Greedy Politicians

By Rush Limbaugh:

I think the vast differences in compensation between victims of the September 11 casualty and those who die serving our country in Uniform are profound. No one is really talking about it either, because you just don't criticize anything having to do with September 11. Well, I can't let the numbers pass by because it says something really disturbing about the entitlement mentality of this country. If you lost a family member in the September 11 attack, you're going to get an average of $1,185,000. The range is a minimum guarantee of $250,000, all the way up to $4.7 million..
If you are a surviving family member of an American soldier killed in action,
the first check you get is a $6,000 direct death benefit, half of which is taxable.
Next, you get $1,750 for burial costs. If you are the surviving spouse, you get $833 a month until you remarry. And there's a payment of $211 per month for each child under 18. When the child hits 18, those payments come to a screeching halt.
Keep in mind that some of the people who are getting an average of $1.185 million up to $4.7 million are complaining that it's not enough. Their deaths were tragic, but for most, they were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. Soldiers put themselves in harms way FOR ALL OF US, and they and their families

know the dangers...
(Actually, soldiers are put in harms way by politicians and commanding officers.)
We also learned over the weekend that some of the victims from the Oklahoma City bombing have started an organization asking for the same deal that the September 11 families are getting. In addition to that, some of the families of those bombed in the embassies are now asking for compensation as well.
You see where this is going, don't you? Folks, this is part and parcel of over 50 years of entitlement politics in this country. It's just really sad. Every time a pay raise comes up for the military, they usually receive next to nothing of a raise. Now the green machine is in combat in the Middle East while their families have to survive on food stamps and live in low-rent housing. Make sense?
However, our own US Congress voted themselves a raise. Many of you don't know that they only have to be in Congress one time to receive a pension that is more than $15,000 per month. And most are now equal to being millionaires plus. They do not receive Social Security on retirement because they didn't have to pay into the system. If some of the military people stay in for 20 years and get out as an E-7, they may receive a pension of $1,000 per month, and the very people who
placed them in harm's way receives a pension of $15,000 per month.

I would like to see our elected officials pick up a weapon and join ranks before they start cutting out benefits and lowering pay for our sons and daughters who are now fighting.
"When do we finally do something about this?"

Cambridge or New York?

Cambridge or New York?

Senator Galluccio says a home rule petition by Cambridge to pay City
employees their city salary and their military pay is a "historic action."
("Cambridge does get it," Letter, Boston herald, November 23, 2007, page 26)
Historic for Cambridge perhaps.
Martha K. Hirst, New York City Commissioner for the Department of Citywide
Administrative Services says NYC employees "have an option no other city offers
-- they can choose to receive their regular city salary and benefits along with
their military pay." ("Vet bills," Letter, New York Post November 18, 2007, page
42) So which came first? The New York or the Cambridge benefit?

Roy Bercaw, Editor ENOUGH ROOM

Not The Only City

Not The Only City

Councilor Toomey says removing Boy Scout collection boxes "had nothing to
do with politics; this event was politicized by the media, not by the city."
Imitating Bill Clinton Toomey suggests it depends on what the meaning of
"politics" is. (Tim Toomey, "Soldier on, Boy Scouts," Boston Herald, November
20, 2007)
He says, "I must remind those who are bashing Cambridge that we are the
first city in the state - and to my knowledge the country - that is offering
full salary and benefits to city employees who are overseas serving our country.
NYC provides full salary and benefits along with their military pay to city
employees. But they must repay (with hardship exceptions) the lower of the
military pay or the City salary when they return.
Councilor Toomey says removing Boy Scout collection boxes was "caused by an
apparent lack of communication." (His resolution (October 22, 2007; Resolution
36 "Urge all residents to participate in the Cambridge Boy Scouts Troop 45 and
Ship 45's Care Package Donation Drive to support our troops overseas.") carries
no power.
What was not communicated? It was not a City Council policy order.
Toomey states "Cambridge always has and will continue to support the men
and women from our city . . ." That allows them to ignore men and women for
other communities as far way as Somerville who fight for freedoms for the
moonbats in Cambridge.
Councilor Decker reads the names of the Killed In Action to oppose the war.
She exploits the deaths of men and women from other cities and states who fight
for her freedoms.
The City Council opposes the war because most of the Cambridge voters
oppose the war. The Councilors pander to whoever and whatever the cause, solely
to get re-elected. They have no beliefs other than getting re-elected.

Roy Bercaw, Editor ENOUGH ROOM

Soldier on, Boy Scouts
Donation drive OK in Cambridge
By Tim Toomey
Boston Herald
Tuesday, November 20, 2007 - Updated 18h ago

In light of recent events on Election Day in which Boy Scouts Troop 45 was asked
to remove donation boxes it had placed in Cambridge polling locations to collect
essential goods for local troops serving overseas, I think it is only
appropriate to clarify a few matters.

First, it is important to note that although over the past five years there has
been heated debate about the wars themselves, Cambridge always has and will
continue to support the men and women from our city who have bravely put their
lives on the line for our country.

On Oct. 22, I sponsored a City Council resolution in support of Troop 45 and its
effort to support the Cambridge military deployed overseas. The City Council
unanimously approved the resolution and went on record commending the Boy Scouts
on organizing the donation drive and urging all citizens to support the effort.

Resolutions like this one reflect the deep support Cambridge has for its
soldiers fighting abroad. The people of Cambridge understand that supporting our
troops and supporting the war those troops are fighting in are often two very
different things.

While this is an extremely unfortunate event, it was caused by an apparent lack
of communication and understanding rather than the malicious intent of any of
the parties involved.

Although the Scouts had informed the Election Commission of their intent and
received encouragement from the City Council, the individual polling locations
had not been notified in time and therefore had not granted the necessary
permissions to Troop 45. The decision had nothing to do with politics; this
event was politicized by the media, not by the city.

I must remind those who are bashing Cambridge that we are the first city in the
state - and to my knowledge the country - that is offering full salary and
benefits to city employees who are overseas serving our country. To say that we
do not care about the well-being of our troops is preposterous. The Home Rule
Petition that I sponsored on behalf of the City Council is one of the most
comprehensive benefit plans for our brave men and women.

Since the beginning of the military involvement in Afghanistan, City Councilor
Marjorie Decker has read the names of fallen soldiers from around the country
released by the Pentagon that week at each of our meetings. We do this to honor
and recognize the supreme sacrifice these heroes have made on behalf of our
country.

I encourage all those cities and towns looking down on Cambridge to examine
their own policies and see if they are on par with Cambridge.

While I am saddened by the disappointing outcome of the Boy Scouts’ donation
drive, I have also been extremely impressed by their resilience. While adults
have become entangled by the perceived politics of the situation, these Scouts
have served as impressive role models to us all by pushing forward unencumbered.
If any good has come of this, it has been the enormous outpouring of support
they have received from across the country.

I’m glad this incident has brought their admirable mission into the public eye,
and I encourage everyone to continue to show their support in this season of
giving by donating to the Boy Scouts of America.
Tim Toomey is vice mayor of Cambridge and a state representative.

Inadvertent Theft?

Inadvertent Theft?

Cambridge City Manager Robert "Healy said the city would not take back the
extra money and would instead try to treat all employees equally." (Janice
O'Leary, "One way to support the troops: full pay," Boston Globe, City Weekly,
May 13, 2007) The Manager has a generous way with taxpayer funds. Isn't that
called theft?
Councilor Decker declared at the council meeting, "It is only a handful of
employees." Oh? If only a handful of people commit a crime it is not a
violation? Not many people commit murder in Cambridge. It is only a handful. If
they are military veterans who need money for food shall we approve?
Councilor Galluccio shut off all debate saying, "No one would disagree with
this." If the handful of police officers did not demand equal treatment would
the "inadvertent illegal pay" be revealed?
These city officials wonder why young people refuse to cooperate with the
police. Well, duh.

Roy Bercaw, Editor ENOUGH ROOM
Cambridge MA USA

CAMBRIDGE
One way to support the troops: full pay
Firefighter Stephan Jeffres received full pay from the city when he served in
Iraq with the Air National Guard. Firefighter Stephan Jeffres received full pay
from the city when he served in Iraq with the Air National Guard. (Christina
Caturano FOR THE BOSTON GLOBE)

One way to support the troops: full pay
By Janice O'Leary,
Boston Globe Correspondent
May 13, 2007

City employees called up to serve in combat would get their full salaries in
addition to military pay, under a home rule petition sponsored by the Cambridge
City Council.

The council voted unanimously last Monday to endorse the bill, which now must go
before the state Legislature because it differs from state law.

Councilors recently discovered a disparity between several city departments in
how military personnel were being paid. The Fire Department, for instance, paid
full salary to a firefighter while he was deployed in Iraq.

However, the Police Department was paying its enlisted officers the difference
between their normal salaries and their military pay, which is what state law
dictates. Twenty officers appealed to the council this month for equal
treatment.

"If you have a family, it's beneficial for spouses, especially those with kids,"
said Stephan Jeffres, the firefighter who received full pay in addition to his
military salary. "Military pay, even with special allowances, is usually less
than you normally make. It keeps you from detail and overtime pay, which you
count on."

City Councilor Marjorie C. Decker, who chairs the council's Veterans Committee,
said she learned of the inequity when she was putting together a welcome home
package for returning soldiers.

At last week's meeting, the council approved the language for the petition
presented by City Manager Robert W. Healy, who said the city has no authority to
institute the policy without approval from the state, despite any urgency
councilors may feel.

"I am not authorized to make such a payment unless the home rule petition goes
through," he said.

While noting that the Fire Department "inadvertently" paid Jeffres his full
salary, Healy said the city would not take back the extra money and would
instead try to treat all employees equally.
[...]