Obama Pushing To Cut Healthcare Benefits For Active And Retired Military

In spite of the cute toys marketed in conjunction with President Obama's boasting about 'getting bin-Laden', it's been obvious for some time that this president and many others around him neither understand nor appreciate our military, except when it's useful politically.

You might remember the use of dead military bodies being flown as a political photo-op in defiance of Department of Defense regulations,(not to mention common decency) Senior Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett famously ordering a decorated military officer to bring her a fresh drink at a White House soiree and the ongoing efforts by Attorney General Eric Holder and the Obama Department of Justice to deliberately disenfranchise military votes during the 2010 midterms in a clear violation of the MOVE Act passed by Congress....and there are many more examples I could site.

The latest attack on our military by President Obama is an attempt to slash their health benefits.

The president tried this once before, in a scheme that would have seen wounded combat veterans cut off from VA benefits and being forced to take out their own private insurance to get treatment, but the outcry from groups like the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the American Legion and polling data that showed that Americans overwhelmingly disapproved made him back off.

Now, he's brought it back again in his new defense budget, which calls for slashing benefits from VA. specifically from a program many vets depend on called TriCare.

This is part of the massive cuts in defense the Obama Administration is demanding . Under the Obama plan, the main targets would be under-65 and Medicare-eligible military retirees through a tiered increase in annual Tricare premiums that will be based on yearly retirement pay:

Significantly, the plan calls for increases between 30 percent to 78 percent in Tricare annual premiums for the first year. After that, the plan will impose five-year increases ranging from 94 percent to 345 percent—more than 3 times current levels.

According to congressional assessments, a retired Army colonel with a family currently paying $460 a year for health care will pay $2,048.

The new plan hits active duty personnel by increasing co-payments for pharmaceuticals and eliminating incentives for using generic drugs.

The changes are worrying some in the Pentagon who fear it will severely impact efforts to recruit and maintain a high-quality all-volunteer military force. Such benefits have been a key tool for recruiting qualified people and keeping them in uniform.

“Would you stay with a car insurance company that raised your premiums by 345 percent in five years? Probably not,” said the congressional aide. “Would anybody accept their taxes being raised 345 percent in five years? Probably not.”

A second congressional aide said the administration’s approach to the cuts shows a double standard that hurts the military.

“We all recognize that we are in a time of austerity,” this aide said. “But defense has made up to this point 50 percent of deficit reduction cuts that we agreed to, but is only 20 percent of the budget.”

The administration is asking troops to get by without the equipment and force levels needed for global missions. “And now they are going to them again and asking them to pay more for their health care when you’ve held the civilian workforce at DoD and across the federal government virtually harmless in all of these cuts. And it just doesn’t seem fair,” the second aide said.{...}

Additionally, the critics said leaving civilian workers’ benefits unchanged while hitting the military reflect the administration’s effort to court labor unions, as government unions are the only segment of organized labor that has increased in recent years.

As part of the increased healthcare costs, the Pentagon also will impose an annual fee for a program called Tricare for Life, a new program that all military retirees automatically must join at age 65. Currently, to enroll in Tricare for Life, retirees pay the equivalent of a monthly Medicare premium.

Under the proposed Pentagon plan, retirees will be hit with an additional annual enrollment fee on top of the monthly premium.

Union votes that vote Democrat as opposed to military who predominantly vote Republican? When it comes to this president deciding whose benefits to slash, it's no contest.

It will be interesting to see how Congress deals with this.

Obama Pushing To Cut Healthcare Benefits For Active And Retired Military

In spite of the cute toys marketed in conjunction with President Obama's boasting about 'getting bin-Laden', it's been obvious for some time that this president and many others around him neither understand nor appreciate our military, except when it's useful politically.

You might remember the use of dead military bodies being flown as a political photo-op in defiance of Department of Defense regulations,(not to mention common decency) Senior Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett famously ordering a decorated military officer to bring her a fresh drink at a White House soiree and the ongoing efforts by Attorney General Eric Holder and the Obama Department of Justice to deliberately disenfranchise military votes during the 2010 midterms in a clear violation of the MOVE Act passed by Congress....and there are many more examples I could site.

The latest attack on our military by President Obama is an attempt to slash their health benefits.

The president tried this once before, in a scheme that would have seen wounded combat veterans cut off from VA benefits and being forced to take out their own private insurance to get treatment, but the outcry from groups like the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the American Legion and polling data that showed that Americans overwhelmingly disapproved made him back off.

Now, he's brought it back again in his new defense budget, which calls for slashing benefits from VA. specifically from a program many vets depend on called TriCare.

This is part of the massive cuts in defense the Obama Administration is demanding . Under the Obama plan, the main targets would be under-65 and Medicare-eligible military retirees through a tiered increase in annual Tricare premiums that will be based on yearly retirement pay:

Significantly, the plan calls for increases between 30 percent to 78 percent in Tricare annual premiums for the first year. After that, the plan will impose five-year increases ranging from 94 percent to 345 percent—more than 3 times current levels.

According to congressional assessments, a retired Army colonel with a family currently paying $460 a year for health care will pay $2,048.

The new plan hits active duty personnel by increasing co-payments for pharmaceuticals and eliminating incentives for using generic drugs.

The changes are worrying some in the Pentagon who fear it will severely impact efforts to recruit and maintain a high-quality all-volunteer military force. Such benefits have been a key tool for recruiting qualified people and keeping them in uniform.

“Would you stay with a car insurance company that raised your premiums by 345 percent in five years? Probably not,” said the congressional aide. “Would anybody accept their taxes being raised 345 percent in five years? Probably not.”

A second congressional aide said the administration’s approach to the cuts shows a double standard that hurts the military.

“We all recognize that we are in a time of austerity,” this aide said. “But defense has made up to this point 50 percent of deficit reduction cuts that we agreed to, but is only 20 percent of the budget.”

The administration is asking troops to get by without the equipment and force levels needed for global missions. “And now they are going to them again and asking them to pay more for their health care when you’ve held the civilian workforce at DoD and across the federal government virtually harmless in all of these cuts. And it just doesn’t seem fair,” the second aide said.{...}

Additionally, the critics said leaving civilian workers’ benefits unchanged while hitting the military reflect the administration’s effort to court labor unions, as government unions are the only segment of organized labor that has increased in recent years.

As part of the increased healthcare costs, the Pentagon also will impose an annual fee for a program called Tricare for Life, a new program that all military retirees automatically must join at age 65. Currently, to enroll in Tricare for Life, retirees pay the equivalent of a monthly Medicare premium.

Under the proposed Pentagon plan, retirees will be hit with an additional annual enrollment fee on top of the monthly premium.

Union votes that vote Democrat as opposed to military who predominantly vote Republican? When it comes to this president deciding whose benefits to slash, it's no contest.

It will be interesting to see how Congress deals with this.

Obama's State Of The Union - The Hollow Man

Ah, the Hollow Man...

As I've told you before, I listen to these things so you don't have to, and I've got a pretty strong stomach - but tonight's festivities were truly something else.

A transcript is available here for those of you into self-mortification, but I'll go over the basics.

First off, the speech was obviously very well rehearsed down to the last vocal inflection and raised eyebrow..in fact. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if there were theatrical directions emanating from TOTUS tonight. Simply amazing..yet as he spoke, the contradictions between what was coming out of his mouth and what we've seen coming out of this White House are so radically different they underlined one of the qualities I dislike most about this president -the way he arrogantly thinks everyone's stupid except him, and thinks that the usual rule that nothing ever goes away on the internet doesn't apply where he's concerned.

The president started off and ended by invoking what he referred to as 'this generation of heroes' returning from victory in Iraq, and indeed he used the military frequently as an example of how he wants the Republicans in Congress to behave . It was disgusting to hear, considering how Senator Obama and many of his fellow Democrats cheering him on tonight did everything they could to sabotage our troops in the field and their mission during wartime. Yet he had the unmitigated gall to use military teamwork as an example of what he wants to see in Washington!

Our military is legally bound to follow President Obama's orders no matter how nonsensical. Congress is not, especially when their common sense revolts and it was both deeply insulting as well as very revealing of the president to use the comparison, making the expected rhetoric that came later about working together a mockery. As if President Obama made any pretense of that when he and the Democrats controlled Congress!

The president of course mentioned bin-Laden, and regular members of Joshua's Army may recall what I had to say President Obama's chief boast perhaps being a huge error. And his statement about how the Taliban's momentum has been broken was simply a blatant falsehood - which is exactly why we're desperately negotiating with them and just released one of their leaders with American blood on his hands from Club Gitmo as a 'confidence gesture'.

The president's chief theme, under the slogan 'an economy built to last' is actually pretty simple - eat the rich and punish the corporations to pay for more government spending.

He called for a punishment levy on 'big banks' and 'big oil companies' and is apparently going to sic Eric Holder on the financial sector to ' find out who was responsible for the mortgage collapse'. I guarantee you that well connected Democrats like Franklin Raines and Jaimie Gorelick who ran Fannie Mae into the ground and walked away with multi-million dollar bonuses are not going to have to worry on that account.

You see, it wasn't the banks that made the rules that governed the secondary mortgage market..it was Washington, and government entities Fannie and Freddie set the pace by reducing underwriting standards and down payment requirements while demanding that lenders make more loans to the unqualified based on racial bean counting. And the Democrat majority in Congress defended them from any oversight or reigning in while they did it.

The president went on to mention his great achievement of 'saving' the auto industry. Will anyone remind him that he did it by gifting GM to his union political allies, crapping on private equity holders and giving the company special tax breaks at the taxpayer's expense to make them look artificially profitable? Or that he allowed GM to do stock dumping that was against SEC rules?

Or about the outright lies he told the American people about GM and Chrysler being profitable and returning the money used to bail them out, when in reality they were a huge loss?

We also had to listen to the president's blathering about trade. Rather than lower our corporate income tax sufficiently to encourage more companies to do business here, his solution is to put another punishment levy on companies that outsource, which will have the effect of even more companies relocating all but bare bones operations elsewhere. When Canada's corporate rate is less than half of ours, why not ?

It was also unintentionally comical to hear the president make a vague call for tearing down regulations that stifle entrepreneurship in one part of his speech while mentioning at least three or four brand new regulatory bureaucracies he wants to create and calling for cap n' trade and climate change legislation in another.

The president went on to discuss education, and of course his solution is to spend more taxpayer dollars to hire more teachers to pay more union dues to fund the Democrats. For such a pro-education guy, you'd never think he'd be the one to stop poor kids from getting into a decent school right there in DC.

Not to mention the trillion dollar time bomb for America's economy this president enacted by executive order concerning a new student loans entitlement that will eventually create a bubble similar to housing and is guaranteed to raise the cost of college education.

Yes, he really does intend to bankrupt the country. Or he's simply clueless, take your pick.

The president also got in a nice plug for the DREAM Act for illegal aliens that he enacted by executive order after Congress rejected it twice. What was that about working together again?

President Obama made quite a thing about his favoring the creation of domestic energy while believing that those of us listening would forget about his job killing de facto prohibition on offshore drilling, his opposition to drilling in ANWR , his recent fiasco with the Keystone Pipeline and his war on the coal industry. Or about Solyndra and the other green energy scams he doled out to his campaign donors and bundlers. All you have to do is look at what the price at the pump was when he came into office and what it is now, the largest increase in history...and that doesn't even calculate the corresponding rise in the price of food and other goods.

And speaking of Keystone, I had to chuckle at President Obama's solemnly intoning the so-called Buffet Rule as an example of how 'the rich' should behave. Buffet, a nicely placed Obama donor stands to make a tidy sum because the pipeline got cancelled because the oil we buy from Canada will now have to be shipped via Buffet's railroads. At a surcharge, of course. It's good to be the King's friend!

There's plenty more, but a few final bits that stood out.

President Obama talked a bit about his foreign policy. He reverently evoked the Arab Spring he helped along as 'a wave of change', which it is. He failed to mention that the change involves the rebirth of al-Qaeda and some of it's affiliates in these countries and replacing dictators like Khaddaffi who was no threat to us and Mubarak, Ali Abdullah Saleh and Ben Ali who were at least nominal allies and replacing them with hard line Islamists and salafists who are not going to be friends to the West, not to mention the 'men and women; Christians, Muslims, and Jews' whose dignity and freedom he claims to be so concerned about. President Obama committed an an historic error here that will come back to haunt us long after he departs the scene.

The president also mentioned what he described as his 'iron clad commitment to Israel's security' which is news to those of us who have followed the interaction between this president and Israel closely.But hey, it's election time, and there a sucker born every minute.

I also found it particularly nauseating to hear this president talk about how smart he is in hollowing out our military budget and in the next moment talking about jobs and VA benefits for those he described as 'those men and women in uniform who defend our freedom.'

This is the same president who is laying off an estimated 500,000 military personnel, many of them who haven't been in long enough to become vested for a military pension or full medical benefits. They'll simply be tossed into an already toxic job market for their 'reward' so President Obama can have more money for his domestic agenda. And I got a horrible taste in my mouth hearing the same President who tried to take away their VA benefits early in his administration talk about health care for veterans.

You have to wonder at what goes through someone's mind when putting on this kind of a performance. Is it simply a case of 'the show must go on'? Or has he simply been mouthing these lies and untruths for so long that he actually believes them by now?

Barack Obama is the modern version of Rehoboam, telling the people of America that he's going to double down his failed policies and add to their yoke.

Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, who gave the Republican rebuttal did a decent job of responding to the president's little show tonight. But he didn't mention much about a lot of the things I've talked about here, and most of the media certainly won't.

That's the real tragedy. It's one thing to snicker to yourself as you see through a cynical con man going through his act for you, but it' s quite another to keep quiet about it and let the rubes get screwed in the name of 'civility' by the Hollow Men of this world.

They deserve better at your hands. We all do.

Obama's State Of The Union - The Hollow Man

Ah, the Hollow Man...

As I've told you before, I listen to these things so you don't have to, and I've got a pretty strong stomach - but tonight's festivities were truly something else.

A transcript is available here for those of you into self-mortification, but I'll go over the basics.

First off, the speech was obviously very well rehearsed down to the last vocal inflection and raised eyebrow..in fact. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if there were theatrical directions emanating from TOTUS tonight. Simply amazing..yet as he spoke, the contradictions between what was coming out of his mouth and what we've seen coming out of this White House are so radically different they underlined one of the qualities I dislike most about this president -the way he arrogantly thinks everyone's stupid except him, and thinks that the usual rule that nothing ever goes away on the internet doesn't apply where he's concerned.

The president started off and ended by invoking what he referred to as 'this generation of heroes' returning from victory in Iraq, and indeed he used the military frequently as an example of how he wants the Republicans in Congress to behave . It was disgusting to hear, considering how Senator Obama and many of his fellow Democrats cheering him on tonight did everything they could to sabotage our troops in the field and their mission during wartime. Yet he had the unmitigated gall to use military teamwork as an example of what he wants to see in Washington!

Our military is legally bound to follow President Obama's orders no matter how nonsensical. Congress is not, especially when their common sense revolts and it was both deeply insulting as well as very revealing of the president to use the comparison, making the expected rhetoric that came later about working together a mockery. As if President Obama made any pretense of that when he and the Democrats controlled Congress!

The president of course mentioned bin-Laden, and regular members of Joshua's Army may recall what I had to say President Obama's chief boast perhaps being a huge error. And his statement about how the Taliban's momentum has been broken was simply a blatant falsehood - which is exactly why we're desperately negotiating with them and just released one of their leaders with American blood on his hands from Club Gitmo as a 'confidence gesture'.

The president's chief theme, under the slogan 'an economy built to last' is actually pretty simple - eat the rich and punish the corporations to pay for more government spending.

He called for a punishment levy on 'big banks' and 'big oil companies' and is apparently going to sic Eric Holder on the financial sector to ' find out who was responsible for the mortgage collapse'. I guarantee you that well connected Democrats like Franklin Raines and Jaimie Gorelick who ran Fannie Mae into the ground and walked away with multi-million dollar bonuses are not going to have to worry on that account.

You see, it wasn't the banks that made the rules that governed the secondary mortgage market..it was Washington, and government entities Fannie and Freddie set the pace by reducing underwriting standards and down payment requirements while demanding that lenders make more loans to the unqualified based on racial bean counting. And the Democrat majority in Congress defended them from any oversight or reigning in while they did it.

The president went on to mention his great achievement of 'saving' the auto industry. Will anyone remind him that he did it by gifting GM to his union political allies, crapping on private equity holders and giving the company special tax breaks at the taxpayer's expense to make them look artificially profitable? Or that he allowed GM to do stock dumping that was against SEC rules?

Or about the outright lies he told the American people about GM and Chrysler being profitable and returning the money used to bail them out, when in reality they were a huge loss?

We also had to listen to the president's blathering about trade. Rather than lower our corporate income tax sufficiently to encourage more companies to do business here, his solution is to put another punishment levy on companies that outsource, which will have the effect of even more companies relocating all but bare bones operations elsewhere. When Canada's corporate rate is less than half of ours, why not ?

It was also unintentionally comical to hear the president make a vague call for tearing down regulations that stifle entrepreneurship in one part of his speech while mentioning at least three or four brand new regulatory bureaucracies he wants to create and calling for cap n' trade and climate change legislation in another.

The president went on to discuss education, and of course his solution is to spend more taxpayer dollars to hire more teachers to pay more union dues to fund the Democrats. For such a pro-education guy, you'd never think he'd be the one to stop poor kids from getting into a decent school right there in DC.

Not to mention the trillion dollar time bomb for America's economy this president enacted by executive order concerning a new student loans entitlement that will eventually create a bubble similar to housing and is guaranteed to raise the cost of college education.

Yes, he really does intend to bankrupt the country. Or he's simply clueless, take your pick.

The president also got in a nice plug for the DREAM Act for illegal aliens that he enacted by executive order after Congress rejected it twice. What was that about working together again?

President Obama made quite a thing about his favoring the creation of domestic energy while believing that those of us listening would forget about his job killing de facto prohibition on offshore drilling, his opposition to drilling in ANWR , his recent fiasco with the Keystone Pipeline and his war on the coal industry. Or about Solyndra and the other green energy scams he doled out to his campaign donors and bundlers. All you have to do is look at what the price at the pump was when he came into office and what it is now, the largest increase in history...and that doesn't even calculate the corresponding rise in the price of food and other goods.

And speaking of Keystone, I had to chuckle at President Obama's solemnly intoning the so-called Buffet Rule as an example of how 'the rich' should behave. Buffet, a nicely placed Obama donor stands to make a tidy sum because the pipeline got cancelled because the oil we buy from Canada will now have to be shipped via Buffet's railroads. At a surcharge, of course. It's good to be the King's friend!

There's plenty more, but a few final bits that stood out.

President Obama talked a bit about his foreign policy. He reverently evoked the Arab Spring he helped along as 'a wave of change', which it is. He failed to mention that the change involves the rebirth of al-Qaeda and some of it's affiliates in these countries and replacing dictators like Khaddaffi who was no threat to us and Mubarak, Ali Abdullah Saleh and Ben Ali who were at least nominal allies and replacing them with hard line Islamists and salafists who are not going to be friends to the West, not to mention the 'men and women; Christians, Muslims, and Jews' whose dignity and freedom he claims to be so concerned about. President Obama committed an an historic error here that will come back to haunt us long after he departs the scene.

The president also mentioned what he described as his 'iron clad commitment to Israel's security' which is news to those of us who have followed the interaction between this president and Israel closely.But hey, it's election time, and there a sucker born every minute.

I also found it particularly nauseating to hear this president talk about how smart he is in hollowing out our military budget and in the next moment talking about jobs and VA benefits for those he described as 'those men and women in uniform who defend our freedom.'

This is the same president who is laying off an estimated 500,000 military personnel, many of them who haven't been in long enough to become vested for a military pension or full medical benefits. They'll simply be tossed into an already toxic job market for their 'reward' so President Obama can have more money for his domestic agenda. And I got a horrible taste in my mouth hearing the same President who tried to take away their VA benefits early in his administration talk about health care for veterans.

You have to wonder at what goes through someone's mind when putting on this kind of a performance. Is it simply a case of 'the show must go on'? Or has he simply been mouthing these lies and untruths for so long that he actually believes them by now?

Barack Obama is the modern version of Rehoboam, telling the people of America that he's going to double down his failed policies and add to their yoke.

Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, who gave the Republican rebuttal did a decent job of responding to the president's little show tonight. But he didn't mention much about a lot of the things I've talked about here, and most of the media certainly won't.

That's the real tragedy. It's one thing to snicker to yourself as you see through a cynical con man going through his act for you, but it' s quite another to keep quiet about it and let the rubes get screwed in the name of 'civility' by the Hollow Men of this world.

They deserve better at your hands. We all do.

Obama's War On The Military: 157 Air Force Majors Terminated Without Retirement Benefits

To free up more money for its domestic agenda, the Obama Administration has been mandating huge cuts and reduction of forces. The latest example is the arbitrary termination of 157 Air Force majors who are near retirement being terminated without pension or medical benefits. All are within six years of the 20 years of service required to qualify for these benefits:

The Chapman University of Military Law and its associated AMVETS Legal Clinic are blowing the whistle on what they say is an injustice set to be perpetrated on 157 Air Force majors on the last day of November.

“The Obama administration has ordered massive reductions in forces, resulting in many officers who are near retirement being involuntarily separated without retirement or medical benefits,” explained institute director Maj. Kyndra Rotunda.

The Department of Defense specifies that service members within six years of retirement normally would be retained and allowed to retire on time with benefits, unless extenuating circumstances exist such as disciplinary issues.

According to lawyers at Chapman and the AMVETS Legal Clinic, the Air Force has deviated from the six-year protection “without any legal authority.”

“At the heart of the matter, is whether the Secretary of the Air Force [Michael Donley] can ignore protections that exist in governing regulations,” Rotunda told The Daily Caller. “The Air Force position is that yes, he may. Our position is that nobody is above the law.”

According to an Air Force spokesman, officers who fail to get a promotion two times in a row are subject to involuntary discharge — unless they are within two years of qualifying for retirement. Officers subject to discharge under what the Air Force calls “selective continuation” are almost always retained until retirement if they appeal for continuation to a selection board, are within six years or less from retirement and have no disciplinary issues or negative information on their records.

However, according to the spokesman Air Force Secretary Donley can deviate from the Department of Defense policy provided he notifies the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness.

Maj. Rotunda disagrees:

Despite the Air Forces’ assertion that the dismissals have been kosher, Rotunda noted that based on the Defense Department’s Instruction 1320.08, “derogatory information” is the only reason officers should be terminated, and that budget shortfalls are not one of the instances.

“The Air Force cites budgetary short falls as the reason to terminate them. But that rationale is nowhere mentioned in the regulation,” Rotunda told TheDC. “In this instant, the officers being separated are within six years of retirement and their records do not contain derogatory information. Thus, they should be allowed to remain in service and retire. The defense department’s own regulation does not authorize what the defense department is doing. The Airmen relied on the law when they entered service and now the Secretary wants to change that law, without authority.”

According to the Air Force Times, this kind of termination without disciplinary infractions or other derogatory information is almost unheard of even in peacetime, let alone when the country is involved in hostilities.

The DC Caller article cites the case of one of the officers in question,Major Kale Mosley, a combat pilot who is just six months shy of getting his 20 years in. He served in 13 combat zones and was recently deployed in Libya with only 30 hours notice, after which he was sent to Iraq.

Major Mosley received notice of his dismissal from the Air Force the same day he arrived in Iraq.

Had this happened to someone working for a private company, does anyone doubt that the Obama Administration's Department of Justice would be filing a lawsuit in record time?

( H/T American Thinker)

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

Obama's War On The Military: 157 Air Force Majors Terminated Without Retirement Benefits

To free up more money for its domestic agenda, the Obama Administration has been mandating huge cuts and reduction of forces. The latest example is the arbitrary termination of 157 Air Force majors who are near retirement being terminated without pension or medical benefits. All are within six years of the 20 years of service required to qualify for these benefits:

The Chapman University of Military Law and its associated AMVETS Legal Clinic are blowing the whistle on what they say is an injustice set to be perpetrated on 157 Air Force majors on the last day of November.

“The Obama administration has ordered massive reductions in forces, resulting in many officers who are near retirement being involuntarily separated without retirement or medical benefits,” explained institute director Maj. Kyndra Rotunda.

The Department of Defense specifies that service members within six years of retirement normally would be retained and allowed to retire on time with benefits, unless extenuating circumstances exist such as disciplinary issues.

According to lawyers at Chapman and the AMVETS Legal Clinic, the Air Force has deviated from the six-year protection “without any legal authority.”

“At the heart of the matter, is whether the Secretary of the Air Force [Michael Donley] can ignore protections that exist in governing regulations,” Rotunda told The Daily Caller. “The Air Force position is that yes, he may. Our position is that nobody is above the law.”

According to an Air Force spokesman, officers who fail to get a promotion two times in a row are subject to involuntary discharge — unless they are within two years of qualifying for retirement. Officers subject to discharge under what the Air Force calls “selective continuation” are almost always retained until retirement if they appeal for continuation to a selection board, are within six years or less from retirement and have no disciplinary issues or negative information on their records.

However, according to the spokesman Air Force Secretary Donley can deviate from the Department of Defense policy provided he notifies the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness.

Maj. Rotunda disagrees:

Despite the Air Forces’ assertion that the dismissals have been kosher, Rotunda noted that based on the Defense Department’s Instruction 1320.08, “derogatory information” is the only reason officers should be terminated, and that budget shortfalls are not one of the instances.

“The Air Force cites budgetary short falls as the reason to terminate them. But that rationale is nowhere mentioned in the regulation,” Rotunda told TheDC. “In this instant, the officers being separated are within six years of retirement and their records do not contain derogatory information. Thus, they should be allowed to remain in service and retire. The defense department’s own regulation does not authorize what the defense department is doing. The Airmen relied on the law when they entered service and now the Secretary wants to change that law, without authority.”

According to the Air Force Times, this kind of termination without disciplinary infractions or other derogatory information is almost unheard of even in peacetime, let alone when the country is involved in hostilities.

The DC Caller article cites the case of one of the officers in question,Major Kale Mosley, a combat pilot who is just six months shy of getting his 20 years in. He served in 13 combat zones and was recently deployed in Libya with only 30 hours notice, after which he was sent to Iraq.

Major Mosley received notice of his dismissal from the Air Force the same day he arrived in Iraq.

Had this happened to someone working for a private company, does anyone doubt that the Obama Administration's Department of Justice would be filing a lawsuit in record time?

( H/T American Thinker)

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!