Planned Parenthood vs. the Military

A standing Defense Department memo recently sent to military families and civilian personnel, warning that a “government shutdown” could result in servicemen and contractors alike going without pay. A summary paragraph reads:

“During the government shutdown, the Department of Defense will have no legal authority to pay any personnel -- military or civilian -- for the days during which the government is shut down.  The shutdown will not affect payments to retirees and annuitants as those funds come from a retirement trust fund.  Below is the effect the government shutdown will have on active duty military, civilian personnel, retirees and annuitants, and DoD contractors.”

This policy has been in effect for at least two years, and was last updated in October of 2013. Although in 2013 Congress passed legislation to ensure military members would receive pay during a government shutdown, that rule has since expired. No changes have been made to this policy, which has been around since the showdown two years ago that lead to a brief cessation of non-essential government services.

International Business Times reports that Representative Mike Coffman, (R)-Colorado, recently introduced a new measure titled the “Pay our Military Act” designed to protect military families during a government shutdown, should one occur this year. Furthermore, reports that the House is working on a CR, separate from the Planned Parenthood spending bill, which would guarantee troops receive timely pay in the case of a shutdown.

The Pentagon memo also indicates that those who potentially go without pay during the duration of a government shutdown will eventually receive their pay. So I can’t help but wonder why the DoD would “warn” troops about the dire consequences of a shutdown when the fact is that everyone will get their due pay -- though it may be late in some cases -- and Congress is currently preparing an emergency military funding bill as a contingency.  

I think the answer is simple: The Department of Defense, under Obama-appointed leaders, has become hopelessly politicized.

After all, what is more appalling to average Americans than the thought that disarray in a dysfunctional Congress could cause economic harm to our warriors and their families? That is exactly the picture the Obama administration wants to paint for public view. The DoD memo is a clever and provocative way to pressure Congress to pass whateverthehell Obama wants.

The “whateverthehell” of the moment is continued funding to the Democrat donor/baby parts processing plant, Planned Parenthood. And, in the context of current events, the Pentagon has effectively told hundreds of thousands of Americans who receive military paychecks that anti-women, anti-abortion Congressional Zealots want to make them sacrificial lambs on the altar of pro-life extremism.

Make no mistake, Congress is caught in a vise-grip between taking food out of the mouths of military babies, and leaving babies to be dissected and procured for parts by Planned Parenthood.

But what, you may ask, is the evidence that the Defense Department has been politicized and would play politics with troops’ lives? Well, for starters:

  • In a November 2013 op-ed in the Washington Times by retired Navy commander, J.D. Gordon, in reference to the “purge” of military commanders, he said: “Everyone who wears the uniform should realize they’ve been converted into de facto political pawns. They’re mostly targeted by the left, which is never shy about taking American power down a notch or two -- or three.”
  • In another Washington Times op-ed dated June 2014 by Rusty Humphries, he spoke to the politicization of the Bowe Bergdahl fiasco. The commentary highlighted the fact that Bergdahl had been used as a political tool to help Obama fulfill his promise to “close Gitmo,” and he recounted the backlash against military veterans who brought to light Bergdahl’s desertion.
  • Retired Army officer Bob Maginnis spoke out against the administration’s granting of “special” privileges to gay military personnel who, in 2012, wore their uniforms in San Diego’s Gay Pride Parade. He said, "Very few people are given permission to march in a parade in uniform. Military members of the tea party couldn't march down Madison Avenue with DOD's permission."
  • The use of the military as a means to push non-military issues, including, but not limited to: the ban on “Don’t ask Don’t Tell,” openly gay service members and officers, gay chaplains, gay marriages performed by chaplains, and ongoing plans to create a path for transgender folk to participate fully in military service, all represent a progressive political agenda.

There is no question that today’s Pentagon is at least as focused on politics and social agendas as it is on protecting the homeland and fighting foreign wars. With that in mind, it seems entirely possible, even likely, that the memo warning troops of how a government shutdown by cruel Congressional Republicans could send them to the poorhouse, is a political ploy to shore up resistance to withdrawing public monies from Planned Parenthood.

The Obama administration makes decisions based on the politics of a thing, not the principle, and, unfortunately, not what is in the interests of the country. The military is supposed to fight wars, kill people, and break things, not engage in social evolution or be used as a pressure tool against Congress. Likewise, Congress is supposed to secure the liberty of the American people through providing checks and balances, not to allot taxpayer dollars to a multimillion dollar abortion provider that kills babies and breaks the law.

Marjorie Haun is a chicken herder and makes her home in remote Western Colorado