Kaiser study).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patriot Games" |
|
| Title: Re: Republican White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise for troops |
22 May 2007 05:24:07 PM |
|
|
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Cranston@NeoconEvilFighter.com> wrote in message
news:f2v57t$vhc$1@news.albasani.net...
"Patriot Games" <Crazy_Bastard@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:OpD4i.7179$xV.2980@trnddc05...
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Cranston@NeoconEvilFighter.com> wrote in
message news:f2soum$d96$1@news.albasani.net...
"Patriot Games" <Crazy_Bastard@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Krk4i.3929$TU1.2153@trnddc07...
"The Pretzel" <pretzel@chokeonit.org> wrote in message
news:464df893$0$4723$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
Patriot Games wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Cranston@TheShadowKnows.com> wrote in
message news:%H73i.376407$6P2.78065@newsfe16.phx...
Harry Hope wrote:
From Army Times, 5/16/07:
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/05/military_whitehouse_opposeraise_070516w/
White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise
By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Troops don’t need bigger pay raises, White House budget officials
said
Wednesday in a statement of administration policy laying out
objections to the House version of the 2008 defense authorization
bill.
The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent military raise
for
Jan. 1, 2008, enough to match last year’s average pay increase in
the
private sector. The House Armed Services Committee recommends a 3.5
percent pay
increase for 2008, and increases in 2009 through 2012 that also are
0.5 percentage point greater than private-sector pay raises.
The slightly bigger military raises are intended to reduce the gap
between military and civilian pay that stands at about 3.9 percent
today. Under the bill, HR 1585, the pay gap would be reduced to 1.4
percent
after the Jan. 1, 2012, pay increase.
Bush budget officials said the administration “strongly opposes”
both
the 3.5 percent raise for 2008 and the follow-on increases, calling
extra pay increases “unnecessary.”
____________________________________________________
Yup
So, "Daniel," tell us how the Repugs "support the troops" and the
Dems don't. Please explain.
What part of "The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent
military raise" don't you understand?
What part of "He got 3.5 percent military raise instead and "strongly
opposes" the raise" do YOU NOT UNDERSTAND eh, Rightard?
That's fine. I think the "follow-on increases" was an issue. Normally
military pay increases are evaluated as needed and NOT planned for in
advance.
So, apparently Bush WAS supporting the troops and the original author
was just lying....
Apparently, the Dems support the troops more than Bush does.
Apparently the Dems just want to ***** away more taxpayer more....
Paying the troops is pissing away taxpayer money? How Republican of you.
Paying the troops NOW is fine. That's why Bush, not the Dems, recommended
it.
Scheduling a pay raise for the FUTURE is stupid.
Maybe by paying the troops a little more, we could reduce the number of
military families who have to rely on food stamps (currently 1 in 5
according to a Kaiser study).
Nobody is arguing that.
You lack of military experience is showing.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "gaffo" |
|
| Title: Re: Republican White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise for troops |
18 May 2007 09:32:55 PM |
|
|
Lamont Cranston wrote:
Harry Hope wrote:
From Army Times, 5/16/07:
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/05/military_whitehouse_opposerais
e_070516w/
White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise
By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Troops don’t need bigger pay raises, White House budget officials
said Wednesday in a statement of administration policy laying out
objections to the House version of the 2008 defense authorization
bill.
The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent military raise for
Jan. 1, 2008, enough to match last year’s average pay increase in
the private sector. The House Armed Services Committee recommends
a 3.5 percent pay increase for 2008, and increases in 2009 through
2012 that also are 0.5 percentage point greater than private-sector
pay raises.
The slightly bigger military raises are intended to reduce the gap
between military and civilian pay that stands at about 3.9 percent
today. Under the bill, HR 1585, the pay gap would be reduced to
1.4 percent after the Jan. 1, 2012, pay increase.
Bush budget officials said the administration “strongly opposes”
both the 3.5 percent raise for 2008 and the follow-on increases,
calling extra pay increases “unnecessary.”
____________________________________________________
Yup
Harry
So, "Daniel," tell us how the Repugs "support the troops" and the
Dems don't. Please explain.
you the same "Lamont Cranston" who used to post all the great OTR shows
to the binaries group in 2000 era?????????????????????
if so thanks for the great "Hall of Fantasy" series post - I play it on
my NRG (RIP Steve Moss - NRG founder ALS victom) pirate transmitter in
my town for my neighbors.
if you are not the same "Lamont" my appologies for thinking you were
another person.
.............
impeach bush - please.
--
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
