The award winning sitcom M*A*S*H of the '70s and early '80s was based on a surgical unit in Korea during the Korean War. One of the characters was Corporal Klinger, a soldier who dressed in woman’s clothing hoping to convince the Army he was insane and therefore would qualify for discharge per Section 8 of United States Army Regulations.
I mention this because it is the only explanation that fits Paul Ryan's agreement to cut military veteran benefits or, at least, the only acceptable explanation for veterans and the Republican Party base.
In December of 2013, Paul Ryan (R.,WI) and Patty Murray (D.,WA) agreed to a spending bill, nicknamed a “Budget Deal”, that among other things eliminated sequester cuts to this years defense budget along with what little claim to victory the Republican Party has won since who knows when. That in itself is a travesty, but the real eye opener is that Ryan proposed cuts to military veteran benefits with the reasoning that the he could no longer allow veterans benefits to continue to “gouge” the defense budget.
Yes, Paul Ryan actually did use the word “
gouge”. He also referred to them as “
generous” as well.
Now you see where my questioning of Paul Ryan's sanity and bid for a Section 8 comes from.
Had Paul Ryan been a Democrat this would have come as no surprise, it would be expected. But from a Republican? A Republican that many believe is going to run for the presidency in the near future? This is for the most part political suicide. It is no secret that most former and current military service members are -- or up till now have been -- reliable votes for the Republican Party. A very valuable asset to have on your side as an aspiring politician. But Ryan has just ensured they will be going A.W.O.L if he looks to them for support in the future. Not only that, his reasoning sounds just as bat crap crazy as he apparently is.
The cuts to veteran benefits are a cut of 1% of Cost-Of-Living-Adjustment starting in January that will save 7 Billion over 10 years.. Many of Ryan's defenders reason that this is no big deal and had to be done. They also reason that many veterans often have second careers and basically are ”double dipping” because they are making money and collect a retirement for their military service. How dare those greedy veterans!
Let's blow this argument out of the water first. Military veterans enlisted and re-enlisted with the promise from their government that if they served 20 years or more they would receive full military benefits upon retirement for that service. There were no stipulations of “if “or “in case of” choosing to start a new career as a civilian after those 20 years of service. That is none of Ryan's or the government's business in the first place and should have nothing to do with their promised military compensation whatsoever.
Secondly, there are far more frivolous and non-essential things Ryan could have cut instead of veteran's benefits and compensation. The Pentagon even told him and congress as reported in May of 2013. When asked to make suggestions of what could be cut from the Pentagon's budget to deal with the recent sequester, they suggested several things like stop forcing them to
buy equipment it doesn’t want nor need. Consolidating redundant departments was another suggestion. As a matter of fact, the Pentagon found 6.9 Billion dollars of spending that was unnecessary for this year alone and recommended these cuts to congress. This was denied. Why, you ask? Congress denied these cuts because they are pork payoffs to supporters, donors, and people in their districts. This leaves only one other entity that may have influenced Ryan’s decision to go full Corporal Klinger; the Defense Industry.
Ryan stated that suggested cuts to veteran benefits came from the “
defense community”. I am sure that in no way he was referring the “defense industry” just like “budget deal” in no way is another name for “spending bill”. The more one looks into the matter the more one comes away feeling that Ryan is protecting defense industry profits over veteran benefits. It is no secret that defense industry lobbyists have left their hives on K-Street and have been swarming congressional halls for a while now. Who knows what little ideas they have been pollinating in politicians heads, but one can guess.
Last, and the most insulting part to veterans past, present, and future is that federal employees avoid the same cuts along with nothing being cut from entitlement programs. A slap in the face to men and woman who served our country and have literally gave an arm, leg, and more on the battlefield to be able to earn a modest retirement and a nice, much safer, career in civilian life if they choose to. Why must military veterans take a cut in benefits when bloated entitlement programs that are known to for massive amounts of fraudulent claims and mismanagement are not asked to do the same? How can this even be explained, let alone justified? The answer is, it can't in the minds of reasonably sane adults.
With this evidence Ryan's actions make no sense if he plans on a future in politics, and not in a padded room. Yet, maybe he is crazy like a fox. Is it possible that Ryan may feel he does not need veteran support and is counting on another block of voters who will replace them?
I wonder who that could be?
Sí me pregunto....
