Why I'm voting Democrat Part 2: Romney's insult to cops/firemen

[Dick Tuck]

Seriously, stop being a pussy. You're boring. You likely always were a closet Socialist/Progressive. So now you're out, good for you. Move on. SHEESH!

Stop being a wussy. You're posting.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Vote republican OR ELSE!

Tow the line or YOU'RE A RINO!

Lockstep or GET TO STEPPING!

See the Tolerant right? ....Me neither

 

[bucs90]

What OWS parasites like you believe in is " love thy neighbor, through thy federal government, using other peoples money". Big difference between that and the biblical admonishment.

Ah. Well, since the context of that quote was in a discussion of whether the Feds have the authority to send fire/police aid to a state, let me ask:

If Hawaii suffered a large volcanic explosion, and fires were rampant in Honolulu, would you oppose the Federal Gubermint sending federal money, equipment and personnel to help the overwhelmed Honolulu FD? Because I think the LAFD, Portland FD and Seattle FD would have trouble driving their fire trucks to help their fellow state.

A consistent response from you would be "NO, the federal government does not have the authority under the Constitution to send aid to the states for fire and police service".

Right?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So let me get this right.......

- Once I vote for a party, or align myself, theres no going back? Even if my views, or the actions of that groups elected officials, change?

Is this like the Bloods/Crips gangs, where I gotta get "jumped out"??

Yeah. You started as a conservative, and switched to being an OWS parasite. Very believable.

Good God. The more right wingers jump on me, the more I'm seeing why the left hated "us"/you all for so long.

Did I say I was an Occupy Wall Streeter now? I said it very clear and simple. I have a few priorities, aside from the general support for the military, that can swing my vote:

1- Cops and firemen
2- Care for the mentally ill
3- Animal rights
4- Adequate but controlled government spending/revenue
5- Legalize weed (although I've never smoked it)

1-4 far outweigh #5, and there are a few other minor topics.

But the Tea Party no longer represents my views as well as some Democrat candidates do. Its quite simple.

And from the harsh and vulgar reactions I've gotten from the right wingers here, I dont really think I'll be changing my vote back anytime soon.

I suppose "Fuck you you pussy communist" is a far better response to me than, well, clearly explaining why I'm wrong.

Ohhhh poor poor Bucs Starkey.

We're piling on.

That's so so so sad

How can we be so mean?

You see the light, how we're such meanies and you're more at home with ConzHateUSA, ConservaDork and fRANCoWtF.

Have fun with your "new" friends

 

[Dick Tuck]

So let me get this right.......

- Once I vote for a party, or align myself, theres no going back? Even if my views, or the actions of that groups elected officials, change?

Is this like the Bloods/Crips gangs, where I gotta get "jumped out"??

Yeah. You started as a conservative, and switched to being an OWS parasite. Very believable.

Good God. The more right wingers jump on me, the more I'm seeing why the left hated "us"/you all for so long.

Did I say I was an Occupy Wall Streeter now? I said it very clear and simple. I have a few priorities, aside from the general support for the military, that can swing my vote:

1- Cops and firemen
2- Care for the mentally ill
3- Animal rights
4- Adequate but controlled government spending/revenue
5- Legalize weed (although I've never smoked it)

1-4 far outweigh #5, and there are a few other minor topics.

But the Tea Party no longer represents my views as well as some Democrat candidates do. Its quite simple.

And from the harsh and vulgar reactions I've gotten from the right wingers here, I dont really think I'll be changing my vote back anytime soon.

I suppose "Fuck you you pussy communist" is a far better response to me than, well, clearly explaining why I'm wrong.

I have very mixed feelings about OWS. I agree with their notion that the American people are being taken over by fat cat corporatists, and Madison Avenue Goebbels types. What I don't buy into, is their YIPPIE style form of protest. That's counterproductive.

We all have the opportunity to expend energy to pontificate our beliefs. I prefer the path of least entropy.

 

[bucs90]

Vote republican OR ELSE!

Tow the line or YOU'RE A RINO!

Lockstep or GET TO STEPPING!

See the Tolerant right? ....Me neither

And I was one of the ones who always accused Democrats of that mindset. I recall Tea Party types bitching about why blacks would never change their mind and vote Dem. I suppose changing one's mind..............IF ONLY FOR ONE ELECTION CYCLE.....and plan to reasses afterwards.......is a sin against humanity.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You notice nobody ever pretends to be a Liberal

The Starkey Twins, Bucs and Jake are David Brock's bastard children

 

[Publius1787]

The Real Message Behind Mitt Romney’s Anti-Police And Firefighters ‘Gaffe’ | Mediaite

All the right wingers of the political world who are in power (mayors, govs, councils) seem to share the same idea: It's open season on cops and firemen. Lump them into the evil "government worker" label, and start slashing away.

This story didn't get reported much at all. Why? Well, maybe because I used to watch mostly FoxNews, and they just didn't spend a lot of time on it. I'm sure CNN, NBC, etc, didn't either.

And the above article sums it up so well. Romney and the right wing TP need votes from the right wing and independents. Which are mostly middle and upper class, many live in suburbs, and many are white. Which is fine. But the article explains, perfectly, that THOSE voting groups aren't as dependent on cops and firemen as, say, those in inner city ghettos. It says in those places, reductions in cops wont cause "someone to die" as a result. Thus, the voters accept it and dont really care. Again....just government workers, which are BAD.

Which is why I personally think "they" dont get it. Many on the right and in the TP live in the suburbs or in safe rural areas. They see a cop here and there. Probably live in fairly safe areas, with the biggest problems being speeding, DUI, some minor thefts. To them, "more cops" not only makes no sense, but they see TOO MANY cops. (Note: Often the case in cities the cops have helped make safe, the locals feel they are no longer necessary). Same with firemen. No one needs a fireman until their house is on fire.

What they dont realize is most FD's also have certified paramedics on the truck. And respond to ALL medical calls. So a person having a minor medical problem has a paramedic show up. If he/she can treat it there, guess what? It's free. You dont pay for an ambulance ride. You dont pay for an ER visit. Which means healthcare costs never happen. Good for everyone involved.

Unless you're the rich TP'er who sees the fire truck stopped at Subway for lunch and think "what a waste of my tax dollars to have so many fire trucks".

I’ve spent two deployments in combat as a Marine Corps infantryman. My first deployment we had 16 killed and around 263 wounded out of a 600+ man battalion. Our paychecks? Much lower than unionized public workers both in the police, fire department, and the bearcats, especially when you take in to effect benefits in many liberal municipalities. As an E-5 I was making $26,000 per year. The average military retiree makes anywhere between 1500 enlisted-2900 officer after 20 years of service and risking their lives. But it isn’t about the pay. It’s about serving your country and preserving our way of life. You don’t sign up for such a job for benefits, retirement, and an 8 hour work day. No, not in combat arms. We offered a public SERVICE. We aren’t allowed to unionize nor do we feel the need to. You won’t find us threatening to walk off the job, hire goons to protest on our behalf, run political ads on billboards, or quit when the government lowers our pay increases to under-pace inflation. Nevertheless, while liberals see fit to cry about the benefits to unionized police officers and firefighters they certainly also see fit to trash the military budget of which we depend on for our very lives. While liberals say to the public “we can’t spend enough for our unionized rescue workers” we were welding iron on the sides of our Humvee’s and watching democrats threaten to defund the war we were fighting (Though they really didn’t mean it but tell that to the enemy) as the enemy increased attacks to ensure that they did. And yet, we continue to do the mission with what we got and you never hear us complain about it. Not even when we received our absentee ballots 3 days before the 2004 Presidential election. Why? Because we serve and we serve with what we got and we serve what we get paid with regardless of the amount. That alone is the satisfaction we receive from doing our duty. If the government sees fit to lower our pay then fine. If its sees fit to decrease our numbers then fine. If it wants to defund our programs then fine. Why? Because we serve for the satisfaction of serving. And if it means that if we must work with less to ensure that our country survives then so be it. Don’t cry to me about firefighters and police officers.

 

[Pho_King]

So let me get this right.......

- Once I vote for a party, or align myself, theres no going back? Even if my views, or the actions of that groups elected officials, change?

Is this like the Bloods/Crips gangs, where I gotta get "jumped out"??

Yeah. You started as a conservative, and switched to being an OWS parasite. Very believable.

Good God. The more right wingers jump on me, the more I'm seeing why the left hated "us"/you all for so long.

Did I say I was an Occupy Wall Streeter now? I said it very clear and simple. I have a few priorities, aside from the general support for the military, that can swing my vote:

1- Cops and firemen
2- Care for the mentally ill
3- Animal rights
4- Adequate but controlled government spending/revenue
5- Legalize weed (although I've never smoked it)

1-4 far outweigh #5, and there are a few other minor topics.

But the Tea Party no longer represents my views as well as some Democrat candidates do. Its quite simple.

And from the harsh and vulgar reactions I've gotten from the right wingers here, I dont really think I'll be changing my vote back anytime soon.

I suppose "Fuck you you pussy communist" is a far better response to me than, well, clearly explaining why I'm wrong.

Why try to explain where you are wrong? You now embrace candidates that want big government, massive central planning, and a nanny state. That is what you will be voting for. Your number 4 is bullshit. If that was number 4 on your list, you could never vote for a dem. of course, perhaps " adequate, but controlled spending/ revenue" to you simply means massively increase spending and taxes.

If those really are your primary issues, you are the type of moron whose vote is easily swayed by the " mean old republicans wanting grandma to eat dog food" bullshit. Which is exactly the type of sentiment you have expressed on this thread. " those republicans are just too mean to support". Give me a break you whiny pussyassed OWS parasite.

 

[bucs90]

Yeah. You started as a conservative, and switched to being an OWS parasite. Very believable.

Good God. The more right wingers jump on me, the more I'm seeing why the left hated "us"/you all for so long.

Did I say I was an Occupy Wall Streeter now? I said it very clear and simple. I have a few priorities, aside from the general support for the military, that can swing my vote:

1- Cops and firemen
2- Care for the mentally ill
3- Animal rights
4- Adequate but controlled government spending/revenue
5- Legalize weed (although I've never smoked it)

1-4 far outweigh #5, and there are a few other minor topics.

But the Tea Party no longer represents my views as well as some Democrat candidates do. Its quite simple.

And from the harsh and vulgar reactions I've gotten from the right wingers here, I dont really think I'll be changing my vote back anytime soon.

I suppose "Fuck you you pussy communist" is a far better response to me than, well, clearly explaining why I'm wrong.

Ohhhh poor poor Bucs Starkey.

We're piling on.

That's so so so sad

How can we be so mean?

You see the light, how we're such meanies and you're more at home with ConzHateUSA, ConservaDork and fRANCoWtF.

Have fun with your "new" friends

Nah, keep bringing it on. See, unlike many, I'm truly not afraid of my principles. If it means voting for someone I never thought I would, so be it. A man makes decisions not from peer pressure, but from what he feels is right. No one would walk with their left eye closed just because the pretty view is on the right, would they? Well, some would. The Tea Party was a great thing from 2009 til about a year ago, in my humble opinion. My views are just more represented by Democrats mostly right now. I've got the courage to admit that, and vote that way.

 

[Papageorgio]

The Real Message Behind Mitt Romney’s Anti-Police And Firefighters ‘Gaffe’ | Mediaite

All the right wingers of the political world who are in power (mayors, govs, councils) seem to share the same idea: It's open season on cops and firemen. Lump them into the evil "government worker" label, and start slashing away.

This story didn't get reported much at all. Why? Well, maybe because I used to watch mostly FoxNews, and they just didn't spend a lot of time on it. I'm sure CNN, NBC, etc, didn't either.

And the above article sums it up so well. Romney and the right wing TP need votes from the right wing and independents. Which are mostly middle and upper class, many live in suburbs, and many are white. Which is fine. But the article explains, perfectly, that THOSE voting groups aren't as dependent on cops and firemen as, say, those in inner city ghettos. It says in those places, reductions in cops wont cause "someone to die" as a result. Thus, the voters accept it and dont really care. Again....just government workers, which are BAD.

Which is why I personally think "they" dont get it. Many on the right and in the TP live in the suburbs or in safe rural areas. They see a cop here and there. Probably live in fairly safe areas, with the biggest problems being speeding, DUI, some minor thefts. To them, "more cops" not only makes no sense, but they see TOO MANY cops. (Note: Often the case in cities the cops have helped make safe, the locals feel they are no longer necessary). Same with firemen. No one needs a fireman until their house is on fire.

What they dont realize is most FD's also have certified paramedics on the truck. And respond to ALL medical calls. So a person having a minor medical problem has a paramedic show up. If he/she can treat it there, guess what? It's free. You dont pay for an ambulance ride. You dont pay for an ER visit. Which means healthcare costs never happen. Good for everyone involved.

Unless you're the rich TP'er who sees the fire truck stopped at Subway for lunch and think "what a waste of my tax dollars to have so many fire trucks".

Sorry but using the word "all" is a discredit and dishonest, so I dock points there.

I also think many communities Democratic or Republican are having funding issues, what better way to get the attention of the voter than to cut police and firemen.

I lived in cities where budgets are voted on, and if the budget levy fails they cut the visible, fireman and police officers. I also think that in tough economic times, all. Need to cut back, essential services or not. Many public sector jobs are management top heavy and cut the actual workers.

Slice it anyway you want but this is a government issue, not a Democratic or Republican issue.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Olympia Snowe is a commie.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Good God. The more right wingers jump on me, the more I'm seeing why the left hated "us"/you all for so long.

Did I say I was an Occupy Wall Streeter now? I said it very clear and simple. I have a few priorities, aside from the general support for the military, that can swing my vote:

1- Cops and firemen
2- Care for the mentally ill
3- Animal rights
4- Adequate but controlled government spending/revenue
5- Legalize weed (although I've never smoked it)

1-4 far outweigh #5, and there are a few other minor topics.

But the Tea Party no longer represents my views as well as some Democrat candidates do. Its quite simple.

And from the harsh and vulgar reactions I've gotten from the right wingers here, I dont really think I'll be changing my vote back anytime soon.

I suppose "Fuck you you pussy communist" is a far better response to me than, well, clearly explaining why I'm wrong.

Ohhhh poor poor Bucs Starkey.

We're piling on.

That's so so so sad

How can we be so mean?

You see the light, how we're such meanies and you're more at home with ConzHateUSA, ConservaDork and fRANCoWtF.

Have fun with your "new" friends

Nah, keep bringing it on. See, unlike many, I'm truly not afraid of my principles. If it means voting for someone I never thought I would, so be it. A man makes decisions not from peer pressure, but from what he feels is right. No one would walk with their left eye closed just because the pretty view is on the right, would they? Well, some would. The Tea Party was a great thing from 2009 til about a year ago, in my humble opinion. My views are just more represented by Democrats mostly right now. I've got the courage to admit that, and vote that way.

What principles? I don't see you having any.

The old "I used to be a Conservative (uh huh, really, truly) and then I saw the light" was old and boring and unconvincing when David Brock did it, you think it gets MORE convincing and effective with the passing years?

LOL

Name change, Dude; maybe Bucs Starkey or Jake Brock, something where we'll have no idea its your new name

 

[Pho_King]

What OWS parasites like you believe in is " love thy neighbor, through thy federal government, using other peoples money". Big difference between that and the biblical admonishment.

Ah. Well, since the context of that quote was in a discussion of whether the Feds have the authority to send fire/police aid to a state, let me ask:

If Hawaii suffered a large volcanic explosion, and fires were rampant in Honolulu, would you oppose the Federal Gubermint sending federal money, equipment and personnel to help the overwhelmed Honolulu FD? Because I think the LAFD, Portland FD and Seattle FD would have trouble driving their fire trucks to help their fellow state.

A consistent response from you would be "NO, the federal government does not have the authority under the Constitution to send aid to the states for fire and police service".

Right?

Sorry. We all know what dems mean when they say shit like " love thy neighbor""don't be such a greedy asshole" and other sentiments. They mean, use other people's money to make themselves feel good. You simply don't use a biblical verse to justify federal spending, when the purpose of the admonishment is to encourage personal charity. Unless, of course, you believe that the biblical verse recommends just such charity.....with your neighbors money.

 

[Vel]

Wow.

This is hilarious. When a left winger decides voting GOP is better for him, he is cheered and congratulated and is said to simply have figured things out, or matured, etc. Never "he was always a closet rich Republican".

All I've done is take a few months (notice I haven't posted in a long while) and analyze my views with that of the current politicians in my city, county, state and nation.

And right now, my views are more represented by Democrats than Republicans.

Thats the foundation of non-partisan independence. Or as some call it, FREEDOM.

Thats all I did. And I'll do it again in 2014 and 2016.

It's actually called having no real principles. For you, it's just a case of the end justifies the means. It doesn't matter to you whether something is fair or right. It only matters that you get what you want.

So let me get this right.......

- Once I vote for a party, or align myself, theres no going back? Even if my views, or the actions of that groups elected officials, change?

Is this like the Bloods/Crips gangs, where I gotta get "jumped out"??

No, the beauty of the U.S. is that you get to vote your conscience. Your credibility however is suspect since you've spent your time here espousing conservative views. I personally find it wrong headed to base votes in a federal election because you're not happy with your local politicians, but perhaps that's just me. I think that if you're unhappy with things at a local level then you should work to change things at the local level instead of thinking that the Federal government should come riding to your rescue. Why should Tennessee taxpayers foot the bill because South Carolinian's don't know how to handle their money?
Your state should prioritize. The TeaParty is not saying that police are not necessary, they are saying to stop government waste. The taxpayers were not meant to be used as a cash cow. Taxes were meant to pay for the basic necessities of society not take up the slack for poor management.

 

[bucs90]

The Real Message Behind Mitt Romney’s Anti-Police And Firefighters ‘Gaffe’ | Mediaite

All the right wingers of the political world who are in power (mayors, govs, councils) seem to share the same idea: It's open season on cops and firemen. Lump them into the evil "government worker" label, and start slashing away.

This story didn't get reported much at all. Why? Well, maybe because I used to watch mostly FoxNews, and they just didn't spend a lot of time on it. I'm sure CNN, NBC, etc, didn't either.

And the above article sums it up so well. Romney and the right wing TP need votes from the right wing and independents. Which are mostly middle and upper class, many live in suburbs, and many are white. Which is fine. But the article explains, perfectly, that THOSE voting groups aren't as dependent on cops and firemen as, say, those in inner city ghettos. It says in those places, reductions in cops wont cause "someone to die" as a result. Thus, the voters accept it and dont really care. Again....just government workers, which are BAD.

Which is why I personally think "they" dont get it. Many on the right and in the TP live in the suburbs or in safe rural areas. They see a cop here and there. Probably live in fairly safe areas, with the biggest problems being speeding, DUI, some minor thefts. To them, "more cops" not only makes no sense, but they see TOO MANY cops. (Note: Often the case in cities the cops have helped make safe, the locals feel they are no longer necessary). Same with firemen. No one needs a fireman until their house is on fire.

What they dont realize is most FD's also have certified paramedics on the truck. And respond to ALL medical calls. So a person having a minor medical problem has a paramedic show up. If he/she can treat it there, guess what? It's free. You dont pay for an ambulance ride. You dont pay for an ER visit. Which means healthcare costs never happen. Good for everyone involved.

Unless you're the rich TP'er who sees the fire truck stopped at Subway for lunch and think "what a waste of my tax dollars to have so many fire trucks".

I’ve spent two deployments in combat as a Marine Corps infantryman. My first deployment we had 16 killed and around 263 wounded out of a 600+ man battalion. Our paychecks? Much lower than unionized public workers both in the police, fire department, and the bearcats, especially when you take in to effect benefits in many liberal municipalities. As an E-5 I was making $26,000 per year. The average military retiree makes anywhere between 1500 enlisted-2900 officer after 20 years of service and risking their lives. But it isn’t about the pay. It’s about serving your country and preserving our way of life. You don’t sign up for such a job for benefits, retirement, and an 8 hour work day. No, not in combat arms. We offered a public SERVICE. We aren’t allowed to unionize nor do we feel the need to. You won’t find us threatening to walk off the job, hire goons to protest on our behalf, run political ads on billboards, or quit when the government lowers our pay increases to under-pace inflation. Nevertheless, while liberals see fit to cry about the benefits to unionized police officers and firefighters they certainly also see fit to trash the military budget of which we depend on for our very lives. While liberals say to the public “we can’t spend enough for our unionized rescue workers” we were welding iron on the sides of our Humvee’s and watching democrats threaten to defund the war we were fighting (Though they really didn’t mean it but tell that to the enemy) as the enemy increased attacks to ensure that they did. And yet, we continue to do the mission with what we got and you never hear us complain about it. Not even when we received out absentee ballots 3 days before the 2004 Presidential election. Why? Because we serve and we serve with what we got and we serve what we get paid with regardless of the amount. That alone is the satisfaction we receive from doing our duty. If the government sees fit to lower our pay then fine. If its sees fit to decrease our numbers then fine. If it wants to defund our programs then fine. Why? Because we serve for the satisfaction of serving. And if it means that if we must work with less to ensure that our country survives then so be it. Don’t cry to me about firefighters and police officers.

Thank you for all you do. I want to applaud your post. There is a big difference in union and non-union cops. In the South, where the highest numbers of cops are killed, it's often done because of low training, but more often low equipment (many depts in the South dont provide bullet proof vests). All Marines deserve more than 26K a year, but as you said, it's not about that. The avg starting pay for cops in most Southern counties is between 25-30K, with modest retirement (nowhere NEAR the union depts up north our out west).

Police work in Atlanta, Charlotte, Jax, Memphis, etc, is NOT anything like what you men do. Apples and oranges.

However, I'd humbly say, the mentality you express of underfunded missions, shitty equipment, no support from the politicians, etc, etc,.......is the same idea (smaller scale) at the non-union PD's down here, even at places that have had multiple officer deaths over the last few years.

Id argue, however, that even the most dedicated military member has a limit to how much he can take in pay/benefit cuts before he could simply no longer do the job.

 

[bucs90]

What OWS parasites like you believe in is " love thy neighbor, through thy federal government, using other peoples money". Big difference between that and the biblical admonishment.

Ah. Well, since the context of that quote was in a discussion of whether the Feds have the authority to send fire/police aid to a state, let me ask:

If Hawaii suffered a large volcanic explosion, and fires were rampant in Honolulu, would you oppose the Federal Gubermint sending federal money, equipment and personnel to help the overwhelmed Honolulu FD? Because I think the LAFD, Portland FD and Seattle FD would have trouble driving their fire trucks to help their fellow state.

A consistent response from you would be "NO, the federal government does not have the authority under the Constitution to send aid to the states for fire and police service".

Right?

Sorry. We all know what dems mean when they say shit like " love thy neighbor""don't be such a greedy asshole" and other sentiments. They mean, use other people's money to make themselves feel good. You simply don't use a biblical verse to justify federal spending, when the purpose of the admonishment is to encourage personal charity. Unless, of course, you believe that the biblical verse recommends just such charity.....with your neighbors money.

So you're saying the Federal Government would have no damn business helping Hawaii out in that scenario because the Constitution doesn't grant the authority? Just a simple question.

 

[Publius1787]

The Real Message Behind Mitt Romney’s Anti-Police And Firefighters ‘Gaffe’ | Mediaite

All the right wingers of the political world who are in power (mayors, govs, councils) seem to share the same idea: It's open season on cops and firemen. Lump them into the evil "government worker" label, and start slashing away.

This story didn't get reported much at all. Why? Well, maybe because I used to watch mostly FoxNews, and they just didn't spend a lot of time on it. I'm sure CNN, NBC, etc, didn't either.

And the above article sums it up so well. Romney and the right wing TP need votes from the right wing and independents. Which are mostly middle and upper class, many live in suburbs, and many are white. Which is fine. But the article explains, perfectly, that THOSE voting groups aren't as dependent on cops and firemen as, say, those in inner city ghettos. It says in those places, reductions in cops wont cause "someone to die" as a result. Thus, the voters accept it and dont really care. Again....just government workers, which are BAD.

Which is why I personally think "they" dont get it. Many on the right and in the TP live in the suburbs or in safe rural areas. They see a cop here and there. Probably live in fairly safe areas, with the biggest problems being speeding, DUI, some minor thefts. To them, "more cops" not only makes no sense, but they see TOO MANY cops. (Note: Often the case in cities the cops have helped make safe, the locals feel they are no longer necessary). Same with firemen. No one needs a fireman until their house is on fire.

What they dont realize is most FD's also have certified paramedics on the truck. And respond to ALL medical calls. So a person having a minor medical problem has a paramedic show up. If he/she can treat it there, guess what? It's free. You dont pay for an ambulance ride. You dont pay for an ER visit. Which means healthcare costs never happen. Good for everyone involved.

Unless you're the rich TP'er who sees the fire truck stopped at Subway for lunch and think "what a waste of my tax dollars to have so many fire trucks".

I’ve spent two deployments in combat as a Marine Corps infantryman. My first deployment we had 16 killed and around 263 wounded out of a 600+ man battalion. Our paychecks? Much lower than unionized public workers both in the police, fire department, and the bearcats, especially when you take in to effect benefits in many liberal municipalities. As an E-5 I was making $26,000 per year. The average military retiree makes anywhere between 1500 enlisted-2900 officer after 20 years of service and risking their lives. But it isn’t about the pay. It’s about serving your country and preserving our way of life. You don’t sign up for such a job for benefits, retirement, and an 8 hour work day. No, not in combat arms. We offered a public SERVICE. We aren’t allowed to unionize nor do we feel the need to. You won’t find us threatening to walk off the job, hire goons to protest on our behalf, run political ads on billboards, or quit when the government lowers our pay increases to under-pace inflation. Nevertheless, while liberals see fit to cry about the benefits to unionized police officers and firefighters they certainly also see fit to trash the military budget of which we depend on for our very lives. While liberals say to the public “we can’t spend enough for our unionized rescue workers” we were welding iron on the sides of our Humvee’s and watching democrats threaten to defund the war we were fighting (Though they really didn’t mean it but tell that to the enemy) as the enemy increased attacks to ensure that they did. And yet, we continue to do the mission with what we got and you never hear us complain about it. Not even when we received out absentee ballots 3 days before the 2004 Presidential election. Why? Because we serve and we serve with what we got and we serve what we get paid with regardless of the amount. That alone is the satisfaction we receive from doing our duty. If the government sees fit to lower our pay then fine. If its sees fit to decrease our numbers then fine. If it wants to defund our programs then fine. Why? Because we serve for the satisfaction of serving. And if it means that if we must work with less to ensure that our country survives then so be it. Don’t cry to me about firefighters and police officers.

Thank you for all you do. I want to applaud your post. There is a big difference in union and non-union cops. In the South, where the highest numbers of cops are killed, it's often done because of low training, but more often low equipment (many depts in the South dont provide bullet proof vests). All Marines deserve more than 26K a year, but as you said, it's not about that. The avg starting pay for cops in most Southern counties is between 25-30K, with modest retirement (nowhere NEAR the union depts up north our out west).

Police work in Atlanta, Charlotte, Jax, Memphis, etc, is NOT anything like what you men do. Apples and oranges.

However, I'd humbly say, the mentality you express of underfunded missions, shitty equipment, no support from the politicians, etc, etc,.......is the same idea (smaller scale) at the non-union PD's down here, even at places that have had multiple officer deaths over the last few years.

Id argue, however, that even the most dedicated military member has a limit to how much he can take in pay/benefit cuts before he could simply no longer do the job.

Feed me once a day and just try to get me out when I'm wounded and I would do it for continental script.

 

[Papageorgio]

The Real Message Behind Mitt Romney’s Anti-Police And Firefighters ‘Gaffe’ | Mediaite

All the right wingers of the political world who are in power (mayors, govs, councils) seem to share the same idea: It's open season on cops and firemen. Lump them into the evil "government worker" label, and start slashing away.

This story didn't get reported much at all. Why? Well, maybe because I used to watch mostly FoxNews, and they just didn't spend a lot of time on it. I'm sure CNN, NBC, etc, didn't either.

And the above article sums it up so well. Romney and the right wing TP need votes from the right wing and independents. Which are mostly middle and upper class, many live in suburbs, and many are white. Which is fine. But the article explains, perfectly, that THOSE voting groups aren't as dependent on cops and firemen as, say, those in inner city ghettos. It says in those places, reductions in cops wont cause "someone to die" as a result. Thus, the voters accept it and dont really care. Again....just government workers, which are BAD.

Which is why I personally think "they" dont get it. Many on the right and in the TP live in the suburbs or in safe rural areas. They see a cop here and there. Probably live in fairly safe areas, with the biggest problems being speeding, DUI, some minor thefts. To them, "more cops" not only makes no sense, but they see TOO MANY cops. (Note: Often the case in cities the cops have helped make safe, the locals feel they are no longer necessary). Same with firemen. No one needs a fireman until their house is on fire.

What they dont realize is most FD's also have certified paramedics on the truck. And respond to ALL medical calls. So a person having a minor medical problem has a paramedic show up. If he/she can treat it there, guess what? It's free. You dont pay for an ambulance ride. You dont pay for an ER visit. Which means healthcare costs never happen. Good for everyone involved.

Unless you're the rich TP'er who sees the fire truck stopped at Subway for lunch and think "what a waste of my tax dollars to have so many fire trucks".

I’ve spent two deployments in combat as a Marine Corps infantryman. My first deployment we had 16 killed and around 263 wounded out of a 600+ man battalion. Our paychecks? Much lower than unionized public workers both in the police, fire department, and the bearcats, especially when you take in to effect benefits in many liberal municipalities. As an E-5 I was making $26,000 per year. The average military retiree makes anywhere between 1500 enlisted-2900 officer after 20 years of service and risking their lives. But it isn’t about the pay. It’s about serving your country and preserving our way of life. You don’t sign up for such a job for benefits, retirement, and an 8 hour work day. No, not in combat arms. We offered a public SERVICE. We aren’t allowed to unionize nor do we feel the need to. You won’t find us threatening to walk off the job, hire goons to protest on our behalf, run political ads on billboards, or quit when the government lowers our pay increases to under-pace inflation. Nevertheless, while liberals see fit to cry about the benefits to unionized police officers and firefighters they certainly also see fit to trash the military budget of which we depend on for our very lives. While liberals say to the public “we can’t spend enough for our unionized rescue workers” we were welding iron on the sides of our Humvee’s and watching democrats threaten to defund the war we were fighting (Though they really didn’t mean it but tell that to the enemy) as the enemy increased attacks to ensure that they did. And yet, we continue to do the mission with what we got and you never hear us complain about it. Not even when we received our absentee ballots 3 days before the 2004 Presidential election. Why? Because we serve and we serve with what we got and we serve what we get paid with regardless of the amount. That alone is the satisfaction we receive from doing our duty. If the government sees fit to lower our pay then fine. If its sees fit to decrease our numbers then fine. If it wants to defund our programs then fine. Why? Because we serve for the satisfaction of serving. And if it means that if we must work with less to ensure that our country survives then so be it. Don’t cry to me about firefighters and police officers.

I respect the police and the firefighters, I also highly respect those servicemen who risked their lives so we can sit home and cry over politics, thank you for what you have done for all of us.

I also don't know why the Democratic party treats soldiers like dirt and not wanting to count their votes, they above all people have EARNED the right to vote and every measure should be made to see each and everyone counted.

I don't see how the Democratic party can treat service men this crappy and then pretend to care about police and firemen.

We also need to pay servicemen, police and firemen the wages Hollywood nut jobs get and give hollywood nutjobs low pay,

 

[bucs90]

Ohhhh poor poor Bucs Starkey.

We're piling on.

That's so so so sad

How can we be so mean?

You see the light, how we're such meanies and you're more at home with ConzHateUSA, ConservaDork and fRANCoWtF.

Have fun with your "new" friends

Nah, keep bringing it on. See, unlike many, I'm truly not afraid of my principles. If it means voting for someone I never thought I would, so be it. A man makes decisions not from peer pressure, but from what he feels is right. No one would walk with their left eye closed just because the pretty view is on the right, would they? Well, some would. The Tea Party was a great thing from 2009 til about a year ago, in my humble opinion. My views are just more represented by Democrats mostly right now. I've got the courage to admit that, and vote that way.

What principles? I don't see you having any.

The old "I used to be a Conservative (uh huh, really, truly) and then I saw the light" was old and boring and unconvincing when David Brock did it, you think it gets MORE convincing and effective with the passing years?

LOL

Name change, Dude; maybe Bucs Starkey or Jake Brock, something where we'll have no idea its your new name

So you think I was a fake right winger for.......the past 4 years on USMB.....just to all of a sudden jump out and say I'm switching in August 2012?

Wow Thats a doozy.