GOP willingness to swallow defense cuts is historic
In hindsight, President Barack Obama made one major if understandable miscalculation in the 2011 budget-sequester process. Needing something that would force congressional Republicans to negotiate when the time came, he and his advisers crammed some $500 billion in defense-spending cuts into the bill, believing that congressional conservatives would compromise to avoid implementation of those cuts.
He was wrong. Some Republicans — led by John McCain in the Senate and by House Armed Services chair Buck McKeon, among others — have indeed tried to rally great outrage at the cuts. For example, according to a fact sheet put out by McKeon’s committee:
“In the midst of the most dynamic and complex security environment in recent memory, sequestration would severely diminish America’s global posture. An additional 100,000 soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airmen would be separated from service. Those reductions would lead to:
– The smallest ground force since 1940
– A fleet of fewer than 230 ships, the smallest level since 1915
– The smallest tactical fighter force in the history of the Air Force.… Cuts to spending for the acquisition of military equipment alone would lead the loss of over 1,000,000 private sector jobs. These cuts could push unemployment back up to 9%. Cuts to active-duty and DOD civilian
personnel would amount to over 350,000 jobs lost.”
(According to data released by McKeon’s committee, Georgia alone has 37,000 civilian defense employees, and furloughs will cost the state some $203 million in payroll between now and October.)
However, despite such dire warnings and in a surprise to the Obama administration, congressional Republicans in general have found defense cutbacks far more acceptable than the revenue increases that would be needed to avoid them. And if even Republicans no longer see the Pentagon as invulnerable, that’s historic.
In fact, that change of attitude will have consequences far beyond the immediate short-term spending battle between Republican and Democrats. It represents a national turning point, with potentially major long-term implications not just for defense spending but for how the United States of America conducts itself overseas. It would seem that the American people are no longer content to spend more on defense than every other major country on the planet combined.
The politics behind the change are fairly conventional. In a recent poll by The Hill, 49 percent of likely voters said they would support cutting defense in order to reduce the deficit, while only 37 percent were opposed to the idea.
Contrast those numbers with a similar question asked about entitlements:
To be honest, I first saw inklings about that change in attitude regarding defense not in polls, but in comments on this blog over the past few years. When a number of conservative Georgians began to voice support for making cuts in the Pentagon budget, I realized that public opinion was changing quickly at the grassroots level, in ways that official Washington had not even begun to understand.
But that too is changing, as the sequester demonstrates.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
407 comments Add your comment
Stevie Ray
March 4th, 2013
9:47 am
DANNY
The failed stimulus is one program. PelosiCare is the one that is absolutely going to bring further, unsustainable obligations…trillions…No real reduction in growing costs will materialize for a variety of reasons…..
jhunt163
March 4th, 2013
9:47 am
“This is a 3.2% of GDP increase in spending projected in 2017 over the average spending of Bush-Clinton era.”
Moderate, I glanced over the CBO’s documents as well and noticed that discretionary spending averaged 5.5 % of GDP through Reagan/Bush/Clinton years and jumped up to 7% during Bush 42. This jump was attributed to 9/11 and creation of the TSA as well as armed conflicts. The current discretionary budget is 9% of GDP directly pointed to the passage of the 2010 stimulus, which created a new baseline for discretionary spending. So the budget has increased from 5.5% to 9% in a period of 12 years.
Despite Washington angst, officials appear resigned to sequester cuts – Fox News | Real Estate Realities With "The Rebel Broker"
March 4th, 2013
9:47 am
[...] Delays – The …Huffington PostThe New Normal (The Note)ABC News (blog)USA TODAY -Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) -Los Angeles Timesall 243 news [...]
MiltonMan
March 4th, 2013
9:48 am
“I’m still ambivalent about the Military cuts. The Military Industrial Complex has bled us dry, but I really would like to see more cuts on oil and Agriculture monies. We could just about balance the budget on those alone, I’m thinking…”
Libs and their awkward understanding of math. Defense spending = 4% of GDP. 4% of any countries GDP does not “bleed us dry.”
DannyX
March 4th, 2013
9:48 am
“The failed stimulus is one program.”
Stevie, answer the question, what new programs has Obama proposed?
St Simons - he-ne-ha
March 4th, 2013
9:49 am
no, this is not what it seems.
I believe the deranged teapotty House is planning a series of
‘Defense-only’ bills with $millions in advertising and free airtime
on Fox and AM radio to gin up the base and try to paint the
prez as weak on defense, a proven manufactured outrage tactic
used by the cons before. Problem is they keep making the same
mistake – its not 1980, or even 1994 anymore.
Its a new century, babeee. Change.
M
March 4th, 2013
9:49 am
“refusal to come up with a Senate budget”
Area man passionately defends what he imagines the Constitution to be.
Brosephus™ - Mobile and Multitasking
March 4th, 2013
9:50 am
Moderate Line @ 9:28
I honestly don’t expect to see a dime of SS or my “defined” pittance err pension when I retire. People in this country have been suckered into entrusting their entire retirement fund with a group of people who’s only concern is them making money. I didn’t have any say in those decisions back then, but I have some now.
MiltonMan
March 4th, 2013
9:50 am
It is a good thing that Obama was able to find $250 Million for his “Arab Spring” brothers in Egypt.
Bosch
March 4th, 2013
9:51 am
Yes, the sequestration was Obamas, and yet we still see people screaming about how he’s the most spendingest POTUS evah! He’s cut spending and still they bitch.
DannyX
March 4th, 2013
9:52 am
The Senate plan in February to replace the sequester with a combination of revenue increases and spending cuts was filibustered.
Has the current House passed their plan?
Jefferson
March 4th, 2013
9:53 am
When the boots hit the furloughs, they(GOP) will cry like they babies they act like.
Stevie Ray
March 4th, 2013
9:53 am
Bosch
March 4th, 2013
9:45 am
I hear you but first, I see no means to re-tool those folks in fashion that will meet existing employment needs…engineering etcetera. I think we can easily find $85 billion in waste the apparent assumption that we can get back on some financial footing without job loss is not reality.
I’m not of the opinion that our education department does anything to impact learning at the student level. I also think comparisons of our education system to other, smaller and less demographically vast countries is absurd. Everyone on who wants to get elected promise better education but none have actually delivered….Seems we should be using different metrics and include a push toward a two tiered approach….one college prep and the other trade/vocational….
MiltonMan
March 4th, 2013
9:53 am
“Yes, the sequestration was Obamas, and yet we still see people screaming about how he’s the most spendingest POTUS evah! He’s cut spending and still they bitch.”
Jay’s opinion piece last week squarely put this on the cons feet. Which one is it?
td
March 4th, 2013
9:53 am
DannyX
March 4th, 2013
9:41 am
“In spite of the government having the most revenue in the history of our country the Obamanistas appetite for even more government programs cannot be satisfied.”
What new government programs has Obama proposed?
Obamacare?
Cap and trade?
Not to mention the add ons to existing programs.
FS spending up
Medicaid spending up
Stevie Ray
March 4th, 2013
9:54 am
DannyX
March 4th, 2013
9:48 am
Define “proposed” so to be certain we avoid falling into a debate on semantics.
Despite Washington angst, officials appear resigned to sequester cuts – Fox News | NewSquirt
March 4th, 2013
9:54 am
[...] Delays – The …Huffington PostThe New Normal (The Note)ABC News (blog)USA TODAY -Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) -Los Angeles Timesall 256 news [...]
Moderate Line
March 4th, 2013
9:54 am
Brosephus™ – Mobile and Multitasking
March 4th, 2013
9:38 am
Wahoo
Those liabilities only exist because the people who benefit most from these programs have little to no control over them.
+++++
I am not sure I follow you on this one. The people who benefit most are the people who are currently collecting or close to collecting. People 65 and older are 15% of the electorate. And the odd thing is they vote overwhelmingly Republican but yet both parties protect them. If you include the 50 and over they are 44% of the electorate.
Mick
March 4th, 2013
9:55 am
donovan
Looters gone wild? Like maybe the republican looters who put us in this mess with all that reckless spending in the first decade of this milennium. Where the hell were you back then? Were you up in arms about the rubber stamp congress???
Latrina
March 4th, 2013
9:55 am
“…led by John McCain in the Senate…”
It is time for that semi-senile geezer to go away. Who on earth listens to him anymore?
More people are waking up to the fact that the military has been repeatedly misused. VietNam, Iraq, Afghanistan. Our armed forces should only be used to defend America, not to police the rest of the world.
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
9:56 am
As for the military China will takeover any place we depart.
Thanks for the early morning belly laugh. I can’t wait to see the Chinese soldiers in Berlin or Nuremberg. Walking the streets of Bamberg.
Holy crap, just when I think I’ve seen the rock bottom of stupidity someone digs a deeper hole.
Stevie Ray
March 4th, 2013
9:58 am
DannyX
March 4th, 2013
9:46 am
It seems to me that we’ve gotten to the point that who/whom actually originated this idea is irrelevant. Wasted energy..issue is now how to actually stop our financial bleeding…
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
9:58 am
Who on earth listens to him anymore?
I’d say his constituency
Recon 0311 2533
March 4th, 2013
9:59 am
Obama and his administration is backing away from the dire predictions they were making prior to the sequester because reducing future spending by a mere 2.4% won’t produce the consequences they predicted. Obama’s primary responsibility is national security and he can have the authority to prioritize spending within the DOD to ensure we have a military capability that preserves our defense capability. He can also agree to additional spending cuts and entitlement reforms that would end the sequester. Bottom line this minor cut in future spending won’t cause severe pain or a reduction in our national defense capability unless Obama allows it to happen. Republicans in congress need to keep pressure on the campaigner-n-chief to do the job of an elected president.
Bosch
March 4th, 2013
9:59 am
Stevie Ray,
I agree, but we already do the college prep/ vocational thing, we just strip funding from it all and then complain when it doesn’t work.
Td,
Obamacare isn’t a new program, it’s an adjustment to our already existing one. Cap and trade? Has that passed? The question is, new program, like Medicare Part D, has Obama been behind -something the govt did not pay for before, now does?
Despite Washington angst, officials appear resigned to sequester cuts – Fox News | News Report Now
March 4th, 2013
9:59 am
[...] Delays – The …Huffington PostThe New Normal (The Note)ABC News (blog)USA TODAY -Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) -Los Angeles Timesall 254 news articles » ch_client = "fryedaddy"; ch_width = [...]
DannyX
March 4th, 2013
10:00 am
“Obamacare is a proposal, td? Maybe you didn’t understand the very simple question, what new spending programs has Obama proposed. Cap and trade has been dead for years.
Common sense @ 9:38- “I In spite of the government having the most revenue in the history of our country the Obamanistas appetite for even more government programs cannot be satisfied. Just as in the commercial, where little girl cries, More, more, we want more” the Obama moochers demand more or other peoples money.”
What are all these new spending programs?
curious
March 4th, 2013
10:01 am
Anyone talking about what happens after the end of September?
What will the funding level be?
barking frog
March 4th, 2013
10:01 am
Historic also is Democratic willingness to cut entitlements, perhaps
even more than the GOP attitude toward defense. When Obama
announced the cut in the increase in food stamps to help fund ACA
I said this is not the Democratic Party that I know. Perhaps the reality
is that both parties are accepting that jobs are not coming back which
is the best solution to our financial problems. You can’t starve the
grandchildren to care for grandma is now the mutual meme.
DannyX
March 4th, 2013
10:02 am
“Thanks for the early morning belly laugh. I can’t wait to see the Chinese soldiers in Berlin or Nuremberg. Walking the streets of Bamberg.”
Or maybe walking the streets of Japan???
Stevie Ray
March 4th, 2013
10:02 am
Perhaps one thing on the horizon could be the Equalization of Opportunity Act..or perhaps the Anti-Dog Eat Dog Act…seems we are heading in that direction….at least the seeds seem more firmly planted..
stands for decibels
March 4th, 2013
10:03 am
Like maybe the republican looters
Given that republicans are overwhelmingly white, and it’s a well documented fact that white people don’t loot, they “find,” I’m afraid your example isn’t going to work
Moderate Line
March 4th, 2013
10:03 am
Brosephus™ – Mobile and Multitasking
March 4th, 2013
9:50 am
Moderate Line @ 9:28
I honestly don’t expect to see a dime of SS or my “defined” pittance err pension when I retire. People in this country have been suckered into entrusting their entire retirement fund with a group of people who’s only concern is them making money. I didn’t have any say in those decisions back then, but I have some now.
++++
I am not sure I understand the premise on this one either. I don’t think Social Security is in the position it is in because people are only concerned with making money. They are in the position there in because any attempt to fix the programs to ensure the continued into perpetuity is fought tooth and nail.
The reason this system is in danger is benefits were never tied to what people paid. I am not sure how people concerned about making money have anything to do with it.
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
10:04 am
No kidding DannyX. The troll forgets that the Chinese lack the military power to even take back Taiwan…….. their break away province.
I love how talk radio and fox gets these people all worked up over the most ignorant crap one could think of………
Stevie Ray
March 4th, 2013
10:05 am
Jefferson
March 4th, 2013
9:53 am
Suffice it to say that those who lose those military jobs will result in heated competition for that particular voting group….when should we expect the TV ads to commence?
stands for decibels
March 4th, 2013
10:05 am
I’d say his constituency
…and any heathen at home watching network TeeVee on Sunday morning, I guess.
Stevie Ray
March 4th, 2013
10:08 am
stands for decibels
March 4th, 2013
10:03 am
I’m not sure what “looters” means in this context but it may be helpful to remember that the majority of safety net recipients are white…proportionately measured is there people get hung up..
Does it really matter? We are all pink on the inside eh?
Stevie Ray
March 4th, 2013
10:10 am
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
10:04 am
I wish our foreign policy was a mirror of China’s. They never blatantly stick their noses under others tents or otherwise attempt to sell their culture. They don’t bully and don’t see a need to be the worlds police force. The island issue is an old wound that will exist for generations as a result from Japan’s warmongering ways of the past..
stands for decibels
March 4th, 2013
10:11 am
I honestly don’t expect to see a dime of SS or my “defined” pittance err pension when I retire
Seriously, Bros–that’s the sort of expression of attitude, while understandable, becomes self-prophecy. The Pete Petersons of this world have been working for decades, cultivating this notion of despair among workers, who become convinced that our nation won’t maintain its obligations in a manner that any self-respecting industrialized country does as a matter of course.
I know that you will fight to see that such a thing doesn’t happen, and I’m not criticizing your *attitude*, but expressing it quite like that in public? not helpful, I don’t think.
stands for decibels
March 4th, 2013
10:12 am
We are all pink on the inside eh?
“And we are tasty when young!”
–J. Swift
curious
March 4th, 2013
10:12 am
Too early to tell if Obama miscalculated. Wait a couple of months.
Drudge
March 4th, 2013
10:14 am
So sequestration aside, you all think we are headed in the right direction under Obama? Or are you still blaming 1/2 of 1/3 of the branches of the federal government for your woes? It’s never your fault – always ours. We would be living in a complete Utopia if it weren’t for conservatives. We would be basking in Detroit, Philly, S Chicago, Oakland type eden.
Tell me honestly – if you can – have any of the 999 problems we have been the fault of Barack Obama? One? Or is this just 999 of the most complex and unfortunate set of coincidences of all time?
Funny, we are wandering blindly down this path, where every important promise is broken, then explained away. Things are getting worse on every level – income, healthcare, savings, debt – and none of you are willing to put down your campaign sign for 10 minutes and prioritize. Wake up. Please. If it seems to good to be true…
wahoo
March 4th, 2013
10:15 am
stands for decibels:
“The Pete Petersons of this world have been working for decades, cultivating this notion of despair among workers, who become convinced that our nation won’t maintain its obligations in a manner that any self-respecting industrialized country does as a matter of course.”
Absent any change in the programs, do you believe the Federal is capable of keeping these promises even if they wanted to?
Despite Washington angst, officials appear resigned to sequester cuts – Fox News | urbandestruction.com
March 4th, 2013
10:16 am
[...] Delays – The …Huffington PostThe New Normal (The Note)ABC News (blog)USA TODAY -Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) -Los Angeles Timesall 256 news articles » This entry was posted in [...]
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
10:16 am
We are all pink on the inside eh?
I’m a long long way from
New York City now
We’re all naked – if you
turn us inside out
-David Byrne-
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
10:17 am
I wish our foreign policy was a mirror of China’s. They never blatantly stick their noses under others tents or otherwise attempt to sell their culture. They don’t bully and don’t see a need to be the worlds police force. The island issue is an old wound that will exist for generations as a result from Japan’s warmongering ways of the past..
Wow. You don’t know much history do you? Ever hear of KOREA? And if you get time try googling Senkaku islands. Or maybe research the area of Siberia where it borders China.
Thanks though for my SECOND belly laugh of the day. This is turning out to be better than the comedy channel.
Seriously Folks
March 4th, 2013
10:18 am
@Martin the Calvanist
Wow..I have read your posts and really trying to follow your logic…So you admit that “we shouldnt tax small businesses with 2million in sales the same as CEO’s/athletes (hmmm..why athletes, i wonder)” yet you spout off about needing a simpler tax code…
You do realize there are NO high priced lobbyists in Washington advocating for everyday people, right? You do realize the tax code, that as written, stands almost 3 feet tall, was not written for you and I or any of those “47% that don’t pay any taxes”???
Sorry, but no matter how you try to “assign” blame to our financial mess, there is blood on the hands of both parties. And this mess, for those with short-term memories, occurred when we allowed “banks” to operate like casinos and we all got f**ked!!!!!!!!!!! Not because of some “scary black man” in the White House…not because of some previous President…Nope. Because we continue to let the foxes guard the henhouse!!!
So no matter how fashionable it is to blame one party over the other, trust me when I say that there are billionaire bankers laughing their butts off that we are on here arguing who is to blame….
Just remember, “Pay no attention to the Man behind the curtain!”….Wizard of Oz!!!!!
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
March 4th, 2013
10:18 am
JAY:
As usual you forgot to include that the Pentagon has not been audited in YEARS and that the next audit is not even planned until 2017.
There is so much waste, fraud and abuse (and just plain FAT) in Defense Department funding that we should probably be cutting it more not less.
Geez !
Headline (CNN): “Pentagon says it’s moving toward being ‘audit-ready’ … ”
http://articles.cnn.com/2011-02-25/politics/defense.department.audit_1_dod-annual-audits-government-accountability-office?_s=PM:POLITICS
Headline (New York Times): “Audit of Pentagon Spending Finds $70 Billion in Waste – NYTimes.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/30/business/30military.html?_r=0
appleseed
March 4th, 2013
10:18 am
Hey Dumb ass Fred Im speaking of enemies not allies.Find Wilma and crawl back under your mushroom cloud.
barking frog
March 4th, 2013
10:20 am
When he was young my Father said he would not collect
his Social Security but he did for 20 years. When I was
young I said I would never collect my Social Security but
my check is regular as clockwork. I guess you can depend
on the US government to keep its word.
Despite Washington angst, officials appear resigned to sequester cuts – Fox News - ADD 2 HOST
March 4th, 2013
10:22 am
[...] Delays – The …Huffington PostThe New Normal (The Note)ABC News (blog)USA TODAY -Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) -Los Angeles Timesall 258 news [...]
Thomas heyward Jr
March 4th, 2013
10:22 am
Wedding and First responder drone strikes will continue………………..until Moral improves.
.
lol
Thomas heyward Jr
March 4th, 2013
10:22 am
And Gitmo.
F. Sinkwich
March 4th, 2013
10:23 am
Here’s a poll for ya:
“Rasmussen Reports survey of 1,000 likely voters reveals that more than four-of-ten Americans (41%) believe the average media reporter (and most of them are average) is more liberal than they are. Those voters who believe reporters are more conservative than they totals 18%…”
Dog bites man! Plane lands safely! Etc.
stands for decibels
March 4th, 2013
10:24 am
Absent any change in the programs, do you believe the Federal [sic] is capable of keeping these promises even if they wanted to?
What kind of a weird question is that?
Obviously changes in funding and spending have to be made to programs year in, year out. And they are, generally.
That’s nothing to do with fulfilling a promise to maintain old-age pension and medical benefits to American citizens. If as part of the program modifications, you find a more efficient way to train and employ doctors (say) or negotiate better prices for pharmaceuticals, you do that. If you do, as we did in the 80s, take the unprecedented step and tell workers “you’ve got a massive demographic bulge retiring in about thirty years, so we’re going to actually bank some of the revenue into a trust fund to be spent later,” you legislate that. all that’s ok, I guess.
and if you decide going forward that the cap on incomes has to rise so yes, you’re collecting more from wealthier Americans (I’d propose a doughnut hole, actually, leaving [say] the income between 110K-200K alone and then gradually taking a bigger bite out of incomes above that–or at least I’d run some numbers through some models to see where that got us), maybe you do that.
If you’re trying to get me to say “well yeah, we should at least recalculate the way we index inflation so that those horrible Olds don’t get as much down the road,” sorry, I won’t say that, because it’s effed up and bullsh-t.
Does that answer your question?
They call me MISTER JamVet.
March 4th, 2013
10:24 am
Defense spending = 4% of GDP.
Why in the world would you use that figure as the important one?
Military spending takes up about 20% of our annul budget.
Close to one billion, three hundred million dollars per year…
Jefferson
March 4th, 2013
10:25 am
The success of SS is that private companies can’t steal the money like they do with medicare. Follow the money, you will find the theif.
appleseed
March 4th, 2013
10:25 am
Smoking gun in a mushroom cloud there is you sign.Now that is intelligent.But sure as h not funny,I suppose that you and only you could get a belly laugh out of your silly azz comments.
stands for decibels
March 4th, 2013
10:27 am
the 999 problems we have
Is that like the 57 known communists in the State Department?
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
10:29 am
<i.Hey Dumb ass Fred Im speaking of enemies not allies.Find Wilma and crawl back under your mushroom cloud.
My My such an emotional outburst from the troll. So you are saying that the Chinese are going to be in Iraq and Afghanistan? Really? That’s an even funnier notion. How are they going to get there? Is Scotty going to beam them there? Or are they going to invade Pakistan first?
Keep the funnies coming son. I love laughing at the dumb stuff the far right wing fanatics buy from their puppet masters.
td
March 4th, 2013
10:32 am
They call me MISTER JamVet.
March 4th, 2013
10:24 am
Defense spending = 4% of GDP.
Why in the world would you use that figure as the important one?
Military spending takes up about 20% of our annul budget.
Close to one billion, three hundred million dollars per year…
I think your number are a little low Jam.
Now the number one job, under our Constitution, for the Federal government is the defense of the nation and we only spend one in five dollars sent to Washington for its highest priority. Seems like our priorities are a little skewed.
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
10:32 am
LOL I think the troll has me confused with Kam…………….
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
March 4th, 2013
10:32 am
Bottom line and then I am out for the day:
Until I see a complete, accurate and specific audit of our Defense Budget …………. CUT !
Everyone be nice.
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
10:34 am
Military spending takes up about 20% of our annul budget.
Close to one billion, three hundred million dollars per year…
I think you are about 679 BILLION off on that military number Jam lol (as of 2009).
F. Sinkwich
March 4th, 2013
10:35 am
O’bozo gave Iraq to Iran and is in the process of doing the same with Afghanistan.
appleseed
March 4th, 2013
10:36 am
Although the U.S. government has spent more than $940 billion on the conflict in Afghanistan since 2001, a treasure trove of mineral deposits, including vast quantities of industrial metals such as lithium, gold, cobalt, copper and iron, are likely to wind up going to Russia and China instead of American firms.
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
10:38 am
the 999 problems we have
I’ve heard only good things about the 999
http://www.999motorsports.com/
jms
March 4th, 2013
10:39 am
If people were able to wrap their minds around the size of the debt they’d realize that this is just the start. It’s going to take a whole lot less spending coupled with tax increases to pay our bills.
DannyX
March 4th, 2013
10:39 am
“O’bozo gave Iraq to Iran and is in the process of doing the same with Afghanistan.”
Wow, cons truly have blocked George W Bush from their memories! Must have been very traumatic thing to go through.
williebkind
March 4th, 2013
10:41 am
stands for decibels
March 4th, 2013
8:54 am
Do you believe people who did not pay into ss should receive a social security check. Oh my back hurts! Give me SSI! My child needs glasses I need a SSI check. Oh I need a quadruple bypass and SSI after the free surgery. Is this what you want?
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
10:42 am
Although the U.S. government has spent more than $940 billion on the conflict in Afghanistan since 2001, a treasure trove of mineral deposits, including vast quantities of industrial metals such as lithium, gold, cobalt, copper and iron, are likely to wind up going to Russia and China instead of American firms.
It’s a good thing President Bush got us over there and then let Bin Laden slip away fro Bora Bora isn’t it?
DannyX
March 4th, 2013
10:42 am
“the 999 problems we have”
Herman has a plan for that.
appleseed
March 4th, 2013
10:43 am
NEW YORK (TheStreet) — Chinese national oil companies are now the biggest beneficiary of Iraq’s oil resources, beating the oil majors, according to analysts.
F. Sinkwich
March 4th, 2013
10:44 am
Bush!
No, not him, O’bozo.
They call me MISTER JamVet.
March 4th, 2013
10:44 am
Now the number one job, under our Constitution, for the Federal government is the defense of the nation…
Incorrect. They are not listed in order of importance. And as proof, I suggest that you read Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution a little closer. (And by way of a rhetorical question, why do you permanent war types always leave out the general welfare part of that clause?)
Seems like our priorities are a little skewed.
Personally, I would add the letter y to the beginning of that pronoun!
Disgusted
March 4th, 2013
10:46 am
So I have a cousin who’s a full-time teacher. He owns a 300-acre farm where he raises beef cattle on the side. So I’m scrolling through the Internet tubes and lo and behold, I find that my cousin has been getting $9,800 per year in federal agricultural subsidies for the past several years.
In fact, I find that in the little county where I grew up the federal government pays $6.5 million annually in agricultural subsidies. And that’s just one county among thousands in this country.
As the Godfather asks, “How did we get to this point?” Why is it that we’re nibbling around the edges, cutting kids’ and seniors’ meals, thinking about whacking Head Start, griping about cuts in the defense budget, while doing nothing about the horrendous expense of paying part-time farmers to maintain their hobbies?
If you want a target for doing some whacking of spending, I just gave you one.
USC-69
March 4th, 2013
10:46 am
No big surprise. I think most of us knew that the Republicans yelling about a STRONG DEFENSE was just a cover for funneling some extra to their defense contractor supporters. Most of the current crop avoided the draft and have little respect for active duty service members. In actuality, when push comes to shove, they are really only interested in their own stash. It should be clear to most by now that the corporations have won the money battle long ago, using political purchases as needed to assure voting support. The real anti-tax sentiment, and those who have the most to lose, are the corporate staff, stock holders, and board members. Too much spending? Obviously not if we have to start mugging the elderly, the disabled, and children, grabbing a few dollars out of their hands when there are trillions sitting idle in corporate accounts. We made these corporations and it is time for them to support the system equitably.
wahoo
March 4th, 2013
10:48 am
stands for decibels:
Forgive me. I am all for minor tweaks here and there to improve efficiency and help manage cost. I should have been more specific and said “major change” as opposed to simply “any” change. As it stands now, I would contend that absent major changes to benefits and/or funding mechanisms for these programs, they (specifically Medicare) cannot fulfill the promises we’ve made to our future seniors. Bear in mind that current US Treasury debt already represents more than 50% of the total global outstandings for AAA rated sovereign debt. I am skeptical that the global capital markets are able to swallow the amount of US debt necessary to finance the future expenditures. Even if we could finance it, I am even more skeptical it could be at rates approaching what we enjoy today. I am, unfortunately, inexorably led to conclude that benefits must decrease (promises broken) and revenue must increase (taxes up), in some form or fashion. The question I posed was more to get at the crux of that matter.
Union
March 4th, 2013
10:48 am
talking about this at work.. the attitude seems to be.. “it doesnt affect me, so why should i care”
this is something obama himself has caused.. the attitude of people is move shattered than it seems to have ever been. when obama stands before the people and talks about how the taxes on the “rich” will help everyone.. then reaching into everyones pockets..
funny thing.. since the sky has not fallen as obama said it would.. more and more people are saying that these cuts are more on future spending than current spending… much like a decrease on an increase..
Progressive, Liberal, Lefty
March 4th, 2013
10:49 am
The teabags have got ‘em by the balls. Actually, they have the whole country by the balls. As long as they keep getting elected in severely stupid districts, this is our life.
wowzer
March 4th, 2013
10:50 am
td– Bush’s wars cost the tax payers less then Obama’s payoff to unions and government employees. Paying for health insurance for the people unwilling to pay for it themselves or who make bad choices in life cost more per year then the wars.
What an idiotic statement!
This misinformed thinking is the majority of the problem causing republicans to act stupidily.
First, the assertment is wrong. More importantly, the cost of lives of our couragous service men and women is a price we did not need to pay. The ongoing costs of medical and mental care to those wounded in action is also a driver to the cost of the economy the obama haters fail to accept.
stands for decibels
March 4th, 2013
10:51 am
Do you believe people who did not pay into ss should receive a social security check. Oh my back hurts! Give me SSI! My child needs glasses I need a SSI check. Oh I need a quadruple bypass and SSI after the free surgery. Is this what you want?
I want to discuss this rationally with people who understand actual issues involved.
And that’s about the nicest way I can reply to your incredibly stupid post.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
March 4th, 2013
10:52 am
Do you believe people who did not pay into ss should receive a social security check. Oh my back hurts! Give me SSI! My child needs glasses I need a SSI check. Oh I need a quadruple bypass and SSI after the free surgery. Is this what you want?
My father died, I got a SS benefits check. — Paul Ryan
They call me MISTER JamVet.
March 4th, 2013
10:52 am
No, Fred, you are correct sir! I misread the non discretionary defense spending as part of the defense budget. The actual number was $744 million in 2011. Which accounts for somewhere between 18 and 20% of the annual budget.
This of course does NOT include the shadow expenditures, etc which are never released for “national security” reasons…
Jefferson
March 4th, 2013
10:54 am
F. Shintkwich is full
Get Real
March 4th, 2013
10:55 am
Still waiting on the Democrats to swallow anything other than more spending
stands for decibels
March 4th, 2013
10:55 am
I am skeptical that the global capital markets are able to swallow the amount of US debt necessary to finance the future expenditures. Even if we could finance it, I am even more skeptical it could be at rates approaching what we enjoy today.
Those are fair points. I lean toward seeing what we can do, in terms of (to put it VERY simply) spending more for stuff we need to get more people to work for higher pay, and seeing what actually happens to interest rates, rather than being afraid of what might happen to them.
I think a lot of these future issues that people do justifiably fret about become less of a problem if you get more people to work. That’s what we should be focused on now.
Brosephus™
March 4th, 2013
10:57 am
TD, liberals don’t care if revenue received by the federal gov’t is at an all time high, it’s still not enough for them.
Conservatives don’t care either as they still vote and pass appropriation bills that call for spending that far exceeds the revenues. One also has to consider that population increases aid that revenue increase, and that also contributes to the increase in spending.
————–
wahoo
Those liabilities exist because the programs themselves have created promises of future performance by the Federal.
And, if we had the continuous job growth at HOME, there wouldn’t be any issues. The private sector shares responsibility in the growth and sustainability of this country just as much as the government does. Unless you’re going to advocate that the government controls private sector hiring, things can not be placed solely on the shoulders of the government. It takes two to tango.
They call me MISTER JamVet.
March 4th, 2013
10:57 am
Well, as I have fat finger syndrome this morning, just look at the pretty picture and you’ll see what I mean!
http://tinyurl.com/bum9r4x
williebkind
March 4th, 2013
10:58 am
“As long as they keep getting elected in severely stupid districts, this is our life.”
Just like the liberals on the north east and west coast and the so called northern states. I agree they are morons.
Atlas Shrugging
March 4th, 2013
10:59 am
I hate this sequestration, I have to get up an hour early just to put on my Obozo the sky is falling protective headgear and body armor.
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
10:59 am
I have to say, I’m not seeing a difference with this sequestration going on. The sky looks as high today as it did on Thursday so if it’s falling I don’t see it. I say we cut even deeper and look into closing those tax loop holes and corporate welfare.
The US leads the World in billionaires and they sure as hell aren’t creating any jobs over here so screw them. They are getting richer while our Country is getting poorer. Of course Warren Buffet lost some cash as did Zuckermen, but Zuckerman scammed his IPO anyway……….
http://www.ajc.com/ap/ap/financial-services/forbes-slim-worlds-richest-for-4th-year-in-a-row/nWgJM/
White House and Press Relations Getting Worse – U.S. News & World Report (blog) | Android Tablets
March 4th, 2013
10:59 am
[...] GOP Delays – The …Huffington PostThe New Normal (The Note)ABC News (blog)Blue MauMau -Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) -CNN Internationalall 258 news [...]
williebkind
March 4th, 2013
11:00 am
“One also has to consider that population increases”
You mean the illegal immigrants you want to make citizens and release from jail?
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
11:02 am
Just like the liberals on the north east and west coast and the so called northern states. I agree they are morons.
You gotta admit willieb, stupid politicians isn’t exclusive to either party. For every Maxine Waters you have a Paul Broun………… For every John McCain you have a Harry Reid……….
I’m trying to think who to compare to Nancy Pelosi lol…………
Brosephus™
March 4th, 2013
11:03 am
Moderate Line @ 10:03
I mean that the common everyday person who has to depend on Social Security and such have no say in forming, writing, passing, or signing legislation into law that affects SS. I think that currently half of the jackass brigade in DC are millionaires or at least worth a million if I remember correctly. Do you think they “need” SS to the same magnitude that Uncle Tony living on $1000 a month does?
That’s what I meant. Most of the decisions being made in DC are made by people who don’t have to rely on the implications of their decisions. We basically have allowed ourselves to be placed in a defacto caste system where the ruling class doesn’t have to suffer based on what they do.
wahoo
March 4th, 2013
11:04 am
Stands:
What I sense you are expressing, and I don’t completely disagree, is that we have a short term problem of getting people back to work. However, we also have a long term problem related to the transfer programs. The dollars involved with the long term problem are so large that even the short term improvements of getting people back to work isn’t going to solve it, sadly. This is why I would want to get the deficit down today, so that the debt capacity is there in the future, as I mentioned to you last week. But putting people back to work needs to be done intelligently, with stimulus that is deficit neutral or deficit reducing. I am not in favor of borrowing large sums to put people back to work in light of the future problems we know are coming. Let me know if I’ve mis-read your position.
White House and Press Relations Getting Worse - U.S. News & World Report (blog) | Batyam blogs
March 4th, 2013
11:04 am
[...] GOP Delays – The …Huffington PostThe New Normal (The Note)ABC News (blog)Blue MauMau -Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) -CNN Internationalall 258 news [...]
They call me MISTER JamVet.
March 4th, 2013
11:05 am
I’m trying to think who to compare to Nancy Pelosi lol…………
Mitch McConnell?
TBone
March 4th, 2013
11:07 am
It’s good to see that you blue nose progressives have graduated from blame it on Bush to blame it all on republicans, very grown up of you.