February 15, 2001

Lying to the Military "W" Style
by Carl S. Ey

Three democrat representatives have decided that President George W. Bush's $310 billion proposal for our defense budget represents an untruth with regard to his campaign promise to repair the military.

"Your decision not to request a supplemental military appropriation bill and to submit a modest $310 billion defense budget raises serious questions," Rep. Martin Frost (D-Texas), Rep. Ike Skelton (D-MO) and Rep. Norm Dicks (D-Wash.) wrote in a letter to the president. "We believe that addressing these glaring needs immediately should be top priority and must be included in your budget before we can responsibly consider trillion-dollar tax cuts."

Who are these three kidding?

Anyone that followed the campaign realizes the President Bush campaigned long and hard on fixing the military by making living conditions better, service member pay better and developing better equipment to lead our Armed Forces into the 21st Century. Recently, the liberal press would have anyone believe that President Bush is not going to honor that promise. Martin, Skelton and Dicks echoed that concern with an exclamation point in the form of a letter to our 43rd president.

Before these three "military saviors" decide to question President Bush, they need to question their own performance.

"Taking care of the troops remains my first priority," said Rep. Skelton who happens to be the ranking Democrat member of the House Armed Forces Committee. "The well-being of American military personnel and their families is extremely important to our national security."

Somebody should ask Rep. Skelton where he was eight years ago when President Clinton didn't know how to salute, let alone spend some of our eventual surplus to improve the military way of life.

Furthermore, Rep. Dicks is a member of the Defense Appropriation Subcommittee. Didn't he realize that service members had problems with decent housing and others were using food stamps to make ends meet?

Finally, Rep. Frost is serving his twelfth term in office and proclaims on his web page that he is in favor of a strong national defense. Did his commitment to the military start when he assisted in authoring this letter to President Bush? What has he been doing for the last 12 terms in Congress as our military has scrambled to meet recruiting goals and get budgets to match Secretary Albright's increased peace-keeping operations tempo.

The three of them should be ashamed that they would have the gall to take on President Bush and his offer of $310 billion. His thoughts behind providing that budget were right on target particularly for a man that has been in office less than a month.

"It seems to me a perfectly rational and logical thing for a president of the United States to do to engage his brain before he opens the taxpayers' wallet," said Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld. "He [President Bush] wants me and the Department of Defense to undertake a defense review. It is not going to take years, and it's not going to take days. It will take some months."

The last eight years brought no movement in repairing our military.  Instead, a flurry of money was thrown in the Armed Force's direction as President Clinton realized that he wanted to leave a positive impression on his way out. It was the age-old, tax and spend mentality of the Democrats. By the way, if there hadn't been a surplus, would Uncle Sam's finest been endowed with a pay raise? Thank God, Denise Rich had some spare change to donate.

Unfortunately, there was no thought, just checks to appease service members. It didn't work and having three members of congress question President Bush's decision on when and how much to spend in order to assist the 1.37 million service members doesn't make any sense either.  Making every American's life easier with a tax cut and an economy booster should take priority over military spending. The military didn't seem to matter for the first six years of the Clinton Administration unless of course he wanted to divert the nation's attention from his impending impeachment!

Obviously, President Bush is a man of his word. He is making huge strides in a sizeable tax cut as he outlined in his campaign.  Furthermore, he is trying to unite the country as opposed to divide it with political affiliations. Finally, he made the "military saviors" look stupid Monday when he proposed a $5.7 billion dollar infusion into the military.

Go figure - a Republican President honoring his campaign promises but not spending foolishly. Why do we even have a Democrat party? I guess it is because we can't stand success. Every so often, we need a president that allows his staff to vandalize the White House, pardon a person that trades with a country that holds U.S. hostages, and looks to Reverend Jesse Jackson for marriage counseling to remind us how much better the American way of life is with a "G.O.P.er" on Pennsylvania Avenue.

Rumors have it that President Bush may add another $14 billion to the military budget as well. In just 23 days, he has done more for us than Rep. Frost, Rep. Skelton and Rep. Dicks have done and is far ahead of President Clinton's efforts to restore pride to our Armed Forces. Perhaps Rep. Frost, Rep. Skelton and Rep. Dicks will be "stand-up guys" and pen another letter to President Bush apologizing for questioning his campaign promise.

Maybe.

Then again, maybe President Clinton will sell some his "White House gifts" and donate the proceeds to the Veteran's Administration.

© 2001 Carl S. Ey

Join the Debate!
Click here to enter the discussion!