Cheney trained this stooge real good!!! Add even more unemployment but keep those multi-billion dollar defense contractors in plenty of green.

Once a Neocon, always a neocon.

"had found $100 billion of savings that they would retain, allowing them to continue developing major weapons and modernizing their forces over the next five years."

I certainly would hope so. We need to retain our ability to repeal an invasion by Venezuela.

repell

""I'm not happy," said Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-California, who just took over as chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. "I remain committed to applying more fiscal responsibility and accountability to the Department of Defense, but I will not stand idly by and watch the White House gut defense when Americans are deployed in harm's way.""

The new Republican congress. Borrow more money to subsidize the military/industrial complex. How do you like that hope and change, rtards?

"We need to retain our ability to repeal an invasion by Venezuela."

Let alone repel one.

Can we just get the number of nukes down to a survivable level for civilization and then maybe have a chat?

Reagan & Gorbachev took it from 70,000 to 30,000.

That's still enough to kill everybody I know.

Cheers!

"Borrow more money to subsidize the military/industrial complex."

Whatever happened to government innovation? You don't really believe in it do you? You know this Internet thingy started out as a military request, and completed by the MIC.......

As far as being a Rtard, what do you have against the retarded? Besides this Rtard will be there Saturday nite to kick your ass! Go Auburn.... I am bringing the dog!

Oh yeah.... its "repell" meatball...

"Oh yeah.... its "repell" meatball..."

Actually, I misspelled it twice. It's "repel," meathead.

"Whatever happened to government innovation? You don't really believe in it do you? You know this Internet thingy started out as a military request, and completed by the MIC......"

Great, let's keeping borrowing hundreds of billions to keep the MIC afloat just in case they come up with something as useful as the Internet.

Repellent.

Now Rapunzel, ...

Actually, I misspelled it twice. It's "repel," meathead.
#7 | Posted by nullifidian

I know thats why I quoted it again....its much more fun than being obvious.

Great, let's keeping borrowing hundreds of billions to keep the MIC afloat just in case they come up with something as useful as the Internet.
#8 | Posted by nullifidian

Yes, its called an investment in the future perhaps the only true investment the government makes (other than infrastructure). Unlike giving people for unemployment, healthcare, oldage, which isn't an investment. While these types of entitlements should be done, they should be funded with current tax revenues only.

Then get our fine men and women out of Afganistan and Iraq, you stupid son of a bitch.

...investment in the future perhaps the only true investment the government makes (other than infrastructure). Unlike giving people for unemployment, healthcare, oldage, which isn't an investment.... -- #10 | Posted by AndreaMackris

Development economists have recognized for decades that investment in human capital -- e.g., through education and health care -- IS investment.

"Yes, its called an investment in the future perhaps the only true investment the government makes (other than infrastructure)."

That's nonsense for the reasons stated by Phoenix. But even it were true, that's just an argument for using that 100 billion to repair America's crumbling infrastructure.

The real story here is that he didn't save a dime. He just shifted the money from one part of his budget to another and called it saving.

Can we just get the number of nukes down to a survivable level for civilization and then maybe have a chat?
Reagan & Gorbachev took it from 70,000 to 30,000.
That's still enough to kill everybody I know.

No...I say make more. Our enemies will. I wouldnt want to be that presidet who asks, "Dont we have any more"?

I have learned through two years of military combat and 5 years of being in potential combat zones you never have enough of anything. And you always run out at a critical time when you need it..

Well this way they get to bury the war spending in investments like Halliburton Xe Backwash who aren't bound by the Geneva convention... the republiclowns call it something cutesy like "international diplomacy" and "spreading democracy".

As far as nukes go I think every nation should have... at the very least 10. The US tends to only pick on the nations that dont' have them... which is what makes having them so appealing. Even Cheney and the pussies from Haliburton dont' sent their Xe Backwash dirtballs in to nuke nations.

When I was in the early 80s, under Reagan, we had pretty shitty pay but we had things like interest-free credit and super-cheap commissaries. When Papi Bush took over, he cut the military budget by removing a lot of the token benefits the soldiers got. Clinton went even further and now the soldiers and sailors and Marines, etc are just cannon fodder. I read somewhere that an E5 today qualifies for food stamps (I don't know if that's true, but even in 1986 and E4 could get them).

I'm all for drawing the military in from around the world, investing in a few genuinely useful high-tech weapons and surveillance gadgets, paying the troops high wages and giving them the best training possible.

The US military today is unfortunately all about corporate welfare.

So the rethuglicoonts get elected in a "shellacking" mostly by promising to "restore fiscal sanity" by reducing the deficit by 100 billion in cuts and then within hours of starting their new gigs they knock that figure down to 30 billion.

Obama, otoh, tells Gates to look for cuts within the military bufget and he find 100 billion to be repurposed and another 78 billion in actual cuts?

So again while the rethugs are beating their chest and declaring themselves to be America's fiscal saviors Obama and the Dems actually did something about it without much fanfare?

That pretty much it?

K, just so we're clear there.

Be Well.

So again while the rethugs are beating their chest and declaring themselves to be America's fiscal saviors Obama and the Dems actually did something about it without much fanfare?

That pretty much it?

K, just so we're clear there.

Be Well.

#18 | Posted by dethspud at 2011-01-08 08:59 AM

Why is it the dems did not do this sooner? Gee, I wonder.

Why is it the dems did not do this sooner? Gee, I wonder.

Something about getting a handle on the two clusterfuck wars that yer boys handed off to them and dealing with an unprecedented economic crisis while dealing with wingnuts screaming about sekret muslins w/o proper documentation, methinks.

As best Spud remembers.

Be Well.

You might say Gates found $100 billion in savings or he increased the budget by 3%. Both are true. So is the fact that these belligerant money wasters lost in Vietnam, IraqII and Afghanistan. All but one of the 55 wars we've started were unnecessary. I wonder what the budget would need to be if the Department of Defense limited themselves to defending our country instead of attacking countries where they want to establish a profitable supply of raw materials with a Corporate friendly unDemocratic Government.

Good for him, but, as usual, they're not really "cuts"--they're reductions in the growth of future outlays.

Start cutting. REALLY cutting. Then go down the hallway and get the same from Sibelius and Incompetano and Clinton and the other Secretaries.

"The Defense Department had instructed the individual branches of the military to identify $100 billion in cuts over the next five years, with Gates' pledge that they could keep the savings they identified instead of it being returned either to the larger Defense Department pool or the U.S. Treasury."

Now there is a budget cut for you!!!! WTF over.

First line from lede:

Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced cuts of $78 billion to the U.S. military and defense department, including reducing the size of the Army and Marine Corps. Gates also said the Army, Navy and Air Force had found $100 billion of savings that they would retain.

Spud's first post:

Obama, otoh, tells Gates to look for cuts within the military budget and he find 100 billion to be repurposed and another 78 billion in actual cuts?

Sniper's first post:

"The Defense Department had instructed the individual branches of the military to identify $100 billion in cuts over the next five years, with Gates' pledge that they could keep the savings they identified instead of it being returned either to the larger Defense Department pool or the U.S. Treasury."

Now there is a budget cut for you!!!! WTF over.

Can you spot the Retorter who actually Reads The Freakin' Articles in this picture?

Be Well.

/Well you can't now cos he's gone
stage left.

Potato head............ it was the last part of the posted article. WTF over. If you would have read anything but the headline you would know that the savings was another bullshit lie. It was a reduction in the increase of their budget. Go back to canada and bugger another walurus.

This premise is also wrong and little "Bobby" Gates isn't just a fool, he's economically illiterate and dumber than a box-of-rocks. This is what happens when pacifists and queers are allowed to advance in today's military.

Social, not defense, spending is the largest expenditure in our budget. Look it up! Ask heritage.org.

Disarming America, which is one the main goals of "Dumbo's administration, only makes us a larger target for for all the "crazies" in the world, like Iran, China, North Korea and our old "trust, but verify" friends, the Russians.

They could never defeat us on a battlefield, but with the "insidious disease" that is the democRAT party eating away at our foundations from the inside, it's another story.

There won't be any need for an economic recovery if we can't defend our way of life. Defense spending should be a top priority while all social spending should be eliminated.

It's called "tough love". No more handouts, so get a job if you want to feed yourself and your family.

There won't be any need for an economic recovery if we can't defend our way of life. Defense spending should be a top priority while all social spending should be eliminated.
It's called "tough love". No more handouts, so get a job if you want to feed yourself and your family.

#26 | POSTED BY ELIXIRMIXER

And if there are no jobs (when real unemployment is ~20%), then just go somewhere and die. The country you want to live in doesn't deserve defense.