HeloDude

Even if what you say is true (debatable), check out the re-election statistics for incumbents seeking re-election in the House. It all comes back to the people. We (as in the vast majority of the population) are the problem and the politicians are just the large symptom.

Continued from my rant in the RIF and Retirement Cuts threads: And for everybody else, Congressmen and Senators are politicians, pure and simple. There's a reason a vast majority of them will follow their party line and then blame their vote on something else...our very own 'Congressman' just did this a couple days ago. Politicians are concerned about retaining their seats, and their party politics and personal ideology sometimes conflict with their priority of retaining their seats, though the 3 are fairly interconnected. This unfortunately is nothing new...though it seems to be getting worse in recent years (though I'm sure it's cyclical to a certain degree). Chang said it correctly (unfortunately)--we serve our senior officers and they serve our politicians, pure and simple. Liquid has more or less said the same thing. I do not feel we are truly here to support and defend The Constitution...and if someone can show me otherwise, then I'd love to hear the argument (when have we picked The Constituition over our politicians?...or have our politicians always followed The Constitution?). Our elected President, whoever it is at the time, can do whatever he (or a future she) desires with our military and if the other politicians do not desire or have the strength to stop him/her, then we do what we're told, regardless of what The Constitution says...so to backpedal slightly, our politicians follow The Constitution when it suits them, on both sides of the aisle (ie structure of the Congress, etc). We have referes who are the federal judges (most notably SCOTUS) but the majority of them are almost as ideological as the politicians...hence why we have a lot of 5-4 decisions, typically following the same ideological trend of what President nominated them. It took me a while to fully understand and accept all of this, and though it made me sad, it provided some clarity to a highly dysfunctional situation. This all being said, we as military members do a pretty good job at breaking things when our politicians tell us to do so, and it can be effectively argued at times that by doing so, we have kept citizens safer. So if you're upset with how Congressman voted, don't be. The country (which includes us) have allowed the politicians to do what they're doing. Our problem in this country stem from the people, not the politicians. If I missed the boat, then I welcome someone to set me straight.

1) Would it ever be appropriate to hold it against somebody for volunteering for an approved AF program to get volunteers to separate? 2). Please define what a 'team player' is for me. Go to the Liberty/Constitution thread for the rest of my rant on what's going on...

This is totally different than the last VSP/RIF from 2-3 years ago. That time, in the very beginning, Big Blue only said it would affect certain year groups and did not say anything specifically in the beginning with regards to specific AFSC's and year groups. Also, all the info that has currently been released says that anyone 'elgible' for a VSP/RIF (or Force Shaping/early retirement) will be officially notified in January. So if you're not notified that you could be eligible for one of the programs and you then are later RIF'd, then I think this would be bigger than the AF later coming back and saying 'oops'. It would be like holding a promotion board without you knowing you were competing in that board.

Both

My bet says yes. The only guys who have been able to take the 1/2 upfront option in recent years have been 11F's, and they're ineligible anyway. So I bet you can apply and if selected, your bonus only paid you out for those additional years you served past your original commitment.

First off, I voted for Gary Johnson and some other Libertarian candidates as well. Second, I agree that the vast majority of folks will still vote for the memebers of one of the 2 establishment parties. But I asked YOU what YOU suggest people do about it? Because, by the way, you said all politicians, so in that case, you believe nobody will be honest and do what they say they'll do. So again, I ask you, what do you suggest as a remedy?

He's two scotches down and spelling was never one of my strong suits.

1) I'm willing to bet a bottle of scotch that the force shaping goes through on some level even with the recent budget deal as we were told today that Gen Welch is doing the Force Management in order for the force to be ready for FY2023 (however the verbiage the went). 2) It was specifically said today (after someone asked the specific question) at the base Force Management mass brief that the Air Force will not necessarily accept all VSP applicants for a specific AFSC/year group in order to not have a RIF for that specific AFSC/year group. Translation: If the Air Force gets 7 VSP applicants for 5 required eduction cuts for a certain AFSC/year group and all 7 are guys that the AF doesn't want to let go, then the AF have the option of dealer's choice, ie--they can disapprove all 7 and elect to go to a later RIF to get the kind of guys they want out of the Air Force in that specific AFSC/year group. The Air Force...where the points don't matter and they get to change the rules as they go.

Looks like 2-stars don't get to have fun anymore.

So then answer my question in regards to what you think people should do if we can't trust put politicians to do what they say they will do?

The real question is how will the bonus play into this whole mix?

McCain voted for it...as expected. Nuff' said.

So the Chiefs are now getting 'Chiefed'?

This...unfortunately.

Really, dude?? Out of all the people on a ballot for office, and you can't find one guy or gal you think would be decent in office? (and yes, 'decent' is/can be a relative term). I get that your politics are probably closer aligned with the GOP than the Dems and you're upset with your GOP Rep/candidate, but you still have other options--you're not limited to the traditional 2 party system.

Fair enough, though the Wicker's Amendment (which does the same thing) still hasn't been voted on. And again, why didn't the GOP in the House do this where they have full control?

How did the Dems vote to block the restoration of the COLA cuts?..and how did they also vote to allow the illegals to get their tax benefits? I have checked the Senate roll call votes and I haven't seen such an amendment voted one way or another. Did Reid not allow it to come to the floor for a vote? I don't think the Senate has voted yet on Sen Wicker's amendment to restore the funding...by all means, correct me if I am wrong. Either way--why didn't the House put up an amendment to fix the bill and restore the funding in the original bill? The GOP runs the House and they could have adjusted the language. I think it's quite apparent that I'm pretty far from a liberal (except on some social issues), but I think you're only blaming one side of the aisle when we should be blaming both sides equally. They both did it for political reasons and both believe that their end goals justify the means. And let's be honest, in the end, if you (not 'you' specifically, but anybody) are a Republican/Conservative type who is upset by this bill, you will still more than likely vote to re-elect your Republican Rep/Senator even if they voted for it. It's the power of the establishment and incumbency and it's how McCain stays in power, why Graham will get re-elected if he survives his primary, etc. Just the way people vote, which is unfortunate.

Lets be honest and fair here man...a strong majority of the Republicans and so-called 'conservatives' voted for this crap in the House, and several Republicans in the Senate voted to allow it to go forward as well. For most of the GOP, I think it was purely political as they don't want the government shutdown to change the narrative away from the Obamacare disaster in prep for the Nov 2014 elections, and for the Dems, they wanted to get rid of some of the sequester and be able to show the country that they can govern. So in other words, politics won the day. But make no mistake about it, this was not a result of reduced spending. Check out how much the government will spend this next year and the compare to 2007 or 2008...and then if you really want to be sick, look at how much we spent in the early and mid 2000's compared to the late 90's. To be quite honest, even if the GOP wins the House, Senate, and Presidency in 2016, I'm not so sure real fiscal discipline will return to Washington anytime soon.

You could say the same thing about any politician on any issue they run on. So with your logic, why should a cirizen ever vote for anybody at all? Are you suggesting it is time for a revolution? It's a strawman type argument, but that being said, I am curious to hear your response...again, if we can't ever trust our politicians, then what should be done?

I don't even have a witty comment for this one...it's definitely a 'WTF' on so many different levels. Discuss. NORTH DAKOTA TO LET MAN IN SAME-SEX MARRIAGE WED WOMAN, TOO

The guy was holding 1 AK and 1 AR...so it can't be M2 as he would have been holding 2 AK's. Don't worry, M2, I got you man.

Careful, you'll offend the liberals.

Wow...but yet, the politicians continue to screw over everybody in the name of good politics when they're back in DC. Forgive me if I'm not impressed that they can smile over some paintings.