Reduce Defense Spending ... Are You Serious?

According to Money Magazine (October 2012, p. 85), 68% of those polled (Republicans AND Democrats) think the United States should cut defense (military) spending. Military Times has reported on numerous occasions that the Department of Defense (DoD), Congress, and President Obama all want to cut personnel and retiree benefits, that is a fact. What are these geniuses thinking? What is 68% of the population, supposedly, thinking? You got me friends!

We have been at war with Al Qaeda, and others, for 13 years and our military, if not dead already, are worn out, exhausted, and not really appreciated, even though "thank you for your service" has become the "catch" phrase since 9/11. Our heroes in uniform, past, present, and future, put their families, health, and lives on the line every day ... for your freedom folks.

So now that Osama Bin Laden is dead, we are out of Iraq (for the time being, in mass anyway), and things are winding down in Afghanistan, we have nothing to worry about ... right? Military retention rates are at all time highs thanks to patriotism and a weak economy, so why not cut their (active duty, Guard, Reserves, and retiree) pay and benefits or, better yet, drum them out of the service altogether so we can save a few bucks? Forget those promises we (the government, recruiters) made about job security, lifetime healthcare, pensions, and other "retention" tools ... the threat is gone, over, history, so why not cut defense spending (that is shorthand for personnel and benefits? Do you really think the military (DoD) is going to give up any planes, tanks, ships, or helicopters?

I don't know about you, but I have a couple problems with that kind of thinking:

First, we, as a nation, made promises to our men and women in uniform and cannot change course now. That is immoral! Can you say integrity? Apparently not. Politicians and others can "talk the talk", but when it comes to keeping promises made to recruits, they DO NOT "walk the walk"! KEEP the promises you made (integrity) to those serving and those who have served. If you want to make changes, make them effective BEFORE future enlistees enlist, not after we obligated to and/or faithfully served our country.

Second, the president, Congress, and DoD ARE NOT focusing on fighting a few terrorists here and there, they are focusing on two very real, very large, very lethal threats ... CHINA (and their redheaded stepchild North Korea), IRAN, and Russia (again) thanks to their nutjob president, Vladimir Putin.

China is a military and nuclear superpower with BILLIONS of potential troops and Iran is on the verge of becoming a nuclear threat (beside having one of the most potent militaries in the Middle East), and is threatening one of the most unstable and economically critical regions in the world today ... ON A DAILY BASIS! Can you say OIL? How about nuclear holocaust? Israel? Are you people out if your freakin' minds?

So why not cut porkbarrel spending, pet projects, a bloated government full of useless programs and lazy workers (that is a generalization, there are many worthwhile programs and civil servants), or even cushy pensions for serving in Congress for a couple of years? Or why does the government not target the BILLION$ that goes down the drain every year due to FRAUD, WASTE? Because they do not care, memories are very short, and if there is not an immediate threat, citizens are selfish and want all the money to come to their way. That is human nature and means the politicians need to keep those voters happy so they can be reelected and receive those cushy pensions ... right?

In conclusion, our shortsighted predecessors cut defense spending after World Wars I and II, Korea, Vietnam, and even Gulf War I, but guess what? That's right, we got caught with our pants down when the next conflict came along. Do you have any idea how much we waste as a nation drawing down and building up our military as a reaction to world events , or worse, elections? BILLIONS ... JUST LIKE THOSE BILLIONS OF CHINESE just a stones throw from the United States of America ... can you say Alaska (Sarah Palin can see Russia from her house after all)? What about Hawaii? There is a place in Hawaii called Pearl Harbor ... have you heard of it?

China recently launched their first aircraft carrier and their defense budget has been increasing by at least 12% annually for decades. Who do you think they are preparing for? Al Qaeda? North Korea? No, they are preparing to take on the largest superpower in the world ... U.S. ... and we are going to be caught with our pants down once again. Why? For a few more votes ... for a few more self-centered, shortsighted, ignorant morons ... that's right, we call them POLITICIANS (lawyers mostly and we all know what Shakespeare said about lawyers).

DO NOT FORGET TO VOTE! I am not going to tell you WHOM to vote for, but vote with your conscience, and, ABOVE ALL, vote for a strong military and hold your elected officials accountable for protecting the FREEDOM we in the military have worked so hard TO EARN and DEFEND. Vote for president in 2016 or you might just be voting for a Chinese Premier in 2020.

That's the end of that tune ... CombatCounselor...OUT!

Chris Sorrentino, LtCol, USAF (Ret)

aka CombatCounselor

This article can be published in its entirety with the permission of C.T. Sorrentino, aka CombatCounselor, 3rd Wave Media Group, and 3rd Wave Publications

Key Words: benefits, budget, China, cuts, defense, election, government, Iran, Korea, military, Obama, pension, personnel, politics, spending, Vietnam, voters, war, Osama bin Laden, 

Copyright 2012-2014 - 3rd Wave Publications - All Rights Reserved

Selfless or Narcissist ... That Is The Question!

Here's a great example of the difference between selfless people, those who go into the caring professions (veterinarians, nurses, social workers, etc.), and narcissists (the antonym of "selfless"), those who go into other professions, usually more prestigious and lucrative.  Can you say attorneys?  Sure you can!

I have seen literally hundreds of clients (I am a licensed psychotherapist) free of charge, "pro bono", hundreds, over the last 22 years, yet I have not and will not brag about it and would never think of mentioning it publicly except to highlight a poignant example, as I am here.

This particular lawyer, who I am sure is not an evil person and in-fact helped my wife get her attorney in her recent successful lawsuit, bragged about HIMSELF on Facebook yesterday (see referenced post below) about how he "waived" an amputees expenses "AND" ONLY CHARGED HIM HALF OF HIS NORMAL FEE ... ONLY HALF OF WHAT, $250 AN HOUR?  This poor man with only one leg had to pay just $125 an hour!

Here is his post:

"I am so humbled by the faith people put in me. I am also overwhelmed by the perspective my clients have despite facing the worst tragedies. I just settled a case today for a man who suffered a leg amputation when a car pulled in front of his motorcycle. Over the time I have been his lawyer, I never heard him complain ONCE about how he felt or how his entire life has been re-written. He was surely in pain, scared, frustrated -- but his attitude was always shockingly positive and upbeat. This client trusted me sight-unseen on the recommendation of a mutual friend. He lives half a country away, and could have picked any of the lawyers knocking on his door. But he chose me. His attitude and spirit prompted me--after our very first conversation--to waive his case expenses AND more than half of my usual attorney fee. So I am thankful to know this client, and I extend boundless appreciation to him  and our mutual friend who put us on the other's path."

When I think of pro bono, I think of the legal profession.  We always hear about attorneys who take pro bono cases for the poor or disabled right?  The problem with that is those cases are usually high-profile cases, the ones that make it on television, shows like 48 Hours, 60 Minutes, or one of other well known programs.  The others are usually during highly publicized trials like Casey Anthony, Jodi Arias, or Robert Zimmerman to name a few recent examples.  Why is it that only these people get “pro bono” defense?  PUBLICITY, that is the reason, tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of dollars in FREE PUBLICITY … how altruistic those lawyers are!

This particular lawyer sees himself as a hero because he reduced his fee by half and ate the expenses, which normally do not add up to much or are highly inflated in the first place.  Here is a poor guy who lost his leg and probably cannot work, and the lawyer likely ended up with between $60,000 and $140,000 of the man’s money!  They probably settled out of court too, saving the attorney a hundred or more hours of work while raking in the same (or more) than he would have if it had gone to trial.

Let me tell you a brief, "hypothetical", story.  A law firm takes on a case for national origin discrimination.  The big cheese, the guy the firm is named after makes only rare appearances, during the first meeting and when they go to mediation.  The rest of the time his “staff” works on the case only when they have time, rarely returning phone calls or emails from the victim because they are focused on bigger issues, other cases.  The entire firm spends minimal time, all the while telling the victim “you have a great case, we’re going to get you close to $500,000!”, which is a pittance compared to what she should have received for having her reputation ruined and losing her 20-year career as a teacher.

As the trial date approaches, the lawyers realized that they had not done enough work, also called due diligence, and dropped the ball, so they asked for a five month extension from the court and it was granted.  Five additional months of stress for the victim and her family, needless stress because the law firm had higher priorities elsewhere.  Only then did the depositions begin, depositions that should have been started months ago in July of 2012, two months before the original court date.  They had not even contacted the victim’s top witness and did not do so until the plaintiff insisted.  That was just a week before the mediation, which came out of nowhere to the victim ... only a month before rescheduled trial date!

In the interim, the big honcho (he even wears a cowboy hat) was taking care of other cases and not even thinking about the victim’s case.  Then, finally, in the few months directly before the mediation and trial, his cronies (low-wage lawyers – compared to the honcho anyway) finally spent some time on the case.  He and his staff probably spent no more than  50 to 60 hours total, and that is likely a stretch, on the case before the surprise mediation (an event the victim was told nothing about until last minute).

As they went into mediation, the honcho was finally there with his crisp brown Stetson, along with his two cronies.  The mediator came in, a retired judge, and it was like “old times”, the honcho and mediator obviously having known each other rather well.  The mediator admitted that he knew very little, if anything, about the case because he “just received it”, so honcho started laying out the victim’s case, a very complex case with hundreds of pages of evidence, over a just a fifteen minute period.  Honcho even forgot several extremely critical points and it was not his cronies that chimed in to correct him, it was the victim’s husband!  And that was it, the judge says “got it” and scurried off to meet with the defense team across the hall.

The negotiations started off just below the figure mentioned above, but the numbers quickly dropped as the mediator went back and forth like a ping pong ball.  As time went on, even though he knew little about the case, the mediator was making judgments, saying “you don’t have a very strong case” and “only 38% of plaintiffs are successful in Missouri”, and all the while the victim’s attorney is agreeing with him!  What?  What happened to the great case the victim had?  Well, then it was time for lunch.

Honcho was gracious enough to offer to buy lunch for the victim and her husband at a French restaurant in the building.  While the victim’s husband used the restroom, Honcho and his male crony ordered Maker’s Mark whisky on the rocks, in a glass the size of the Hulk’s fist, filled to the brim.  Must have been at least a triple shot.  Honcho’s wife, the other crony, ordered a glass of wine, so when the husband returned, Honcho said “we’re having one, you might as well order one too”, so he order a glass of wine as well.  The victim does not drink and stuck with just water.  Less than half way into lunch, Honcho had already polished off his whisky, orders another, as did his male sidekick, and here come two more tumblers full of alcohol.  There must have been AT LEAST 6 ounces in each glass, for a total of 12 ounces EACH over lunch … all in less than an hour!

Things started heading downhill, to put it mildly, after lunch as the mediator became more negative and offensive and honcho getting more impatient and aggressive (with the client and her husband) with every minute, becoming hostile, raising his voice, and stomping out of the room at one point.

Looking back, it seems like a big production, a well rehearsed one at that, as honcho and his cronies started to insist the victim had a poor case and that she should think seriously about accepting an offer that was a fraction of the starting number.  They said “you’ll be lucky to get this much in court, if you can win at all”.  Wearing her and her husband down over several hours, which seemed to be the goal, honcho became enraged when the husband stated “I thought you said we had a good case, we were hoping that you would advocate for seeing this through to trial, we wanted to hear you say “let’s fight this and beat the bastards!’.”  At that point honcho stood up, cussed at the husband, saying “we’ll do whatever you want”, while his cronies kept pushing the victim harder and harder toward a settlement.

It all made sense, “good cop, bad cop”, wear the subject (his client in this case) down until they cannot take it any more, then go in for the kill!  Honcho and his cronies had everything to gain and nothing to lose by settling in mediation.  They would receive 40% of the agreed-upon amount and much more than their hourly rate based on the small amount of work they had obviously put in, saving themselves a great deal of work during the most intensive period, just before and during trial.  Win-win for the lawyers ... WHAT A SHOCK!

In the end, the victim received a VERY SMALL FRACTION of what she was told would be an equitable result, “making her whole”, an amount that would barely pay for a mid-priced car these days.  And that was supposed to "make her whole" after having lost a $65,000 a year job and a 20-year career?  The lawyers were the obvious victors here, coming out on top in this case, them and the mediator who charged thousands for a single days’ work.

I would tell you about my personal experience with lawyers, an experience even less positive than this, but I will save that for another article, a book maybe.  All in all, I think Shakespeare was right when he wrote:

“
The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.” William Shakespeare - Henry The Sixth, Part 2 Act 4, Scene 2

I do not mean that literally, but maybe the world would be a better place if there were not any in the first place.  Which brings me to the question: Selfless or narcissist?  Every lawyer I have ever met, with one exception out of hundreds were selfish, arrogant, narcissists.  Have you had a different experience?   I hope so.  If you have or have not, let me hear your opinion, about your experience with the legal profession.  

"Selfless or narcissist ... that is the question!" - CombatCounselor, June, 18th, 2013

Key Terms: arrogant, attorney, case, CombatActivist, court, defendant, defense, INSTITUTIONAL, InstitutionalTerrorism, judge, lawyer, legal, mediation, narcissist, plaintiff, selfless, TERRORISM, trial, victim, viral

Letter to the Editor, Air Force Times - HAGEL'S OPPORTUNITY (March 11, 2013)

I am assuming that an "editorial" is written by or for (in this case my guess would be Mr. Dorr) "the editor", Ms. Ianotta. In terms of JOINTNESS and BASE CLOSURES, I could not agree more. That is where our like-minded opinions end.

PEOPLE: Even though only 19% of the force stick around for retirement, I disagree with a strictly 401(k)-style retirement. We already have a 401(k)-style option in the Thrift Savings Plan, even if there are no matching contributions. A significant recruiting and retention tool is one of the few pensions still available in America today. Could there be a hybrid retirement, like the type proposed by several sources, where troops could qualify for reduced retirement at the ten year point, drawing the pension beginning at age 60? A combination of the two could help retention and provide a reasonable retirement for those who put their lives on the line for their country.

TOOTH TO TAIL RATIO: Are you assuming Afghanistan will end in 2014 and there will be no more war for the foreseeable future? Wishful thinking! A one-to-two ratio would never allow enough recovery time between deployments if at war, which between the instability in the Middle East, a nut at the helm in North Korea, and China spreading its wings and building aircraft carriers, is highly likely. Our forces are worn out and drastically reducing the force is a temporary solution to a long-term problem. We have seen the cycle over and over, so do not be naive.

EFFECTIVE USE OF THE NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE: Most would agree, particularly the Guard and Reserve, that they have been used VERY effectively over the past 20+ years. Probably TOO effectively. There is nothing more there to give if you think they are going to make up the difference for your "tooth to tale ratio". Bless you all!

HEALTHCARE: Is Air Force Times really going to go there? Are you seriously proposing that "those who can afford to pay more" pick-up the slack? We all made the same sacrifices and were promised the same benefits, so I think it is ABSURD to expect higher wage earners pay more for a benefit we were told was "free" and "for life" during recruitment. Maybe Ex-Secretary Panetta could pay back the $1 million in plane trips home during his SECDEF tenure (and only God knows how much he wasted BEFORE becoming Secretary). Maybe we could take all the money wasted on end-of-year "spend-downs" and plow it back into the budget EVERY YEAR. Maybe we could end government and contractor fraud, waste, and abuse instead of giving it lip service. I have seen enough money wasted on just one government contract (the contractor currently has a class action lawsuit also pending against them and an IG complaint from me) to fund Tricare for at least a few months ... ONE CONTRACT!

Air Force Times loses credibility with those kinds of shortsighted suggestions. Where is your loyalty? Who do you think pays your salary? Your readers, active-duty and retired military! Do you think your "suggestions" are popular with other readers?

Maybe you should stick to reporting the news rather than telling the new SECDEF how to run the show. I think he has much smarter, military-savy people on his staff than Military Times does.

Chris Sorrentino, LtCol, USAF (Ret) aka CombatCounselor

Letter to The Honorable Patty Murray (D - WA) Regarding Military Suicides

January 21st, 2013

The Honorable U.S. Senator Murray,

First of all, thank you for your concern and efforts to help reduce military suicides through your support and leadership in passing the Defense Authorization Act of 2013.

Unfortunately, an office and/or education are going to do little to solve a problem that is caused by ignorance and a flawed system. The primary solution in reducing suicides will be by providing confidentiality to our military when seeking mental health treatment as well as education for leaders so that they understand the importance of therapy/counseling for their troops over the promotion of their own careers.

I am a retired military officer, disabled Veteran, and expert in the treatment of mental health problems with a focus on active-duty military and Veterans.  I have also written and spoken extensively on this topic in my blog - http://www.CombatCounselor.blogspot.com - and YouTube channel - http://www.YouTube.com/combatcounselor. My article, "The Stigmas Killing Young American Heroes", will be published in De Oppresso Liber magazine later this month. You can also find an earlier version on my blog.

With more troops being lost to suicide than combat, we must do something soon. One active duty military and 18 Vets die EVERY DAY by their own hand, 6,900 each year, so something MUST BE DONE...SOON! Our heroes deserve no less. 

I recently sponsored a petition on this topic on the White House Petitions website, but only managed to collect 70 signatures even though my pleas reached tens of thousands of my followers and subscribers. Apathy and ignorance are rampant in this country and I will do whatever I can do to eliminate both, particularly when it comes to the well being of our military and Veterans, in my lifetime.

Thank you again for your service country and your concern for our military men and women. 

Respectfully,

C.T. Sorrentino, LtCol, USAF (Ret)

MS, LPC, NCC

Reduce Defense Spending ... Are You Serious?

According to Money Magazine (October 2012, p. 85), 68% of those polled (Republicans AND Democrats) think the United States should cut defense (military) spending. Military Times has reported on numerous occasions that the Department of Defense (DoD), Congress, and President Obama all want to cut personnel and retiree benefits, that is a fact. What are these geniuses thinking? What is 68% of the population, supposedly, thinking? You got me friends!

We have been at war with Al Qaeda, and others, for 13 years and our military, if not dead already, are worn out, exhausted, and not really appreciated, even though "thank you for your service" has become the "catch" phrase since 9/11. Our heroes in uniform, past, present, and future, put their families, health, and lives on the line every day ... for your freedom folks.

So now that Osama Bin Laden is dead, we are out of Iraq (for the time being, in mass anyway), and things are winding down in Afghanistan, we have nothing to worry about ... right? Military retention rates are at all time highs thanks to patriotism and a weak economy, so why not cut their (active duty, Guard, Reserves, and retiree) pay and benefits or, better yet, drum them out of the service altogether so we can save a few bucks? Forget those promises we (the government, recruiters) made about job security, lifetime healthcare, pensions, and other "retention" tools ... the threat is gone, over, history, so why not cut defense spending (that is shorthand for personnel and benefits? Do you really think the military (DoD) is going to give up any planes, tanks, ships, or helicopters?

I don't know about you, but I have a couple problems with that kind of thinking:

First, we, as a nation, made promises to our men and women in uniform and cannot change course now. That is immoral! Can you say integrity? Apparently not. Politicians and others can "talk the talk", but when it comes to keeping promises made to recruits, they DO NOT "walk the walk"! KEEP the promises you made (integrity) to those serving and those who have served. If you want to make changes, make them effective BEFORE future enlistees enlist, not after we obligated to and/or faithfully served our country.

Second, the president, Congress, and DoD ARE NOT focusing on fighting a few terrorists here and there, they are focusing on two very real, very large, very lethal threats ... CHINA (and their redheaded stepchild North Korea), IRAN, and Russia (again) thanks to their nutjob president, Vladimir Putin.

China is a military and nuclear superpower with BILLIONS of potential troops and Iran is on the verge of becoming a nuclear threat (beside having one of the most potent militaries in the Middle East), and is threatening one of the most unstable and economically critical regions in the world today ... ON A DAILY BASIS! Can you say OIL? How about nuclear holocaust? Israel? Are you people out if your freakin' minds?

So why not cut porkbarrel spending, pet projects, a bloated government full of useless programs and lazy workers (that is a generalization, there are many worthwhile programs and civil servants), or even cushy pensions for serving in Congress for a couple of years? Or why does the government not target the BILLION$ that goes down the drain every year due to FRAUD, WASTE? Because they do not care, memories are very short, and if there is not an immediate threat, citizens are selfish and want all the money to come to their way. That is human nature and means the politicians need to keep those voters happy so they can be reelected and receive those cushy pensions ... right?

In conclusion, our shortsighted predecessors cut defense spending after World Wars I and II, Korea, Vietnam, and even Gulf War I, but guess what? That's right, we got caught with our pants down when the next conflict came along. Do you have any idea how much we waste as a nation drawing down and building up our military as a reaction to world events , or worse, elections? BILLIONS ... JUST LIKE THOSE BILLIONS OF CHINESE just a stones throw from the United States of America ... can you say Alaska (Sarah Palin can see Russia from her house after all)? What about Hawaii? There is a place in Hawaii called Pearl Harbor ... have you heard of it?

China recently launched their first aircraft carrier and their defense budget has been increasing by at least 12% annually for decades. Who do you think they are preparing for? Al Qaeda? North Korea? No, they are preparing to take on the largest superpower in the world ... U.S. ... and we are going to be caught with our pants down once again. Why? For a few more votes ... for a few more self-centered, shortsighted, ignorant morons ... that's right, we call them POLITICIANS (lawyers mostly and we all know what Shakespeare said about lawyers).

DO NOT FORGET TO VOTE! I am not going to tell you WHOM to vote for, but vote with your conscience, and, ABOVE ALL, vote for a strong military and hold your elected officials accountable for protecting the FREEDOM we in the military have worked so hard TO EARN and DEFEND. Vote for president in 2016 or you might just be voting for a Chinese Premier in 2020.

That's the end of that tune ... CombatCounselor...OUT!

Chris Sorrentino, LtCol, USAF (Ret)

aka CombatCounselor

This article can be published in its entirety with the permission of C.T. Sorrentino, aka CombatCounselor, 3rd Wave Media Group, and 3rd Wave Publications

Key Words: benefits, budget, China, cuts, defense, election, government, Iran, Korea, military, Obama, pension, personnel, politics, spending, Vietnam, voters, war, Osama bin Laden, 

Copyright 2012-2014 - 3rd Wave Publications - All Rights Reserved