May we never forget.

For Our Veterans

Bits of Tid: July 28, 2009

• The US Senate Armed Services Committee will be holding hearings on repealing the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy!
• Be sure to sign the petition at citizensforapublicoption.com!
• Shock-ing:
  

Michael Moore stands up against poor treatment of vets, troops

While his critics continue to attack him and accuse him of not supporting our troops even as they themselves have neglected our men and women in uniform, Michael Moore is showing once again that actions do speak louder than words.

Moore, founder of the Traverse City Film Festival that owns the State Theatre downtown, said the theater is implementing a new labor policy requiring all its contractors and vendors to attempt to hire veterans who served in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Moore described it as an "affirmative action" measure to help area veterans find employment opportunities when they return home -- opportunities that Moore said are severely lacking for many servicemen and women.

His opposition to the war remains as strong as ever. But Moore said he's just as upset about the treatment of the troops fighting the war, ranging from the lack of high-tech equipment to protect the soldiers to their medical treatment and the economic and employment uncertainty they face when returning home.

It would be sad enough if, in the wealthiest, most industrialized country in the world, just one American struggled to make ends meet. More shameful is that millions of Americans find themselves in this predicament every day.

Far more disconcerting, however, is that many of these people are veterans who have served their country in uniform.

Moore points to statistics to make his case. The federal labor department last month released unemployment rates for veterans who served in Iraq and Afghanistan that showed a 6.1 percent jobless rate for veterans who have served since September 2001. That compares to a national unemployment rate of around 5 percent in April. The jobless rate for veterans ages 18 to 24 was substantially higher, totaling 12 percent compared to 9.5 percent for non-veterans in the same age group.

These young men and women have already paid a high price - they put their lives on the line for the sake of freedom. And yet,

"Instead of receiving our veterans with open arms when they come back, they get 'Sorry chump, there's nothing for you,'" said Moore, who's hired military veterans for key editing and production positions for his documentaries, including "Fahrenheit 9/11" and "Sicko."

The State Theatre is also offering active-duty service personnel free admission to all movies.

Downright disgusting.

Nobody should have to go through this - especially our troops.

Truly supporting the troops

The phrase "Support the Troops" is often used as somewhat of a cliché that isn't usually backed by action. While some like to say they support the troops, not many people actually do anything to back up their words with deeds.

Now, thanks to Blogging for Michigan's Troop Care fund, we have an excellent opportunity to put our words into action. Now through November 25, BFM is taking donations which will be used to help provide material support to Michigan-based troops currently serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Donations are being accepted online or by mail. They will appreciate any donation, large or small. If you don't feel you can afford to donate, please be sure to spread the word so that more people know about Troop Care.

"Support the Troops" should be more than a phrase - it should be a way of life. Here's your chance to show that you really do care about those who are serving their country in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Bits of Tid: June 11, 2007

• Republicans are losing their grip on the rural vote. As a Michigander, I say, 'darn right.'
  
• Media Mouse takes a look at troop casualties in Iraq, which include four from Michigan. RIP.
  
• Very disturbing.
  
• Here's a piece from MichLib about one legislator flip-flopping on presidential endorsements. Hope you find my comment to your liking.
  
• HHS Secretary Mike Leavitt is making news after trying to schedule a meeting with Sen. Craig Thomas of Wyoming. Wouldn't be a big deal, except for one thing: Thomas passed away last week.
  
• Check out the House Democrats' renewable-energy plan.
  
• Two suspects have been arrested following a breaking-and-entering incident at CMU.

Presidential Bits of Tid: May 29, 2007

75 weeks from now, America will elect its 44th President and its 47th Vice President. But before we get to that, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention an important birthday.

That handsome young man in the photo was born ninety years ago today, May 29, 1917.

You may know that at 43, Ted Kennedy's brother was the youngest person ever elected President (Teddy Roosevelt became President at age 42 after William McKinley was assassinated). You may noty know that Bill Clinton was just 46 when he was elected in 1992. Barack Obama will turn 47 in August 2008, at which time John Edwards will be 55. Now who's the youngster? ;-)

Turning our attention back to those who wish to count themselves among JFK's successors:

• Many of Obama's supporters say that, like JFK, he symbolizes hope - hope that a black person can become President, hope for an end to the era of bitter partisanship, hope for, well, better days and years ahead. Critics say he's all style and no substance. While certainly no one can doubt that he has inspired a great many people, I must say his issues page is the most comprehensive of any of the candidates' issues pages.
  
  
• Look what John Edwards wants to do for our servicemen and women. The entire plan is great, but I especially like his "Plan for Coming Home" and Military Families Advisory Board ideas.
  
  
• Bill Richardson is known among the 2008 hopefuls for being probably the most experienced of the 2008 hopefuls But he also has a lighter side:
  
  

  "My favorite team has always been the Red Sox. I'm also a Yankees fan... This is the thing about me. I can bring people together."

• Does Hillary have a front-runner for VP?
  
  

  Former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack "has assumed a role in Sen. Hillary Clinton's Presidential campaign unlike any of the New York Democrat's other national advisers. He campaigns for her in Iowa and other key states, spends hours each week on the phone with donors and elected officials and has helped forge policy ideas Clinton presents on the campaign trail," the Des Moines Register reports.
  
  "In this way, Vilsack has made the quick and seemingly effortless transition from a one-time Clinton rival for the 2008 nomination to a go-to player in her campaign. Aides acknowledge privately that Vilsack's work for the campaign has the look of a rehearsal for the role of running mate, should Clinton win the nomination."

  
  I'll be honest: A Hillary/Vilsack ticket doesn't appeal to me very much.
  
  
• On the other side of the aisle, Sam Brownback is having trouble in his home state, taking just 18% in solidly red Kansas.

R.I.P.

Fading light dims the sight
And a star gems the sky, gleaming bright
From afar drawing nigh,
Falls the night.

Day is done, gone the sun
From the lake, from the hills, from the sky
All is well, safely rest;
God is nigh.

Then goodnight, peaceful night;
Till the light of the dawn shineth bright.
God is near, do not fear,
Friend, goodnight.

This is for all who have died in the line of duty, as well as for all veterans who have left us, including:

Grandpa Julius J. Young: January 9, 1919 - September 27, 1985
Grandpa Edward C. Urbanowski: March 10, 1923 - April 29, 2004

White House opposes pay hike for troops - so much for 'supporting' them

One has to wonder how some people like to proclaim their ‘support’ for the troops when in reality, current Administration policy reeks of being anti-troop.

First there was the idea to go to war in Iraq in the first place - a decision which has cost nearly 3,400 American lives and God knows how many Iraqi civilians’ lives, not to mention our standing in the world and several-hundred-billion-dollar jump in the national debt.

Then came the Abu Ghraib scandal. Then Walter Reed. Then Bush’s recent veto of a bill that would have brought our troops home to safety.

And now comes this:

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. (emphasis added)

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.”

I added some bold to show yet another difference between Republicans and Democrats - the Democratic-controlled Armed Services Committee voted to pass a pay hike, while the Administration opposes it. Actually, truly supporting the troops would involve bringing them home, but since such efforts haven't worked yet, this will have to suffice for now. Anyway, back to my rant.

Mr. President, do you really believe it unnecessary to treat our men and women in uniform to a fair wage? These people are putting their lives on the line in a war that you started, and your idea of 'supporting' them is to oppose giving them just a 3.5% pay hike?

What exactly is your idea of 'suporting the troops,' Mr. President? Because evidently it's not the same as mine.