By Rush Limbaugh;

I think the vast differences in compensation between the victims of the September 11th casualty, and those who die serving the
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 11th.

Well, I just 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 11th 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 that are getting an average of $1.185 million up to $4.7 million are complaining that it's not enough.

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 11th 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 fifty years of entitlement politics in this country. It's just really sad.

Every time when 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.

However our own U.S. Congress just voted themselves a raise, and 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 be millionaires plus. They also 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 you may receive a pension of $1,000 per month, and the very people who placed you in harms way receive 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 ??"

If this doesn't seem fair to you, it is time to forward this to as many people as you can.

 

Interesting view. Sadly it always come down to $ to measure things. I don't doubt the numbers and having served in the Air Force I understand life in harms way. Maybe its time we show more respect to anyone who puts on a uniform to serve. . . no matter if it's a civilian or military job.

 

hmmmm

 

Yeah....what a great country we live in....

 

This might be the first logical thing to eminate from Limbaugh's mouth in... well, ever!

I totally agree. I feel for those who lost friends or loved ones on 9/11, but the huge monetary payout is a joke.

Edit: See my post below for a better explanation of this.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by WestSideBilly
[B]This might be the first logical thing to eminate from Limbaugh's mouth in... well, ever!

I totally agree.

 

I, for one, don't think the "payout" that the victims of 9-11 are receiving is a "joke". No amount of $ could ever take away the pain that I would go through had I lost someone on that terrible day. That's that.

Also, while I agree with Rush's point, I think his logic is partially flawed. You can't compare the pay that the victim's of 9-11 are receiving to the pay that our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines receive. For one, most of the pay that the victims of 9-11 are getting are from contributions from people like you and I. the $ that the military gets is from the govt. (actually just you and I too but that's a whole other ball of wax).

The point about the pension/pay of US Senators and their wages is more relevant.

It is upsetting. I was very patriotic (though not blinded by my patriotism) long before 9-11. I continue to believe that I am lucky to live in the greatest nation in the world. I am a strong, strong supporter of our military (see my signature below) and I think that we as a nation need to do a better job of taking care of the people who put on a uniform to protect the rest of us.

 

My problem with the pay that's going to the loved ones lost on 911 is that we gave and gave to help these people. We came together and did it because we wanted to and now the Government is going to give them our tax dollars too. It seems to me that Washington has said it doesn't matter that you gave what you could, we'll decide how much you give.

I may not agree with Rush 100% but he sure makes a good point with this.

 

In Limbaugh's diatribe, he really is discussing 2 distinct issues: military pay and the 9/11 payout. He tries to connect the two, but seemingly fails.

With regards to military pay, I don't think there are a lot of folks out there who feel as though our soldiers are payed well. They're not. And the issue of congressmen voting themselves a pay raise, while miltary families live off of food stamps and gov't handouts, stinks of hypocrisy (imagine that!). I don't imagine there to be a lot of argument here, so I'll move on...

With regards to the 9/11 compensation fund/payout, I still think it's a very questionable policy, for 2 reasons:

1. How are the 9/11 victims any different than the people killed in Oklahoma? What about overseas victims of terrorism (plane hijacking/bombings, embassy bombings, etc)? What about non-combatants killed in Pearl Harbor? This is a big can of worms that is being opened, and I personally am afraid of the contents.

2. Even if the fund was funded entirely by charitable donations from outside our government, it doesn't change change the fact that concessions have been made to the familes of the victims that are way out of the norm. For a victim's family, any and all income taxes payed that year and the year previous are returned - and by nature of who worked in the WTC, there were a lot of somewhat affluent victims. Also, an estate tax exemption of up to $8.5 million was granted. The estate tax on an $8.5 million estate is over $3 million!

The point is, immense breaks were given to 9/11 victims' families. Did they suffer a great loss? Absolutely. Is there loss any different or greater than the loss of a loved one to any other non-natural (i.e. military death, auto accident, street homicide, etc etc) cause? I don't think so.

 

One difference between the military casualties and civilian casualties is that those in the military CHOSE to be there with the understanding that their lives were at stake. The victims of 911 made no such decision. This difference certainly doesn't diminish the lives of military personnel mor than civilians, but somehow it [i]does/[i] have bearing.

This country has a lot of things to figure out in the aftermath of 9/11.