The American Spectator : Obama Scissorhands

Text Size

Obama Scissorhands

By Jed Babbin on 1.12.12 @ 6:09AM

Slashing defense even as he promises new systems no one will be able to deliver.

There are two ways to react to President Obama’s latest round of defense spending cuts. One is emotional but somewhat justified. The second is to analyze of Obama’s plans critically to reveal a transformation of our military that is as dangerous as Obama’s transformation of our economy.

Since Obama appeared with Defense Secretary Panetta and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey in the Pentagon press room last Thursday, many commentators have written and railed at length on radio and television about how these cuts will hollow our forces’ readiness to fight.

That reaction is understandable but it isn’t on more solid ground than Obama’s plan, because neither the plan nor the common reaction deals with the real dangers our nation faces.

Under former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Obama imposed about $400 billion in defense spending cuts by his “Queen of Hearts” method of budgeting for defense: verdict first, trial after. They ended, for example, production of key weapon systems such as the F-22 fighter, the C-17 transport aircraft, and the DDG-1000 Zumwalt destroyer.

Gates imposed those cuts before the Quadrennial Defense Review — “QDR” in the inevitable acronym — was performed. The QDR was supposed to be the congressionally mandated analysis of the threats the Pentagon is expected to deal with and from which its budget is supposed to be derived. But Gates and his team wrote the post-cuts QDR to justify the cuts rather than to justify a budget that answered the threats.

In April of last year, Obama praised Gates’s first round of cuts and then ordered a review of defense spending to double them. Last week’s announced plan was the result of that review. It repeated the Queen of Hearts exercise and took it one step further. It took the planned smaller budget, fashioned our military’s future around it, and then made big promises that cannot possibly be kept.

The plan announced by Obama and Panetta plans a revision of our force structure:

• To refocus our military to meet the rise of China’s military force by “rebalancing” toward the Asia-Pacific region.

• To be able to win one conflict and fight another to a stalemate.

• To provide standing forces, for a limited time, to engage in new nation-building operations.

• To meet every other challenge in space, cyberwar, and other fields of unconventional operations.

So if we have to fight China, Israel has to deal with Iran on its own, Europe can deal with Russia, and the Middle East can stew in its own juices. And stalemate is now a strategy.

But even that’s a very tall order for a force that may be cut by as much as $1 trillion in spending over the next ten years.

Let’s get that bogeyman out of the way first. Just because a Pentagon budget is $700 billion a year doesn’t mean that it will be more effective at deterring or defeating the threats than a threat-based $350 billion a year force might be. The unanswered questions are what capabilities do we need and what will it cost to have them?

And there’s the rub. Neither the Pentagon nor, as far as I can determine, the intelligence community has done the essential analysis to determine what we need our military to do. Obama’s plan mentions things such as missile defense, cyberwar, and space operations as targets for investment, but it also plans to pour money into strengthening the failed NATO alliance and other such boondoggles. There’s not enough money to go around.

Page: 1 2 >

About the Author

Jed Babbin served as a Deputy Undersecretary of Defense under George H.W. Bush. He is the author of several bestselling books including Inside the Asylum and In the Words of Our Enemies. You can follow him on Twitter @jedbabbin.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (140) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

oldfart| 1.12.12 @ 6:35AM

Bottom line it - more money (that we don't have anyway) for social engineering.

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 7:41AM

For at least 20 years we have been wasting trillions on silly losing wars and defending rich countries like Israel the Arabs, Europe, Japan and Korea. We have 900 bases in 130 countries. Most of them would be happy if we left, except the kleptocrats in these countries who we bribe to keep the locals quiet.

The few peanuts that Obama proposes to cut out of future appropriations is nothing that will make a dent in the problem. This country is broke and our troops are broken. That is why a lot of them have given money to Ron Paul's campaign. 10 years of losing wars in Afganistan and Iraq are now supposed to be followed by another world war in Iran.

We can defend this country for about half of what we now spend and defend it well. We are sick of financing the Social Securitry systems ands medical care of other counties. Lets fund our own Social Security and Medicare, with the waste in defense and other departments. Some of the people here would rather see Granny thrown off diaylisis and Grandpa's Social Security cut in half, then cut the lavish subsidies to other countries defense. The people of the world want us out of their lives. 5% of the world's population should mind it's own business. Every empire falls eventually usually for economic reasons. This empire is bankrupt. Lets get down to the real business of it's liquidation while we still can leave these countries with the troops able tocome home in a first class manner. We don't want to see them dumped on our doorstep in disgrace like the soldiers of Nazi Germany, and the USSR.

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 7:54AM

Real Republicans and conservatives know that wars and warmongers are enemies of liberty. Warren Harding slashed the Navy and military budgets by huge amounts. Robert Taft was a vigorous opponent of foreign wars and foreign entanglements. He led the Republican Congress in cutting defense and many other wasteful New Deal programs. Dwight Eisenhower, who knew somethng about the subject, hated the warfare state and wanted the world to defend itself. He warned about the Military Industrial Complex and it's bad influence on the country. Nixon ended the Vietnam war and negotiated with our worst enemies China and Russia. He also neotiated with the North Vietnamese. Reagan hated nuclear weapons and wanted to rid the world of them. He warned us to stay out of the Middle East. He negotiated with our worst enemies and brought about huge arms reductions. This nonsense of the chicken hawk neocons has to end. They want us in endless war and bankruptcy.

KennesawJack| 1.12.12 @ 8:42AM

So, Jack. Am I correct that you propose we stand idly by while Iran and its cronies go about the destruction of Israel and the transformation of the entire ME into an Islamic theocracy, while China goes about expanding its empire into Japan, Taiwan, Thailand, Malaysia, probably India, and eventually Austrailia, while the soon-to-be reborn USSR once again drops an iron curtain across eastern Europe? Do I have that right? Are you so naive to believe that if we pull back from our engagements in the world that Iran, Russia, and China will sit back and sing Kumbaya with us? We no longer live in a world where America can pull itself into a cocoon and survive. Oh, and you need to read Reagan's autobiography. It was only after one of the most massive build-up of armaments in our nation's history , including the expansion of our nuclear capability with the MX missile, that the brought the Soviets to the negotiating table. Like it or not, we live in a peace through strength world. And another thing, in fairness, it can be, and should be, reasonably argued that Taft's opposition to foreign wars served to make WWI infinetly more destructive than it may otherwise have been.

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 9:08AM

Jack's about to call you a chickenhawk warmonger who wants to fight wars in the ME on behalf of Israel. Jackie no likey the military. What do you expect from a self avowed "proud 4-F"?

KennesawJack| 1.12.12 @ 9:28AM

I've got to be in meetings the rest of the day so won't be back here until late this evening. Hate to miss this little roundtable, though. Just wait unitl Al, Drunken Sailor, Ken (Old Texican) and Occam get here. I'm going to miss all the fun. Damn.

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 9:46AM

No worries, Brother. You know its always hopping on here late at night.

Drunken Sailor| 1.12.12 @ 9:58AM

Sorry you have to go but yes, you have Jack (Paul's) theory of national defense. "Pull your head into your shell, close up and wait to be attacked. Abandon your allies, put your hands over your ears and repeat to your self outloud, I can't hear you so you don't exist."

Jack/Paul would be some of the first that if we followed their strategy and were attacked when then convienently forget the pushed for that strategy, point fingers and blame everyone else for the smoking craters on our or our allies shores.

Drunken Sailor| 1.12.12 @ 9:59AM

Correction:
would then convienently forget

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 10:04AM

Con Job is a chicken hawk warmonger who is a triple 4FFF. Go fight and die for Israel with the blood and money from your own family, yellow belly. Why the hell should I bother with a lilly liverid whimp like you? I was involved in one of the most dangerous occupations for 40 years, far more dangerous then policeman or fireman. I ran a huge opperation with hundreds of tough, and rough employees. Hell I had people who were on the Bataan Death March,the Battle of Iwo Jima, Okinowa, Katserine Pass, the Philipines, the Battle of the Bulge, North Africa, China, Korea and Vietnam jumping when I gave an order. Thats not counting all the Vets of the German, Italian, Polish, Latvian, Soviet, and Romanian armies who worked for me.

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 10:28AM

Big f-ing deal, coward. Neither you, nor your father, who told you it was "better to be a live coward" have any leg to stand on whatsoever. You are a chickenshit coward, who proudly admits his relief at not having to do what many others VOLUNTEERED & STILL VOLUNTEER to do.

My family has fought for THIS country, asshole, unlike anyone in your pathetic cowardly lineage:

http://navymemorial.org/NavyLo....._id=621073

Does my Dad look like he's wearing an Israeli Navy uniform with 4 stripes on it to you, chickenshit?

"Why the hell should I bother with a lilly liverid whimp like you? I was involved in one of the most dangerous occupations for 40 years, far more dangerous then policeman or fireman."

What job was that? Being the "Gimp" at the local queer leather bar where you & Clint met? Yeah, I hear that you man hoes tend to get AIDS & die. That IS dangerous.

"I ran a huge opperation with hundreds of tough, and rough employees. Hell I had people who were on the Bataan Death March,the Battle of Iwo Jima, Okinowa, Katserine Pass, the Philipines, the Battle of the Bulge, North Africa, China, Korea and Vietnam jumping when I gave an order. Thats not counting all the Vets of the German, Italian, Polish, Latvian, Soviet, and Romanian armies who worked for me."

Who cares? That, & $7 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks & sure as shit doesn't give you any room to criticize any vet, or in my case, any son of a vet, being as how your family is such a proud line of cowards. Funny, what IS this mythical occupation you had? Why choose not to mention it? Is that because, like Clint's fake WWII vet daddy, its NON-EXISTENT?

Get bent, Jack. You, Clint & Margie all need to get together for a hate orgy. Y'all seem to be pretty good at it.

Al Adab| 1.12.12 @ 11:18AM

Quite a conversation there guys. The Left takes it on Faith that a strong military is not needed and that enemies are just a matter of misunderstanding. For almost forty years they have preached the evisceration of the military. That core belief has not changed even though today we see that interest payments on the national debt exceed the entire defense budget. We are on the verge of emasculating our ability to defend ourselves against those who would do us harm.

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 11:25AM

The kids volunteer and die for no reason, in needless wars. They do it most likely due to the ravings of some evangelical pastor who is afraid to go himself or because they actually believe all the war propaganda put out by the controlled media. Like I say, the many vets I had working for me didn't go around sounding like warmongering fools. Most of them considered their years in the service as a waste of time that could have been spent better on different pursuits.

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 11:38AM

Funny, most of the vets I know, & my Dad served with, spent the happiest times of their lives in the service. You're a joke, Jack. You don't know "jack" shit about vets.

Mike| 1.12.12 @ 11:43AM

Jack

I tend to not comment too harshly on anyone's claimed connection to the military. I was only in for 20 years and only served in combat arms specialties in the Army so I don't know it all.

I call BS on your last line though: "Most considered their years in the service a waste of time..."

I have known an uncountable number of vets. Some of them loved the service some of them hated it. Very few of them, even the ones who hated it, considered it a waste of time.

Of course a few did, but your assertion that most of the vets considered it a waste of time reveals how tenuous your connection to the military truely is.

Mike Johnston
SFC USA (RET)

Drunken Sailor| 1.12.12 @ 12:25PM

Ditto from the Navy side.

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 11:45AM

Jack the "Proud 4-F" Pukes:

"The kids volunteer and die for no reason, in needless wars. They do it most likely due to the ravings of some evangelical pastor who is afraid to go himself or because they actually believe all the war propaganda put out by the controlled media."

Way to denigrate the men & women who serve this nation, & therefore YOU. So they're just dumbass dupes, right? Not 18 year olds who're, in the eyes of the law, smart enough to make their own decisions? How very "libertarian" of you.

You're a fraud, Jack. The more you write, the bigger a fraud & military hater you expose yourself to be.

ATTENTION ALL VETS:

You are all dumbasses & dupes who signed up to fight because some pastor told you to, not because of any sense of patriotism or family pride. All this according to Jack, who's "pride" in his family consists of him being a "proud 4-F" & his Dad's wise advice that it's "better to be a live coward."

KennesawJack| 1.12.12 @ 5:45PM

Your penultimate sentence is most assuredly the truth. Your last sentence is most assuredly a lie. I'm not big on ad hominem attacks but you should be absolutely ashamed of yourself for that last sentence. My family has had men in every war this nation has ever fought, except for the Spanish American, going all the way back to the Revolution. One of us is buried at Andersonville, one was buried at Bastogne but we brought him home after the war. My mother had five sons, four of us served. My oldest brother and myself in combat. None of us has ever, or would ever, consider our service a waste of time and I have never heard a vet, and I know a hell of a lot of them, ever say it. Damn you, sir, for that remark.

1-2 Punch| 1.12.12 @ 9:15PM

This post is proof of what a liar you are. Comments like this would get you the same treatment that POS Jesse Ventura received here a week ago. "They do it most likely due to the ravings of some evangelical pastor who is afraid to go himself or because they actually believe all the war propaganda put out by the controlled media." This quote just reinforces the contempt leftist a-holes like you have for the men in the military. Most (not all) men volunteering now and in the past are leaps and bounds far more intelligent than you state. You detest the military and feign support just like any other left wing POS. You are a fucking digusting fraud just like your candidate.

Clint| 1.12.12 @ 6:39PM

The Israel Firster Smear Bund Sociopathic Makes A Habit Of Attempting To Smear American Combat Officer's,Such As My Dad.

My Dad Was A Combat Officer with The 38th Cavalry Reconnaissance Squadron,who fought from Normandy, To Paris, To The Battle Of The Bulge, To Germany ,To The Link Up With The Russkies In Czechoslovakia.

He Holds The Bronze Star, The Silver Star, The Fourragere, The Croix De Guerre ( Presented To Him By France ) And The Presidential Unit Citation .

The Israel Firster Smear Bund Liar, Con Job Also Attempted To Smear Lt. Wesley Ross,Who Was Attached To Dad's Command.

You Picked Out Some 20'Some Year Old From Face Book With The Same Name, As Lt. Wesl3y Ross,Who Served Attached To My Dad's Command And Tried To Pass That Kid Off As Me.

Lieutenant Wesley Ross

146th Engineer Combat Battalion - B Company

On March 4, 2011 at 6:32 pm Wesley Ross said:

My platoon–3rd Platoon, B-Company: 146th Engineer Combat Bn–and a platoon of the 2nd Ranger Bn were attached to a Troop of the 38th Cavalry Squadron for much of the time after we entered Paris 25 August 1944, and the Bulge. We were often among or east of the retreating Germans. This 38th Cavalry Troop was aggressive to the point of being scary! The Cavalry and Rangers did the necessary fighting as we cleared Tellermine roadblocks and abatis. Their activities are spelled out in my book “146 Engineer Combat Battalion–ESSAYONS” REALLY A GREAT OUTFIT the 38TH!

Lt. Wesley Ross.
http://www.battleofthebulgemem.....alion.html

You're A Serial Liar,Israel Firster Smear Bund Boy, ConJob.

Lieutenant Wesley Ross And His 146th Engineers Were attached To My Dad's Command In The 38th Cavalry Reconnaissance Squadron.

Interesting, How This Israel Firster Smear Bund Sociopathic Liar, ConJob, A 4-F Neo-Chickenhawk,Who's Dad Was A Navy Dentist, Now Attempt To Smear American Combat Officers.

The Tea Party Rebellion Is On The East Coast.

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 6:45PM

Name your father, post a link to his record, or shut up. Period. I don't give a damn what someone whom you plucked out of an article has to say about the unit they were in.

Again, you ain't old enough to have a dad who was in WWII, unless you're at LEAST 55. No one under the age of 22 writes the way you do. Put up or shut up, Valir Thief.

Clint| 1.12.12 @ 7:05PM

Why Don't You Try To Make Me Shut Up,You Sociopathic Gutless 4-F Neo-Chickenhawk Son Of A Navy Dentist Coward, Con Job.

You Know Where To Find Me.

Our Valley Forge Tea Party Patriots Meet Again At 6 PM This Friday Night At The Phoenixville Country Club.

Now, You Put Up Or Shut Up 4-F Maniac Israel Firster Smear Bundist Neo-Chickenhawk Coward, ConJob.

Asked And Answered.

He Holds The Bronze Star, The Silver Star, The Fourragere, The Croix De Guerre ( Presented To Him By France ) And The Presidential Unit Citation .

Lieutenant Wesley Ross And His 146th Engineers Were attached To My Dad's Command In The 38th Cavalry Reconnaissance Squadron.

http://www.battleofthebulgemem.....alion.html

See A Psychiatrist.

You're A Sociopathic Fanatic Maniac Israel Firster Serial Liar, 4-F Neo-Chickenhawk, Con Job.

Timothy L. Pennell| 1.12.12 @ 7:51PM

Is it me, or did the guy who puts a capital letter at the beginning of every word, just tell somebody to "See A Psychiatrist"?

Clint| 1.12.12 @ 8:15PM

It's You, Bloviatin' Keyboard RINO-CINO Asshat, Pennell.

Con Chef (NB) | 1.13.12 @ 6:46AM

Fraud. LIAR! VALOR THIEF! FAKE ASS BITCHBOY.

Clint| 1.12.12 @ 6:53PM

Try This Link

http://www.battleofthebulgemem.....alion.html

jothepro| 1.12.12 @ 8:43AM

Yeah Jackwi,
We don't need no stinking defense. Lets put more money into social programs that will make it so much easier for the take over of our once great nation- ------You Idiot.

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 11:32AM

We need defense. We don't need agressive and stupid wars, for no sane reason. Young people die for the fantasies of old fool politicians. There isn't a war that, I can think of that is worth the life of one of my family or my own life. My old man always said to me. " Can you think of anything more stupid or wasteful then war? " He was a very wise man.

Mike| 1.12.12 @ 11:50AM

Jack

To answer your dad: Yes I can. Tyranny.

And to your comment about no war that you can think of that is worth the your life or the life of a family member I have to wonder if you just don't know enough history or you are being selfish to accept the benefits of being an American without aknowledging the obligations?

Mike Johnston
SFC USA (RET)

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 3:42PM

Tyranny is all over the world. We should worry about tyrants in the USA, not Burma, Israel, Jordan, China, Cuba, most of Africa, or Saudi Arabia. We can't fight everyone everywhere. Read General Smedley Butler's great book ' War is a Rackett.' General Butler was the former Commandant of the Marines and winner of 2 Congressional Medals of Honor.

DevilDog| 1.12.12 @ 6:56PM

jackmeoff,
dont mention that man's name. you havent EARNED the right to say it.

while he was fighting for this nation, your parents were still shating their diapers BOY! thing is, you still havent stopped

TW in SC| 1.12.12 @ 11:08PM

" War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."

John Stuart Mill
English economist & philosopher (1806 - 1873)

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 7:07AM

then don't volunteer. pretty simple if you ask me.

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 9:07AM

Jack, the "Proud 4-F Live Coward" Puked to Me:

"A chicken hawk is a live coward 4FFF Con Job. I went to my draft board, took my physcial and they didn't want me. Unlike you I didn't and don't call for murerous wars fought by some other poor schmuck. You and the rest of the neocon, chicken hawk key board warriors here, give cowardness a bad name."

Unlike you, I realize that this is still an all volunteer military. And if you were such an f-ing "patriot," which we all know you're not, with all your Hitler defending posts of lo these many months/years, & actually CARED about your nation, you would've tried to find away around your F-4 status as I did. As for "cowardess," this coming from the pussy who's cowardly father told him it was "better to be a live coward?!"

You're a freaking fraud, Jack. You aren't fit to even speak to vets with your sniveling, "proud 4-F" status. Nor are you fit to judge or cast dispersions on the patriotism of people who's fathers went into NROTC & VOLUNTEERED to join the Navy & go to sea during Vietnam. You know? That conflict you're so "proud 4-F" about?

You're a coward & no patriot. You are not fit to carry the jockstraps of the men fighting today, nor the men who VOLUNTARILY went to the conflict you were all to happy to not be sent to. If I'm a "chicken hawk," then you certainly are a "chickenshit." As are the rest of you idiots who fling about the term "chickenhawk" without ever having served a day yourselves, or in Clint's case, never even deigned to darken the doorstep of a recruiter's office.

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 11:18AM

Con Job: You are just another triple 4FFF coward braying for wars for Israel like the fat slobs Dick Cheney, Perle, Jonah Goldberg, little Billy Kristol, Bill Clinton, Kagen, and triple pizza with triple cheese on it John Podhoretz. Then we have the bloodthirsty Dr. Krauthammer, in his wheelchair, acting like a real life version of Dr. Strangelove. We should drop the whole gang of you on Tehran without a parchutte.

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 11:39AM

You first, since you're so keen on providing our enemies with free fellatio service. After all, I'm sure given your glowing praise of Hitler, if that old bastard were still alive, you'd have your lips wrapped around his schlong as well.

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 10:11AM

Iran is a backward 3rd world country with no nuclear weapons and no nuclear weapons program. Israel is a rich country with 500 atomic weapons. Even the present head of the Mossad has said if Iran had a nuclear weapon it would not be an essential threat to the existence of Israel. 2 former heads of the Mossad, Dagen and Halevy call an attack on Iran the stupidist thing ever. They say such an attack would poison the Middle East for a hundred years.

Al Adab| 1.12.12 @ 11:21AM

Jack:
I usually don't bother to respond to you, but let me in this instance assure you that Iran does in fact have a nuclear weapons program and is actively seeking to create and use a devise. The centrifuge plant in Natanz has no other purpose. By refusing to face that fact you endanger not only millions in the ME, but your self and family as well.

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 11:35AM

The CIA and all 22 of our intelligence agencies say Iran has no nuclear weapons programs. They don't want their intelligence to be manipulated by another liar to get us into a war. Leon Panetta has just said the same thing. Who the hell are you?

Al Adab| 1.12.12 @ 1:39PM

Try Google.

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 3:34PM

Google NIE of 2007,[ Nationional Intelligence Estimate ] reconfirmed this year. Google Leon Panetta and comments on Iran nuclear program this week. Israel and it's propaganda ministry have been lying for years about Iran. There is zero evidence that Iran is in violation of it's treaties on nuclear power. we didn't go to war with China, Israel, India, Pakistan, the USSR when they aquired nuclear weapons. Why the hell should we go to war with Iran who isn't even building one? To hell with all you liars who want to bring on WW3.

SpiralArchitect| 1.12.12 @ 3:25PM

No nuclear programs... of course not. Their scientist keep ending up dead.

There is a larger reason they do not have a nuclear program worth notice, yet.

Consider why their true friends (heh) China & Russia (or Pakistan??) have not sent or sold secrets, nuclear in nature, to them (Iran).

Even a powder puff like you should be able to draw a semi-intelligent conclusion to that question.

Jack, does the Wi. stand for Winnemucca?

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 7:09AM

Jack....I didn't know you held clearances! are you stating you have been read into the programs that allow access?

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 12:28AM

ewwww......I just get shivers all over when you talk about "real Republicans and Conservatives" Jackie Boy.

Chicken hawks want us all dead.....and so do Paul-Chickens! oy.......decisions...decisions

McGee| 1.12.12 @ 11:23AM

"Arabs: and "Europe" are not countries.Israeli is not rich."Our troops are bit " broken" There is no evidence troops are giving money to Ron Paul who, if not a draft-dodger, was the closest thing to it, who has no foreign policy, and looks increasiny senile - Some Comander in Chief! Let us thankGod Ronald Regan did not worship at your church of pre-emptive defeat-management!

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 11:38AM

Reagan hated nuclear weapons and wanted the world rid of them. He was a man of peace who negotiated with our enemies huge weapons reductions, to the howls of the neocons.

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 11:41AM

The number 1 contributor to Ron Paul's campaign are members of the active military. The number one contributor to the campaign of Obama and Romney are Goldman Sachs and the other banksters.

DevilDog| 1.12.12 @ 7:03PM

provide the PROOF BOY!

nothing but leftoist propoganda.

i am at the base and VA everyday. not one single paul supporter anywhere. even at VFW, Am Leg, DAV, MarCorLeagues, etc....

post the PROOF! show the names, amounts, and accounts to back up yours and pauls lies

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 7:35PM

Your a liar. You haven't ever been in VA hsopital. Just google the list of people who give to Ron Paul and what their occupation is. The last I looked it was members of the Air force number 1 followed by members of the other services.

TW in SC| 1.12.12 @ 11:18PM

Rebuttal: http://www.freerepublic.com/fo.....9075/posts

--As the reporter in the Houston Chronicle says,

"many contributors do not disclose their occupations, making it difficult to determine the total extent of military contributions to any one candidate."

--More importantly, the amount of contributions are incredibly small, hardly proving much of anything. Beth adds in the Outside the Beltway comment section:

Also not understood by the obsessed Paulbots and other assorted antiwar nutters: the fact that "military employees" includes civil service employees of the various services. That means a GS-7 who works at Whatever Air Force Base in BFE, Idaho has their employer listed as "Air Force." For all we know, not one of those people is someone in uniform. I'm sure there are some, but it certainly is not all, nor is it indicative of some big antiwar sentiment in the military. For Paultards and Sullivan to extrapolate that idea from this is laughably absurd.

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 12:30AM

my experience as well. and I live in a military community.

DevilDog| 1.12.12 @ 6:53PM

1. show me anywhere were we have been asked by the people to leave those countries? they KNOW that we are the reason they are free and have money to spend on themselves by not paying for their own defense.
2.few peanuts? obama tells Hawker-Beechcraft that he is pulling their contract with the Air Force and giving it to Brazil.

destroying American comapnies and joibs and giving them to FORIEGNORS!
3. country is broke? yes it is! because of war on poverty, theft of SS, wlefare, medicaid and etc. for all the lazy socialists who think they are owed a living.
4.troops are broken? bwahahahahahahaha

since YOU have NEVER served nor ever known any troops, you only prove what a FLATOUT LIE that is.
5.losing wars? that is what all you gutless cowards say to MAKE us lose. you pansies think pissing on dead jihadis is bad but keep quite on them beheading Americans, or pouring acid on Americans. we win every battle and YOU make us lose the war with your surrender monkey beliefs because you are a gutless swine rimming coward
6.see granny thrown off dialisis? that is PROG SPEAK! just goes to show YOU are spewing the mantra lies of the left.

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 12:25AM

wait a minute....if you're going to draw down defense...why the hell also fund social security and medicare. why Jack...that's robbing Peter to pay Paul as those systems are currently structured.

take a flying leap....if we live in a Paul world...let's do it all the way.

all jocularity aside...I see you have no answer to the author's primary complaint: any Defense budget should be predicated on a threat assessment.

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 12:32AM

Jack....apologies....but as we like to say in the military......you're a numb-nut!!!!

biomedlives| 1.14.12 @ 8:54AM

Right on!

John Daniel| 1.12.12 @ 6:42AM

Pentagon could use some serious parsing, but under the leadership of a commander-in-chief who understands threats and how to tailor a military structure to meet them...the incumbent has not a clue, and so we will be both poorer and weaker.

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 12:34AM

yup.

but that's not his goal anyway. as an idea...dismantling the so-called military industrial complex is the goal. one can only hope....after that is achieved...the country turns its attention to dismantling the entitlement industrial complex.

Hal G. P. Colebatch| 1.12.12 @ 6:47AM

It gets worse. A point no-one seems to have picked up on is that America's closest allies who buy defence systems from the US will also be weakened because cutting US production runs will raise unit costs for them. Australia, for example, was planning to buy up to 100 F-35 fighters. Witth increased unit costs that looks highly unlikely now. More importantly, Israel's ability to buy expensive systems will be reduced. Thus Obama is weakening not only America but the pro-American world

Michael Tomlinson| 1.12.12 @ 6:51AM

Ron "Mahmoud Ahmadinejad" Paul is so excited Obama's listening to him on defense and foreign policy now if only those pesky Republicans would just turn the Party over to the OWS anarchist he could be not just King of Pork, but of Amerika.

Clint| 1.12.12 @ 7:08AM

Ronald Reagan On Defense Waste:

" During my 1980 campaign, I called federal waste and fraud a national scandal. We knew we could never rebuild America's strength without first controlling the exploding cost of defense programs, and we're doing it. When we took office in 1981, costs had been escalating at an annual rate of 14 percent. Then we began our reforms. And in the last two years, cost increases have fallen to less than 1 percent. We've made huge savings. Each F-18 fighter costs nearly $4 million less today than in 1981. One of our air-to-air missiles costs barely half as much.

Getting control of the defense bureaucracy is no small task. Each year the Defense Department signs hundreds of thousands of contracts. So yes, a horror story will sometimes turn up despite our best efforts. That's why we appointed the first Inspector General in the history of the Defense Department. And virtually every case of fraud or abuse has been uncovered by our Defense Department, our Inspector General. Secretary Weinberger should be praised, not pilloried, for cleaning the skeletons out of the closet. As for those few who have cheated taxpayers or have swindled our Armed Forces with faulty equipment, they are thieves stealing from the arsenal of democracy, and they will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law."

The Tea Party Rebellion Is In South Carolina.

Drunken Sailor| 1.12.12 @ 10:02AM

Ahhh yes Clint but your forget to mention Regan then had the Department of Defense create a "Fraud, waste and abuse" hotline. The number is posted all over every military base I have ever been to and they provide a $ incentive to the whistleblower if their report shows what they claim. It used to be based on a percentage of the money you saved the goverment.

Clint| 1.12.12 @ 7:22AM

Uh Oh !

The Ricky Perry Algore Cheerleader From Niiggerhead Rock, Little Micky Is In The Building

Dr.Ron Paul,
" I have never voted for an earmark. I voted against all appropriation bills, except for Veterans. So, this whole thing about earmarks is totally misunderstood.
Earmarks is the responsibility of the Congress.
If you cut off all the earmarks, it would be 1 percent of the budget. But, if you vote against all the earmarks, you don't cut one penny. That is what you have to listen to. We're talking about who has the responsibility, the Congress or the executive branch?

I'm saying, get it out of the hands of the executive branch. Just listen again about what I have said about the TARP funds. We needed to earmark every penny. Now we gave them $350 billion, no earmarks, and nobody knows..."

Dr.Ron Paul Gets It About Earmarks & Congress Having It's Responsibility Usurped By The Executive Branch.

The Tea Party Rebellion Is In South Carolina.

Doctor Right| 1.12.12 @ 7:58AM

Robo-Post ALERT!

Nothing new here. Move along.

Timothy L. Pennell| 1.12.12 @ 8:51AM

Did ya ever notice how Clint, and Jackass, are the only two people that, after they've written something? They reply to their own post.

Alan Brooks does that.

It must be a GAY thing.

Drunken Sailor| 1.12.12 @ 10:18AM

Did you also notice that yesterday CVGRL was typing just like Clint? Capitlizing every couple of letters. Freudian slip?

Timothy L. Pennell| 1.12.12 @ 2:15PM

She's a PIG.

It's no more complicated than that.

Dick Nome| 1.12.12 @ 2:17PM

It's a Paulbot cult thing.

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 12:38AM

oh BS. it's a strict Constitutionalist argument.....but misses the whole dynamic of inter-State transfers of taxpayer money.

Pecos Pete| 1.12.12 @ 6:54AM

Mr. Babbin says, "There's not enough money to go around."

He is correct. Just like the federal education department increases the number of administrators as opposed to teachers and causes a deterioration in education , the defense department has too many administrators and social policies. King O will keep, and even increase, the DOD administrators and conversely reduce boots on the ground. Lots of paper, not much in the way of ammunition.

oldfart| 1.12.12 @ 7:07AM

I guess BO plans to win a war by smothering the other side in paperwork.
I agree that DOPE (Department of Public Education) has done more to increase education costs and dumb down our children with political correctness than the Soviet Union could have ever hoped to achieve.

Old Soldier| 1.12.12 @ 7:44AM

I've wondered about that myself. From what I gather from other blogs - the DOD is letting civilian employees go in some places while hiring in others.

I would love to know exactly where Obama plans to cut non-military personnel and what the final number will be. We currently have something like 700k full-time civilian federal employees in the DOD.

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 12:42AM

look....we experienced a HUGE ramp-up since 9/11. it is time to wicker the budget down. and, by far, the most expensive cost category for DoD is people. the problem with Obama and the intentionally engineered sequestration is that there is no logic to how the drawdown is being executed....thats' the author's point. it's only secondary that the other hidden reason is that DoD is the largest discretionary account that can be savaged - not to reduce the deficit - but to fund his other entitlement programs including Obamacare.

Zbigniew Mazurak| 1.12.12 @ 7:08AM

The article is WRONG. The DOD's budget is NOT $700 bn a year. Not even close.

Under the FY2012 National Defense Authorization Act, the combined budgets for the DOD and for the DOE's defense-related programs are $662 bn, with $645 bn of that going to the DOD. Under the FY2012 Defense Appropriations Act, the DOD's budget is even smaller. The DOD has never had a $700 bn budget. Not this fiscal year. Not ever. Before Mr Babbin pontificates about defense issues, he would be well advised to learn AT LEAST, repeat, AT LEAST the basic facts. It is immoral to pontificate about issues about which one is ignorant.

Al Adab| 1.12.12 @ 11:24AM

Interest payments on the national debt exceed the entire defense budget as we speak. That situation is a "clear and present danger" to our national well being if not to our existence.

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 12:44AM

it was $698 billion last year. sounds a lot like $700 billion to me!

Darin| 1.12.12 @ 7:18AM

Has anyone realized the biggest reason Defense is being cut? Because the military and people in the Defense industry tend to lean Republic. Obama is merely cutting off funds to his "enemy."

Don't agree? Then why are there no significant cuts to Democrat-leaning areas like education, welfare, etc.? And don't give me the "these programs help people" bunk because they do far more harm than good. And if you want to use that argument, I submit the military's role in relief efforts after the Indonesian tsunami, numerous hurricanes, the Japanese earthquake/tsunami, etc.

Timothy L. Pennell| 1.12.12 @ 7:29AM

What? A Democrat is GUTTING Defence? How can this be? Why, everybody KNOWS that Democrats are STRONG on Defence. Right? Isn't that what they tell us, every Election. Isn't that what the Non-Biased Media tells us, every election, before going on to ask if we're "Questioning the Democrats' Patriotism"?
ISN'T IT?!

The MUSLIM is a Marxist. That MAKES him a Liar.Everything he says, EVERYTHING, is a Lie.

The Stimulus was a Lie. Shovel Ready Infrastructure was a Lie. Promising to take Public Financing was a Lie. Promising to Debate his Cuban Health care Plan on CSPAN was a Lie. Promising to put all legislation up on the Web, for 72 Hours, before a Vote, was a Lie. "No more Earmarks was a Lie. No Lobbyists in his Administration, was a Lie. PayGo was a Lie.

I never heard Reverend Wright say those kinds of things, was a Lie. Bill Ayers is just a guy in my Neighborhood, was a Lie. My Health Care Plan will bring Health costs DOWN, was a Lie. I will not sign anything that will add one dime, to the deficit, was a Lie. Recovery Summer was a Lie.

The Unemployment Numbers are a Lie. Every Taxpayer Dollar he gives to his Bundlers' "Green Energy Companies" that, mysteriously go Bankrupt, shortly thereafter, is a Lie. His Oil Drilling Moratorium was a Lie. His reason for denying the XL Pipeline is a Lie.

But, fear not. For he has given us his assurances, as the Great Military Man that he is, that a TRILLION Dollars in CUTS, in the next 10 years, in the Defence Department, will make us STRONGER. With Iran is getting the Bomb. With Pakistan on the brink of falling to the Islamists, at any moment. With China, building up every facet of it's Military. We need a Smaller Military. That's what he's telling us.

With Russia building up it's Capabilities. With the Middle East on Fire, and I'mahandajob in Venezuela, looking for a good place to fire all of the MISSILES that he, and Pugsley, are building in their Missile Factories, at us. AND, he's going to Cuba. AND, he's going to Ecuador. AND, he's going to Nicaragua.

He say that this is the time to Build Down our Forces. This is the time to cut the Army in half. This is the time to Shrink our Navy, and Marine Corp. This is the time to CANCEL New Weapons Systems. (The Airborne Laser System) Cut Funding for New Inventories, like the Joint Strike Fighter. Cut R&D on Exotic Weapons Systems.

This is the time to PROJECT WEAKNESS.

If you wanted to Destroy this Country, from within? What would you do?

Why, you would do EVERYTHING that this man has done, since DAY 1.

I'm gonna write this, one more time, and you can tell me how Crazy I am.

"And I saw the BEAST rise from the SEA (The world of Politics) And he was given a MOUTH, to speak Haughty and Blasphemous words. And he was allowed to exercise Authority for forty two Months." Revelation 13-5.

Now, you tell me: What President would be seeking Military Cuts, as BIG as he's seeking, at this time? What kind of a Man, would actively pursue the WEAKENING of his Countries' Defences, just as her Enemies were Arming for War?

Everything he says, is a LIE. Everything he does, weakens this Nation. EVERYTHING!

Everything he does, in the Middle East, weakens Israel. He has abandoned one ally (Mubarak) so as to allow the Islamists to take his place. He has WAGED WAR against another Middle East Country (Libya) and accomplished the same thing. He does NOTHING, in Iran or Syria. But then, why should he? They are already at WAR with Israel. He has just handed over IRAQ, to Iran, and wants to "Make a Deal" with the Taliban. "The REAL KILLERS" on 911.

There's a MUSLIM on the Throne of the most powerful Christian Nation the world has ever known, and the ONLY FRIEND that Israel has.

What part don't you understand?

Mimi| 1.12.12 @ 8:46AM

Tim...send this Post to DEBBIE head of the DNC...and yeah..One copy to Huffington Post..oh send one off to the Whitehouse too!

KennesawJack| 1.12.12 @ 8:51AM

Tim, this man is determined to preside over the decline of the United States and, if given another four years, will finish the job. When that day comes, Clint and Jack will be wondering what the hell happened. After all, all we have to do is become isolationist again, transfer wealth from the producers to the parasites, and give up our liberty in exchange for security and all will be right with the world. Obamarx and his minions are the folks Orwell told us were coming and here they are.

Timothy L. Pennell| 1.12.12 @ 9:35AM

No. They are the folks that JOHN of Patmos forewarned us of.

They are the people our Founding Fathers knew, would, some day, come to Power. They are the Domestic Enemy, in everybody's OATH.

They are The Reason for the 2nd Amendment.

And they will not go away quietly.

Brooks| 1.12.12 @ 10:56AM

Tim,
You hit a homer! I'm sure that you have still missed many lies, for instance claiming to be the author of two books. The first of which was penned by Bill Ayers ("commie with a small "c".") The second was done by a committee according to Ayers.

It is permissible for Muslims to lie to advance the religion or cause.

It is O.K. for a Communist to lie to advance the cause.

It is natural for a person afflicted with the Narcissistic Personality Disorder to lie.

Brooks| 1.12.12 @ 11:15AM

It is permissible for Muslims to lie to advance the religion or cause.

It is O.K. for a Communist to lie to advance the cause.

It is natural for a person afflicted with the Narcissistic Personality Disorder to lie.

sane person| 1.12.12 @ 12:37PM

How about mentioning the corruption of this administration in the DoD by political appointees - you know the one that promised ethics and transparency?

Let me cite one example of an important presidential appointee in the Obama administration who is illegally pocketing significant amounts of taxpayer money. These infractions are occurring in the Department of Defense (DoD) by people extremely close to Obama and represent severe ethical and criminal violations that have recently been reported in the news. It was Obama himself who crafted an “Ethics Pledge” that was signed into law on January 21, 2009, but what has happened within this administration is clearly contrary to the language or spirit of this pledge.

First, a little history. Obama’s successful presidential campaign was heavily dependent on massive amounts of grass-root support and donations. Much of that support also came from so-called “bundlers,” of which a Mr. John Dugan from Chicago, Illinois was an important campaign donation organizer (i.e., an important bundler for Obama). Mr. Dugan is currently a general partner and Co-Founder of OCA Ventures, headquartered in Chicago.

After the election, Obama appointed Mr. Dugan’s niece, Regina Dugan, to become the head of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). DARPA is the research arm of the DoD with an annual budget of over $3 Billion.

Prior to being appointed to DARPA, Regina Dugan had founded a company in Rockville, MD with her father, Vince Dugan, and her uncle, John Dugan, called RedXDefense. The company is privately held and was a small business that employed only 2 to 4 people and survived on Government funding, mostly SBIRs.

Regina Dugan’s appointment to the Directorship of DARPA was a direct result of her family’s significant help (financial and otherwise) to the Obama campaign.

Upon Regina Dugan taking the position as Director of DARPA, she transferred management of RedXDefense to her father, Vince Dugan, who now serves as its Chief Executive Officer (CEO). Regina Dugan’s sister, Christina Haney, also serves as the Vice President of Marketing at RedXDefense. The company is privately held and Regina Dugan claimed in her financial disclosures prior to her appointment as Director by Obama that she was an owner of RedXDefense and that the value of the company was zero (a dubious claim of any company with revenues).

As recently reported in the Los Angles Times (See: http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....9577.story) and Wired Magazine (See: ), it has been discovered that DARPA has awarded contracts worth at least $1,800,000 over the last two years to the company (i.e., RedXDefense) co-owned by the Director of DARPA, namely Regina Dugan, and run by her father.

A spokesperson for Dugan claims that the awards were proper because Regina Dugan recused herself from any role in DARPA’s dealings with RedXDefense. This statement indicates a total lack of understanding of how DARPA functions since every contract and funding award from the Agency is signed off by the Director. Apparently, Regina Dugan appointed the then Deputy Director of DARPA (Robert Lehaney) to oversee any issues that may arise with her company RedXDefense. However, she fired Lehaney a few weeks later. She then brought in a new Deputy Director, Kaigham Gabriel.

Kaigham Gabriel was a Program Manager at DARPA back in the 1990’s and narrowly escaped jail time based on his giving lucrative contracts to companies he subsequently received kickbacks from. It can be surmised that Gabriel was the type of Deputy Director that Dugan wanted under her at the Agency and Gabriel was given the responsibility of overseeing any DARPA dealings with Dugan’s company RedXDefense.

Gabriel has defended the very sizable awards to Dugan’s company in the press stating these conflicts of interest are encouraged by the current leadership of DARPA. Obviously this is very strange statement coming from a high level Government official.

Finally, the Inspector General of the DoD recently started an investigation of this corruption, see:

http://www.dailytech.com/DARPA.....e22463.htm

But here is the irony, while this investigation is going on, Dugan and Gabriel have kept their jobs and have been protected by the White House. Moreover, they are getting free legal aid from the Govt. If they were outside of the Govt, they would have to pay their own legal fees. Also, while they are in their offices at DARPA, they can do more efficient house cleaning.

I suspect this is the tip of the iceberg of Obama cronies lining their pockets in the DoD.

Why hasn’t the MSM or even sources like Am Spec, National Review, or even Republican Congress members or candidates gone after this story. I suspect there are many other $M’s that have not yet been noticed that Dugan and her cronies have stolen.

martin j smith| 1.12.12 @ 7:34AM

And so it is that Ron Paul is Obama --and so it is that New Hampshire is a Fraud Primary. Lets keep watching the circus shall we ?

hardcard| 1.12.12 @ 8:34AM

leon panchetta sec of d, now I understand why.

JimH| 1.12.12 @ 8:41AM

‘Let's get that bogeyman out of the way first. Just because a Pentagon budget is $700 billion a year doesn't mean that it will be more effective at deterring or defeating the threats than a threat-based $350 billion a year force might be. The unanswered questions are what capabilities do we need and what will it cost to have them?’ This has been my point on a few military spending post of my own. The mission must first be defined. Then you figure out what capabilities you need to accomplish it. Then you know what need to spend. And as national defense is the one responsibility entrusted solely to the federal government, this should come ahead of anything else it does. You can argue as to what the mission is, but that is where you have to start.

Timothy L. Pennell| 1.12.12 @ 9:11AM

Let's find out. I'll give you a one shot Derringer, and I'll take one of those 50Caliber Machine Guns that Obama and holder gave to the Mexican Drug Cartels, and you can tell us all, AGAIN, why size doesn't matter.

Tell us how a 200 something Ship Navy, is just as good, if not BETTER, than a 600 Ship Navy. Tell us how Cutting the Army and the Marine Corps, helps us. How, Cancelling New Weapons Systems is better than NOT cancelling them. (Did you ever write on you Military Spending Posts, that Germany might have Prevailed, in WW2, if Hitler hadn't CANCELLED his Nuclear Weapon efforts?)

Tell us what is more important, than National Defence? Without the Baddest Military on the Planet, all of our Freedoms are at risk. It's like the 2nd Amendment. It's there to PROTECT all of the other Amendments. Which is why the LEFT hates it so.

You want a Defined Mission? Here it is.

Evil is on the March. And, when it comes, and it will, we need to be in a position of OVERWHELMING Military Strength. No-one will come to our aid. We're on our own.

Remember: WEAKNESS is a Provocation.

And you sound like an Idiot.

DRed| 1.12.12 @ 10:47AM

We spend more that twice Iran's entire GDP on our military. Even if they get Venezuela and Ecuador to gang up on us too I think we'll be able to meet them with overwhelming force.

Drunken Sailor| 1.12.12 @ 11:26AM

Convienent you pick those tiny countries. What if China decides to aggresively use that Navy they are building up?

Al Adab| 1.12.12 @ 11:27AM

...and when the fishing boat with its device aboard sails into say Houston or Miami what would be your response?

DRed| 1.12.12 @ 11:56AM

I picked those tiny countries because that's what the republican establishment seems to be afraid of these days. China is obviously a different order of threat, but if we didn't build a ship for 10 years our Navy would still be more than a match for theirs.

Al, we'd wipe Iran off the map if they sent a fishing boat with a device on it into Houston. You think us building or not building two Zumwalt destroyers has any influence on Iranian military planning?

Drunken Sailor| 1.12.12 @ 12:31PM

Apparently you do not know the US Navy's mission.

"
The navy's mission is to maintain freedom of the seas and deter aggression by training combat-ready naval forces.

The mission of the Navy is to maintain, train and equip combat-ready Naval forces capable of winning wars, deterring aggression and maintaining freedom of the seas
http://www.navy.mil/navydata/o.....rg-top.asp

So yes, we would need more ships than it would take to simply defeat the Chinese. We also maintain the freedom of international shippng lanes. Always have.

DRed| 1.12.12 @ 12:36PM

Well, ever since we took over for the British. But yeah, I agree. Our Navy is fantastic. The Chinese? Wake me up when they figure out how to fly a plane off their obsolete soviet aircraft carrier. We do need more ships than we'd need to defeat the Chinese (or any other navy). We have those ships.

Al Adab| 1.12.12 @ 1:08PM

DRed:
So if I understnad your view correctly, it is better to avoid conflict today and perhaps obliterate or incinerate millions later, than "to take arms against a sea of troubles and by opposing end them"? Elimination of the Natanz facility would prevent the scenario I posit. Would it not have been wiser for France and Britain to prevent the German re-occupation of the Rhineland when they could have than to suffer WWII in Europe later all in the name of peace?

DRed| 1.12.12 @ 2:57PM

You're missing my point entirely. I'm talking about our military budget. Iran is not going to be dissuaded from any aggressive behavior by an increase in US military spending. Our military is already so many times more powerful than theirs that upping our defense spending isn't going to be a deterrent. At the same time, cutting our defense budget by a relatively small amount won't affect Iranian strategy for the same reason. We'll still be so much more powerful than they are that it will be irrelevant.

Al Adab| 1.12.12 @ 3:16PM

Were Iran our only potential enemy, your argument would have a certain validity. However, since there are in fact myriad enemies (or wannabe ones) in theaters around the globe, an ability to engage two or three at a time remains a strategic necessity.

Also, as Sailor notes above, certain other situations, such as international trade, rely on the ability of the US to act when necessary. Additionally, if American power and the ability to project it is limited by the size and nature of the military then we become somewhat musclebound in our ability to respond. Hopefully we could retain more options than either do nothing, or obliterate the opposition.

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 12:58AM

yea...that kinda plays into the slippery slope argument...and the next two ships...and the two after those....

what's the threat?

JimH| 1.12.12 @ 12:39PM

Do you use a tactical nuke to swat flies?

Al Adab| 1.12.12 @ 1:44PM

Actually Jim, in one sense yes. The immediate application of overwhelming force to defeat or deter a threat is by far more humane (granted in dealing with the immoral being of war) long term than watching an enemy gain strength untill his threat becomes ever more serious. See my WWII post above.

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 12:59AM

I'm sure the survivors of Hiroshima quite agree with your "humane" ascription to the application of atomic (let alone nuclear) weapons!

JimH| 1.12.12 @ 12:45PM

The point is just spending money does not necessarily make you safer. Had we been building battleships instead of carriers they’d be speaking Japanese in Hawaii. I’m all in favor of a strong defense but you want to be getting what you need to win the next war, not the last one.

Thom| 1.12.12 @ 5:17PM

"Had we been building battleships instead of carriers"

JimH,
You know how any "battleships/battle cruisers" we built during WWII? You know how many of the ones damaged at Pearl we rebuilt and brought back into service along with the 17 mainline carriers?

Mimi| 1.12.12 @ 8:49AM

If it is 642 billion... thats cheap for crying out loud! Obama spends and flushes down the toilet BILLIONS on Solyndra type deals in a HEARTBEAT !

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 1:00AM

where do you think he expects to draw his funding from?

VonMisesJr| 1.12.12 @ 8:58AM

It is only logical that statist would construct a military budget the same way they conduct all planning. It is called "central planning" and it based only on the whims of the "Annointed."

POM is the way free markets make decisions. This is completely foreign and antithetical to statist. The POM serves as pricing does in free markets to the extent that it signals to producers what is desired by the consumers.

In centrally planned economies such as the USSR, the central planners had no idea whether the leather should be used for more jackets or more shoes. They had no feedback what size jackets or shoes. So if you need a size 46 leather coat for the winter, perhaps you got size 10 shoes. If you wear size 9, stuff paper in the toes. If you need size 12, don't walk too much.

This is why the USSR lost the cold war and no longer exists. Shall we start picking a new name for the country between Canada and Mexico? Methinks we should give a prize for the best name in 2013 if Obama is re-elected.

H Abdullah Shabazz| 1.12.12 @ 9:01AM

Why do we need a big miitary when Brazil doesnt?

Like us, a big country, with plenty of raw materials, bordered by weak neigbors and the ocean. They spend 4% of what we do, 25 billion instead of 600 billion, and they get something we dont: Security

They never lost a war or been invaded or worried about atomic attack or uplifted Afghani women, or needed any bodybags. They havent bankrupted themselves on a useless empire. If we had followed theier lead after the cold war, our national debt, the biggest threat to our security, would be: Zero.

KennesawJack| 1.12.12 @ 9:24AM

Because they always knew they had the Monroe Doctrine to rely on (at least until Obamarx took over). After Obamarx succeeds in destroying this nation, Brazil and the rest of SA will be easy pickin's to help complete the Caliphate. Based on your name, I would hazard a guess that you might just find that appealing.

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 9:45AM

Hell, Bro, Brazil is already socialist & tight with Chavez to a slightly lesser degree than that idiot in Nicaragua.

John Navratil| 1.12.12 @ 10:54AM

H Abdullah Shabazz,

According to the CIA factbook, (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/br.html)

Brazil's per capita GDP is 20% of the U.S. Their entire GDP is 15% of the U.S. We spend a bit less that 5% of our GDP on defense ($B 14,660 / $B 650) and Brazil spends 1.7%. Hardly a factor of 25 given the relative sizes of the populations and economies.

What it interesting to note is that the U.S. is 24-th in spending as a percent of GDP (the numbers are a few years old) behind China (no surprise there) and virtually every Middle Eastern country (notably, not Iran).

Even the Maldives spends a greater portion of their GDP on their military than does the U.S.

To turn your question around, why does the Maldives need a big military and we don't? Or, perhaps of greater interest, why does China or Syria need a big military and we don't?

As for debt, without a military or wars, Brazil's public debt is 55% of GDP (#43 in the world) behind the us at 63% (#29) which is, notably, behind (the economic powerhouse of Europe) Germany at 84% (#16), Canada at 84% (#15) and Japan at 200% (#2) - none of which are known for huge militaries or (apart from some NATO missions) wars. Japan spends less than 1% of GDP.

Indonesia spends 3% GDP on its military, is not known for its adventurism, yet for some inexplicable reason Muslim extermists blew up a hotel in 2002 killing a bunch of tourists and bombed again in 2005.

The data do not appear to support your assertion that following Brazil's lead would realize your vision.

George S| 1.12.12 @ 11:37AM

Sir, you are ill-informed if you believe our debt is the result of defense spending. How much of that trillion dollar stimulus went to defense? Zero. How much of the 15 trillion we are in debt went to buy tanks and guns? Zero.

The treasury collects three times the amount of the defense budget, yet we still have a 1.5 trillion deficit. Look again, all our spending is transferring money to people who do not work. We are broke because of that. Well, not actually broke... there is still 700 billion in loose change earmarked for defense.

Also, cause and effect is a very common logical fallacy. Is Brazil invasion free because of her defenses or because they are spending the correct amount? If Brazil spent less, would that mean they would be invaded?

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 1:05AM

they also...

- never liberated Europe

- never defeated Japan

- never stood down Russian missile deployments to Cuba

- never supplied allies in their wars

- never kept the sea lanes open

- never responded to terrorist threats

and on...and on.

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 9:43AM

The plainly stated objective of many of these cuts is that "we don't need to be able to fight 2 wars at the same time."

Let's all be sure to remember this when China finally gets serious about the South China Sea being THEIR territorial waters, in its entirety. And let's just hope that nothing else is going on in the world at that time, should that happen. I mean, our enemies NEVER talk to each other. "Why, we're the strongest nation on Earth," the neo Chamberlains say. "Who would DARE to attack us if we were already involved in a major war?"

Obama & Paul. Peas in a pod. Period. I knew when I saw yesterday that the Paulistinians would have the warm & fuzzies:

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/k.....n_military

Yep. Nothing warms the cockles of a Paulistinian's or regressive's heart like seeing the evil "military industrial complex" gutted.

You turds need to read some more Sun Tzsu & Musashi. You might learn something. I stress "might."

bill| 1.12.12 @ 9:51AM

The worst thing happens when we cut our military budgets for the sake of appeasement and isolation. This is a pre 9/11 defetious menatality. Had we have not slash military budget under Clinton Administration, 9/11 would have never happened. Our military and intelligence community would have been ready and foiled those terrorits' ploy.
No cut to defence budget.
We need to get rid off the public sector unions, and that will save billions of dollars.

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 10:31AM

"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last."...Churchill

"If he yields it from fear, it is for the purpose of avoiding a war, and he will rarely escape from that; for he to whom he has from cowardice conceeded the one thing will not be satisfied, but will want to take other things from him, and his arrogance is increased as his esteem for the Prince is lessened."...Machiavelli, The Discourses

dcd| 1.12.12 @ 11:45AM

It ia not an either or situation, cut defense and non-defense by massive amounts. Invest in research and capacity infrastructure. Then, with a robust economy, when the inevitable unexpected problem arises (this happens no matter how much was spent) america is best prepared for te traditional approach of throwing money at a problem until something works.

fmm| 1.12.12 @ 11:54AM

These cuts are routine. They happened after WWI and we entered WWII with a completely undersized and mostly incompetent professional army. They happened after WWII and Korea. They happened with a vengeance after Vietnam with Clinton eventually reducing the armed forces by more than half. So what is all the fuss about anyway?

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 1:07AM

well that's pretty profound! and the historical circumstances and motives are exactly the same in each instance! you nailed it!

Mike| 1.12.12 @ 11:59AM

Remember that most expensive thing in the world is the second best military.

Mike Johnston
SFC USA (RET)

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 12:28PM

Just ask the Brits, who now have no Ark Royal, nor her Harrier compliment.

Paul Kotik| 1.12.12 @ 12:35PM

Smartest comment in the whole damned section. Wisest, I mean.

martin j smith| 1.12.12 @ 12:07PM

So which candidate will protect this nation as per the Constitution and faces the real world and not the Lala land of Obama,Paul,Huntsman or Romney ?

shipley130| 1.12.12 @ 1:37PM

I'm beginning to think that Obama is just plain crazy.

Al Adab| 1.12.12 @ 5:22PM

25th amendment

shipley130| 1.12.12 @ 1:39PM

The fuss is cutting military when we have nations (plural) hell bent on the destruction of America.

Thom| 1.12.12 @ 3:11PM

Oh, where to start. On 9/11 four large commercial airliners with their IFF turned off avoided intercept for hours in one case because under the 243 billion Defense budget in the last two weeks of the fiscal year no aircraft/pilots/weapons were ready for interception and no apparent way to find said large radar blips flying freely over the most populated portion of the United States. Like Dec 7th, 1941 all the rhetoric about what was spent or needed for "defense" became moot because the actual threat had been discounted long before it arrived on our door step and no capability was maintained for even the most basic tracking of objects flying over our home territory had been maintained due to the "peace dividend" and need to balance the budget on the back of "defense" which is the number one enumerated responsibility of the Federal Government and central to why the "several states" created it in the first place.

Much of the increase in "Defense" spending from late 2001 to now in inflation adjusted dollars goes to increased operations/training and the consumption of things that cost a lot more now than then. Fuel is at least three times as expensive and the military is using a lot of that to not repeat 9/11 like scenario. Ammo, which is the natural byproduct of having a trained military force capable of doing more than parades and disaster relief is on the order of three to 5 times more expensive. We entered WWII with torpedoes that didn't actually work, weren’t tested and that cost lives and put people and equipment at unnecessary risk in the name of saving money on "defense". Keeping an additional 200,000 Reservists and NG troops trained up and on "active" duty is the expected outcome of not being able to do any meaningful military op longer than a few months with the current active duty force pool coupled with the practice of not deploying more than 1/3 of our active duty force at a time to keep our all-volunteer force happy.

All this combined and more give us the most expensive toolbox full of various kinds of tools and capabilities but on balance rarely enough of each "tool" to be used singly or in combination with our other "tools" to be militarily effective for anything other than raids and saber rattling exercises. The phrase "combined arms" has been in the military lexicon for a long time and the synergistic relationship all the "tools" bring to the equation is more times than not lost due to political considerations that all too often give us the outcomes we had with Korea, Vietnam, the first Gulf "battle" and now Iraq and Afghanistan. Pound for pound our "tools" can generally prevail over any other likely adversary if they play by the same rules. As demonstrated in Iraq and Afghanistan for a decade now our adversaries have no intention of playing by our set of rules and in both cases we deployed hugely larger forces than our adversaries could even dream of but the ratio of real combat billets spread thinly out to pointless levels vs. what our adversaries could field make our efforts look bloated and ineffectual compared to the relatively efficient results our adversaries obtain on a merger investment by comparison. Rumsfeld tried to come to grips with our habit of spending billions while our adversaries spent millions but the root problem cannot be solved as long as a majority of Americans see spending 4-5% of GDP on "defense" as excessive. Economies of Scale (savings due to large unit productions over a predictable time span) are already absence from much of what the military buys. Anyone who takes an objective view at what net procurements (over and above replacement of existing equipment) have bought since 1988 will note the absence of any real world advancement in per unit capability. A Squad of men can only control so much ground regardless of all the wiz bangs they are given. As demonstrated in Kosovo, Israel in 2006 and our latest bombing campaign in Libya, you cannot win a war quickly with just air power no matter how powerful and effective it is. Neither the Air Force nor the Navy can effectively deny the use of "ground" by our adversaries yet Administration after Administration has attempted to do this and not risk "ground forces". Had Serbia or Hezbollah in Lebanon been able to actually pitch Scud sized rockets into populated areas of Israel or Nato countries those long drawn out bombing campaigns would have been shown for the folly they really are against a determined and capably adversary. Destroying a balanced combined arms force pool and hoping no one will notice is the artful use of wishful thinking that brought us Pearl Harbor and then the aftershock of having to actually build a real military capability from scratch and use it in ways that were simply discounted by a very naive electorate a short time before. For this and many other reasons of substance I put no faith in the ability of anyone to predict the future in this regard. Our only viable option is to match/exceed the capabilities of our adversaries or relive history and the real and terrible cost that will bring upon us.

Like the 1930s we are building a force structure to meet a budget goal and when the next real threat reveals itself we will be just as prepared for that as we were on Dec 7th, 1941. Less actually since we don't have the industrial capacity to ramp up production of "war" related material like we did in WWII. Taking initial loses today like we did at Pearl and in the Philippines will be fatal to this country's ability to wage a real war. Far too many people in this nation think we can't or won’t be bled. I've done my time; won't be me, my children or grandchildren that have to pay the price for our naiveté.

As Mike so apply put it above, finding out you are second rate in military terms is a very expensive venture.

TGA| 1.12.12 @ 3:20PM

here we go again. jimmy carter gutted the military...and ronald ray-gun built if back...slick willie slashed...bush rebuilt....now obama slashing...
romney building? can we get off this stupid cycle..

Al Adab| 1.12.12 @ 5:21PM

We could end the cycle were both parties still patriotic and put the interests and security of the nation first. Sadly that is no longer the case for the one cares only for itself and its power.

Crown thy good| 1.12.12 @ 4:12PM

To protect us, war is a necessary evil; people urinating on dead enemies; parading heads/bodies to show power and try to intimidate is part of human behavior/reaction to misery.
People need to educate themselves, and know why we're fighting - the powers that be would like us to think we're not smart enough to understand --- it doesn't matter how smart you are - what matters is your true intentions - try searching propaganda tricks, and find how much is getting dumped on us, as it has for decades.
Whose your reps? Obama claims to represent American values - how much did you hear about liberation theology from the general media?

Dixie Pixie| 1.12.12 @ 6:21PM

Greetings KennesawJack.
For a good update on the current wars and military unpleasantness see below::::
http://www.strategypage.com/qn.....20102.aspx

You should not be surprised at the latest military cuts, as they were built into the Debt Ceiling Deal.
The deal stated there would be a Trillion dollars cut, half from the military and half from the entitlement spending if the Super Committee failed.
They did, so the automatic cuts are here.
500 billion dollars from the military / homeland security.
500 billion dollars from Entitlements.

The really bad news is the USA has got a even bigger problem than the deteriorating world military situation.
The Ruling Class can no longer accurately perceive the worlds political / military scene.

For example, Washington interpreted the Arab Spring as Jeffersonian Democrats yearning to set up a Secular Democracy of Freedom and Liberty.
The Ruling Class could not have been more wrong as the next governments will have a super majority of Radical Islamist of the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafism parties.

Without the ability to perceive reality, no rational military strategy can be devised as Washington is ignoring or minimizing real threats in favor of defending / attacking against phantasms and delusions.
No real coherent military spending plan can be implemented when Washington can not tell friend from foe and enemies from allies.

Thom| 1.12.12 @ 6:43PM

Many people throw the word “security” into discussions of “defense” which distracts from the discussion because absolute security is not possible regardless of expenditures or capabilities bought. Those who seek “security” from our defense establishment are often times the same people who think it is someone else’s job to protect them and their family from harm due to criminal activity. Equating a policing function, which has no capability to protect individuals from random incidents of crime with national defense, is a fool’s game. What security this nation had prior to Pearl Harbor was the result of a significant physical fact. We were separated from the bulk of any damage Germany or Japan could do to this country as a whole by two very large bodies of water. A 22 mile gap of water between Britain and France proved more than enough to forestall the most powerful land army in Europe in 1940 but by 1944 Germany could rain down death on London without risking a single German life in exchange. Things have improved a bit since 1940 in this regard. Some people simply lack the capacity to get out of the 1770s thinking however.

It is a given there will always be people who want someone else to carry their water for them throughout life but the proper function of “defense” is to deter effectively and when that does not or cannot work as demonstrated numerous times in the last say 500 years the proper function of defense is to wage that war with absolute conviction and determination until the aggressor is finished and unable to continue to be a threat. One of the largest misconceptions about our “defense” capability is that what we have today will be there the day after our next aggressor gets up the courage or simply lacks the sanity to make rational decisions the way “we” define rational and acts upon what they see as their best interest. It is a given we will not be the aggressor and throw the first punch in the next large scale war and equally a given our enemies aren’t going to take out a front page ad in the NY Times announcing their intentions in advance. Even if they did, the Times would not print it in time for the obvious reasons. Given our own history and that of the world at large there is no basis to assume we will be confronted by a single entity in the future located in only one geographic portion of the planet. China’s interest and North Korea’s interest are one in the same each playing a different role for the naive of the world. China/North Korea and Iran’s national interest are intertwined on several levels not the least of which is energy import to China from Iran in exchange for military technology and assistance with same. Either China or Russia will stand in the way of anything effective going through the UN against Iran. Check on that board. Russian’s interest and role are that of the Man with No Name in Clint’s Eastwood’s series of westerns where he played both sides against the other and profited from both. Western Europe will be completely “defenseless” in 5-10 years but I’ll bet the bulk of the Euro population thinks it has “security” when all is said and done.

If it is a sense of “security” you seek in this life I would suggest you consider moving to Western Europe while that illusion still has meaning among millions.

sirbourbon| 1.12.12 @ 8:16PM

Keep the weapons and 'piss' (literally) on the militarism overseas. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....02139.html

Open up cloed down US bases in the continental USA and close bases in Iraq and elsewhere in the middle east. Bring the fleets back to protect our waters and not to protect foreing lands.

Our national defense depends on our strength as a viable economic power and foreign adventurism debilitates our economy. Open up the oil fields in Alaska, offshore drilling in California and the Gulf. The lower 48 has plenty of oil and gas that is pooling and bloating thousands of feet below in the lower 48 while hippy enviros and conservative Utah senator Orin Hatch waste our time and money on Solyndra and Geothermal boondoggles. >>>http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/10501-sen-orrin-hatchs-own-geothermal-solyndra-scandal

We need to put nuclear into high gear and get on board with Keystone. If we do this we won't have to worry about keeping waterways open in the middleast. Let the EU worry about where they're going to get their oil from. Let the muslim nations have their oil cartel and we'll have our free market. We don't need their oil.

Worrying and fretting endlessly about a Pentagon war budget that spends its budget subsidizing Japan, Korea and the European nations' defense budgets makes no sense as our nation's debt rises into the the 20 TRILLION dollar stratosphere!

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 1:17AM

over the last 60 years...what has been the principal driver of the Federal budget?

Drunken Sailor| 1.13.12 @ 8:48AM

That wouls be "Entitlement Programs".

MilitaryUnite| 1.12.12 @ 8:20PM

Military-
We must be united in voting out Obama...before he ruins everything our wonderful military has fought for.

I know that the cuts are impossible...and then he asks for 1.2 TRILLION today...and he won't even say where the 5 TRILLION has gone this past three years.

U.S. MILITARY VOTE OBAMA OUT

Indy| 1.12.12 @ 8:30PM

Perhaps TAS could help us understand how Ron Paul would go about cutting defense, recently I learned about the Sustainable Defense Task Force when he joined with Barney Frank and Wyden to propose defense cuts in 2010. In this article from big government, http://biggovernment.com/tloud.....cuts-plan/
we learn about those taskforce members and their ties to Soros, does this concern anyone else? The article has many links for readers.

Yes, there are areas to cut defense, I'd start with the many PC lawyers in the Pentagon and the millions going to GE. But in no way do I want Soros friendlies proposing cuts. RP, why aren't you teaming up with Sessions or DeMint, I'm sure Rep. West would be willing to work with you.

Indy| 1.12.12 @ 8:50PM

The same person who wrote the article about Ron Paul I linked to above has a lot to say about Leon Panetta and raised the alarm prior to his senate confirmation, I will link to one article but there are many at his blog http://www.trevorloudon.com/20.....game-here/ and from that post he includes a passage from Mark Rudd in 2008

"Obama is a very strategic thinker. He knew precisely what it would take to get elected and didn’t blow it. He used community organizing methods to mobilize a base consisting of many people who had never voted before or who regularly don’t vote….But he also knew that what he said had to basically play to the center to not be run over by the press, the Republicans, scare centrist and cross-over voters away. He made it.

So he has a narrow mandate for change, without any direction specified. What he’s doing now is moving on the most popular issues — the environment, health care, and the economy. He’ll be progressive on the environment because that has broad popular support; health care will be extended to children, then made universal, but the medical, pharmaceutical, and insurance corporations will stay in place, perhaps yielding some power; the economic agenda will stress stimulation from the bottom sometimes and handouts to the top at other times. It will be pragmatic…

And I agree with this strategy. Anything else will court sure defeat. Move on the stuff you can to a small but significant extent, gain support and confidence. Leave the military alone because they’re way too powerful. For now, until enough momentum is raised. By the second or third year of this recession, when stimulus is needed at the bottom, people may begin to discuss cutting the military budget if security is being increased through diplomacy and application of nascent international law."

If you don't know who Mark Rudd is, think SDS and the Weather Underground.

This writer does his homework and includes pictures of Panetta with the company he keeps. Mark Rudd's prediction in 2008? Well you judge for yourself.

http://www.trevorloudon.com/tag/leon-panetta/

The company this adminstration keeps is beyond troubling, any curious journalist out there?

POST American| 1.12.12 @ 9:58PM

---------------------FINAL WORD-----------------------

In this, the 11th hour of the Globalist
RED China world TREASON and EUGENICS
OP -----please, please, please put aside the '90's Show'
sideshows and DIS-tractions.

REALLY ---------------PLEASE!------------------------

----------------HUAC/ Nuremberg 2012---------------

biomedlives| 1.14.12 @ 8:57AM

In my view, the major threats to our country's security and prosperity are not military. They are the trade and budget deficits, largely financed by China, our inadequate infrastructure, and our less-than-robust technological prowess. China may be able to take effective control in the future without firing a shot.

POST American| 1.14.12 @ 10:12PM

--------------------FUTURE BLAST!------------------------

FOX News Update 2015:

Bill Gates has relocvated headquarters
to RED China, currencies and pensions
have disappeared as part of retructuring,
98% of the population are completely
sterile thanks to Monsanto's GM food,
CHEM-trailing, Bisphenol A, radiation,
microwaves etc.

BUT Fox is still bent on keeping you
IN----formed.

"AS the nation climbs out from 6 months
of general unrest, the good news is those
2.5 MILLION Red Chinese security and emergency
assistance operatives seem to be doing the
trick. Not only is electricity back on in some
parts of the country, but now FEMA camps
are hosting -----POP concerts! Bill Gates is
helping direct the operation form his world
command center in Shanghai and everyone's
now in for a 'good time'."

-------------HUAC/ Nuremberg -----2012---or else!

reXteryalizer | 1.15.12 @ 4:57AM

Want to thank all of you, for your Powerfull stand against Oboma & His Corrupted political partners.

But there is so much more we can do. Being aggressive and focusing on the facts and truth is only the first step.

We musT follow Up with more details standing by our convictions and dont back down.

Oboma has NOT brought CHANGE, In fact ~! ~ THE ONLY real THING needing CHANGE !....Was Barack Hussein Obama II.

HIMSELF

Barack Hussein Obama II ( Who hates American Values ) who is A " SELF PROCLAIMED Enemy" ~of responsible, Morally Conscious HARD WORKING Americans.

oBOMAS Irresponsible & DRUG MAFIA and reckless supporters KNOW~ that Barack Hussein Obama II, WILL FORCE

YOU to paY THEM, out of your PockeT

.{ FOR all of their UNCHECKED Vices and THRILLS/

{ All on YOU | /

At your COST & Sacrifice

...This UN~CHANGABLE fraud, has done His VERY BEST to Inspire VIOLENCE.

THESE ARE OBAMAS OWN WORDS.. saying .........To his supporters.

Saying “Get ready for hand-to-hand combat with your Fellow Americans”

– Obama has ALSO DECLARED to his Supporters

“I want all Americans to get in each others faces!– Obama demands !

“You bring a knife to a fight pal, we’ll bring a gun” –

THESE ARE OBAMAS OWN WORDS..
ANGER VIOLENCE and more taxes..... THIS IS OBAMAS Change for america

/“Hit Back Twice As Hard”. He commands !

*Obama on the private sector: ~~ “We talk to these folks…~ / so

I know whose a*$ to KICK.“ OBOMA wants to KICK your a*$ /

Shouting THAT Republican victory would
mean ~ “hand to hand combat”

HE IS EXPECTING people to be on Edge and BORDERLINE killing MODE, VIOLENT / and STAND up for their immoral CAUSES

THIS IS WHAT HE LIVES FOR ./ ./ ./ THESE ARE OBAMAS OWN WORDS.. !

* Obama Tells democrats: “ I’m itching for a fight.” !

....PLEASE.... go to reXes NEW WebsiTe ~ ! Oboma *( Just like Adolf Hitler~~\

oBOMA~~~ Demands ! -- [ THE FINAL SOLUTION - for Un~Wanted Children

Barak Obama is A MURDERER .~Torturing UNWANTED babys on DEATH ROE

CLICK HERE http://obomlnation.webstarts.com/index.html

OBAMA TAKES a little NEW BORN innocent child. BORN. ALIVE sTabS it iN the head SUCKs ITS BRAINS OUT.

Latest Headlines

We Will Remember

Roger Kaplan|26 comments

Real Immigration Reform Requires Free Markets

Ross Kaminsky|80 comments

Enough With the Bipartisanship

Matt Purple|45 comments

The United States of El Norte

Larry Thornberry|59 comments

Vodka = Vodka = Vodka

Daniel J. Flynn|93 comments

Laying Down My Pen

Quin Hillyer

Tornado Chasers

Claire Healey|35 comments

The Chinese Waltz

George H. Wittman|2 comments

The Spectacle Blog

Jimmy Wray, R.I.P.

Aaron Goldstein | 4:19PM

The Spectator’s Spectacular: May 18-May 25

Patrick Ryan | 10:45AM

Updated: NBC News: Holder Personally Approved Fox Reporter Warrant

Ross Kaminsky | 5.24.13

Felonious Attorney General?

Kaylin Bugos | 5.24.13

Did the Boy Scouts Cave to Pressure?

Claire Healey | 5.24.13

BBC World Survey Ranks Israel Near Bottom in Global Popularity

Aaron Goldstein | 5.24.13

Obamacare is a Big and Growing Problem for Democrats

Ross Kaminsky | 5.24.13

Stein on IRS Scandal

Patrick Ryan | 5.24.13

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Pope Culture

By George Sim Johnston

A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck

By P.J. O'Rourke

Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
Dames at Sea

By John Corry
In the Absence of Guns

By Mark Steyn

In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The Metaphysical Martini

By Werner J. Dannhauser
Counting the Costs of Clintonism

By Robert H. Bork

The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
Chuck McHagel

By George Neumayr

It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted

By Douglas Bartholomew
It’s the Best Time of the Year

By Mark Steyn

The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
The Bush Crack-Up

By Brit Hume

Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?

Clip of the Day

H/T to National Review Online

The American Spectator

Loose Canons

Obama Scissorhands

About the Author

Letter to the Editor View all comments (140) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

oldfart| 1.12.12 @ 6:35AM

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 7:41AM

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 7:54AM

KennesawJack| 1.12.12 @ 8:42AM

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 9:08AM

KennesawJack| 1.12.12 @ 9:28AM

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 9:46AM

Drunken Sailor| 1.12.12 @ 9:58AM

Drunken Sailor| 1.12.12 @ 9:59AM

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 10:04AM

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 10:28AM

Al Adab| 1.12.12 @ 11:18AM

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 11:25AM

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 11:38AM

Mike| 1.12.12 @ 11:43AM

Drunken Sailor| 1.12.12 @ 12:25PM

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 11:45AM

KennesawJack| 1.12.12 @ 5:45PM

1-2 Punch| 1.12.12 @ 9:15PM

Clint| 1.12.12 @ 6:39PM

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 6:45PM

Clint| 1.12.12 @ 7:05PM

Timothy L. Pennell| 1.12.12 @ 7:51PM

Clint| 1.12.12 @ 8:15PM

Con Chef (NB) | 1.13.12 @ 6:46AM

Clint| 1.12.12 @ 6:53PM

jothepro| 1.12.12 @ 8:43AM

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 11:32AM

Mike| 1.12.12 @ 11:50AM

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 3:42PM

DevilDog| 1.12.12 @ 6:56PM

TW in SC| 1.12.12 @ 11:08PM

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 7:07AM

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 9:07AM

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 11:18AM

Con Chef (NB) | 1.12.12 @ 11:39AM

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 10:11AM

Al Adab| 1.12.12 @ 11:21AM

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 11:35AM

Al Adab| 1.12.12 @ 1:39PM

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 3:34PM

SpiralArchitect| 1.12.12 @ 3:25PM

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 7:09AM

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 12:28AM

McGee| 1.12.12 @ 11:23AM

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 11:38AM

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 11:41AM

DevilDog| 1.12.12 @ 7:03PM

Jack in Wi.| 1.12.12 @ 7:35PM

TW in SC| 1.12.12 @ 11:18PM

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 12:30AM

DevilDog| 1.12.12 @ 6:53PM

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 12:25AM

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 12:32AM

biomedlives| 1.14.12 @ 8:54AM

John Daniel| 1.12.12 @ 6:42AM

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 12:34AM

Hal G. P. Colebatch| 1.12.12 @ 6:47AM

Michael Tomlinson| 1.12.12 @ 6:51AM

Clint| 1.12.12 @ 7:08AM

Drunken Sailor| 1.12.12 @ 10:02AM

Clint| 1.12.12 @ 7:22AM

Doctor Right| 1.12.12 @ 7:58AM

Timothy L. Pennell| 1.12.12 @ 8:51AM

Drunken Sailor| 1.12.12 @ 10:18AM

Timothy L. Pennell| 1.12.12 @ 2:15PM

Dick Nome| 1.12.12 @ 2:17PM

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 12:38AM

Pecos Pete| 1.12.12 @ 6:54AM

oldfart| 1.12.12 @ 7:07AM

Old Soldier| 1.12.12 @ 7:44AM

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 12:42AM

Zbigniew Mazurak| 1.12.12 @ 7:08AM

Al Adab| 1.12.12 @ 11:24AM

carnot| 1.13.12 @ 12:44AM