Obama Administration: Cripple the Armed Forces.

[BlueShoe]

Defense Secretary Hagel, almost certainly at the direction of President Obama, has announced massive future military cuts in personnel, hardware, and benefits for our service members. Among other things, troop strength will be reduced to the lowest levels since just before Pearl Harbor.

At a time when militant Islam, an expanding Chinese military, and a resurgent Russia that intends to restore the glory of the Soviet era, this policy of weakening our military readiness could prove a disaster.

Aside from hardware and strength level cuts, proposed pay and benefits cuts are going to rip morale. Pay freezes, cut allowances, increased health care costs, closing commissarys, etc. are going to make for a lot of very ticked off men and women. So upset, in fact, that many may elect to leave the service, the ones that you most wish to retain, career NCOs and junior officers, both groups that are usually married and have dependents.

In their goal and haste to create a dependent welfare society, it would seem as if our fighting forces are the vulnerable ones that the Obama admistration has targeted in order to direct funds and resources toward building the socialist state. Billions and billions for food stamps and welfare, but nothing for the petty officer or sergeant, or for gear for him to fight with is what this outrage appears to many of us, and already the very loud protests are being heard.
www.rt.com/usa/us-military-cuts-budget-423/ (http://www.rt.com/usa/us-military-cuts-budget-423/)

[davew]

Why is a military necessary, when a great orator negotiator like our current president can talk everyones way to peace? (he never got the nobel peace prize for nuttin)

[Greyfox]

Obama's agenda from day 1 has been to reduce the Military-Industrial complex.
He more or less said so in his Cairo and Berlin speeches prior to being elected.
Of course as the National Debt grows and interest owing, the reduction of the military will be a natural consequence.
Hence he has no problem spending.

[Clocker]

Why is a military necessary, when a great orator negotiator like our current president can talk everyones way to peace? (he never got the nobel peace prize for nuttin)

By coincidence, I posted the following in another thread today:

To the extent that it has any intellectual foundation, the Obama foreign policy represents a species of “liberal internationalism,” which holds that the actors in the international political system (IPS) tend towards cooperation rather than competition. Liberal internationalists contend that the goals of actors within the IPS transcend power and security; they also see an important role for actors in the IPS other than states, including international institutions such as the United Nations.

Boy, that tendency toward cooperation that transcends power and security describes the relation between Obama and Putin to a "T".

Source (http://www.fpri.org//articles/2014/01/principle-and-prudence-american-foreign-policy)

[Robert Goren]

We should bring our troops home. Get them out Germany and Japan. That a huge waste of taxpayer dollars right there. About the only thing I agree with Ron Paul on.

[burnsy]

Cripple that's a laugher and I was in the Navy...we should be sending bills to these countries........You can add up every country on that chart and we spend more than all of them COMBINED! Can you say fear and brainwashed?.....I thought you couldn't....:) We really need it too when the other guys best is flying jets into skyscrapers....

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151669046889364&set=a.175035499363.104403.165297924363&type=1&theater

[Marshall Bennett]

Final stage of their master-plan, dissolve the military. Communist bastards. :D

[Ocala Mike]

What Goren said.

Always amazes me to see the same people who view government as too large complaining that the military isn't large enough.

[delayjf]

We really need it too when the other guys best is flying jets into skyscrapers....

If you throw in China and Russia in the mix of "the other guys", 727s are hardly their best. I could see getting out of Europe, but not the Pacific Rim.

[Tom]

Big government and small army is not the formula for a great nation.
But then again, having an idiot like Obama in charge is the pathway to mediocrity.

And, since the alleged news media will no longer report it, I can tell you that the debt was not the only thing this loser has blown through the roof since 2009.....with a CNC as pathetic as this one is, our troops belong at home.
His performance in Afghanistan has been stellar.

[Tom]

"What difference at this point does it make!

[Clocker]

But then again, having an idiot like Obama in charge is the pathway to mediocrity.


I wish Obama was mediocre, it would be a great improvement. I'm starting to get nostalgic about Jimmy Carter.

The irony is that Obama's two big announcements for the month were cutting the military and the end of the age of austerity. Which has to mean that he wants to fund his new social programs, including universal pre-school, with money cut out of the military budget. Which is appropriate, because members of the military will then qualify for welfare benefits.

There is no doubt in my mind that there is a good deal of fat in the military budget, but I see no evidence that any cuts would be done intelligently, and given the track record of the government (on both sides of the aisle) the money won't be put to any more efficient use elsewhere.

[jdhanover]

2013 (source: Wikipedia)

US miltary spending: $682 Billion
China (2d most): $166 Bn
No other country spends over $100 Bn.

US spending is greater than the next 9 countries COMBINED.

Maybe we need to spend smarter (and less)???? This ridiculous spending level has been going on for a long time. As usual, both parties at fault.

[newtothegame]

Have you witnessed the rail gun?
Has anyone witnessed the lasers being tagged for next years deployments?
And like it or not, there is a reason no other country really wants to tangle with our military.
There is a reason wars are fought on other peoples soils versus our own....
Those items aren't cheap!

And to those who say about smaller government yet conservatives and right wingers want a larger military.....wrong! We want the best military not a larger military. There is a difference and it does come at a price.
And, I find it laughable to try and compare our military budget to that of other countries.....
Would you all like the possibility of going to war with some of the antiquated tools (their budgets provide for)????

[mostpost]

Defense Secretary Hagel, almost certainly at the direction of President Obama, has announced massive future military cuts in personnel, hardware, and benefits for our service members. Among other things, troop strength will be reduced to the lowest levels since just before Pearl Harbor.

At a time when militant Islam, an expanding Chinese military, and a resurgent Russia that intends to restore the glory of the Soviet era, this policy of weakening our military readiness could prove a disaster.

Aside from hardware and strength level cuts, proposed pay and benefits cuts are going to rip morale. Pay freezes, cut allowances, increased health care costs, closing commissarys, etc. are going to make for a lot of very ticked off men and women. So upset, in fact, that many may elect to leave the service, the ones that you most wish to retain, career NCOs and junior officers, both groups that are usually married and have dependents.



In their goal and haste to create a dependent welfare society, it would seem as if our fighting forces are the vulnerable ones that the Obama admistration has targeted in order to direct funds and resources toward building the socialist state. Billions and billions for food stamps and welfare, but nothing for the petty officer or sergeant, or for gear for him to fight with is what this outrage appears to many of us, and already the very loud protests are being heard.
www.rt.com/usa/us-military-cuts-budget-423/ (http://www.rt.com/usa/us-military-cuts-budget-423/)

If you are against it, I am for it. The last thing we need in the world are the opinions of a foolish old man who thinks there are still Bolsheviks in the world.
The cuts conform to the Bipartisan Budget Act of December 2013. Bipartisan means they were agreed to by both parties.

The 40,000 man reduction in forces almost exactly matches the number of troops that will be leaving Afghanistan. Neither China nor Russia is going to attack us or our allies. A ten million man army will not prevent a terrorist attack. We do not need airplanes designed to destroy Soviet tanks in Europe.
We need efficient intelligence networks and military forces capable of responding quickly and effectively.

[Tom]

Bipartisan means they were agreed to by both parties.

And has nothing to do with being right or smart.
Whenever a republican and a democrat agree on anything, you better run the other way.

[mostpost]

Big government and small army is not the formula for a great nation.
But then again, having an idiot like Obama in charge is the pathway to mediocrity.

And, since the alleged news media will no longer report it, I can tell you that the debt was not the only thing this loser has blown through the roof since 2009.....with a CNC as pathetic as this one is, our troops belong at home.
His performance in Afghanistan has been stellar.
Let's tell the whole story, OK? Since 2003 we have been engaged in two wars, one in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. Your figures are only for Afghanistan. From 2003 to 2008 our operations in Afghanistan were limited. These are the casualty totals annually for both wars.

2003....................622
2004....................958
2005....................996
2006....................971
2007....................1078
2008....................477
2009....................467
2010....................559
2011....................472
2012....................311
2013....................127

Every one of the deaths the United States suffered in Iraq was unnecessary and the blame for them rests solely with George W. Bush and the neocons.
George W. Bush and the neocons also must shoulder all of the blame for the deaths in Afghanistan prior to 2009 and a portion of the blame thereafter.

[ArlJim78]

2013 (source: Wikipedia)

US miltary spending: $682 Billion
China (2d most): $166 Bn
No other country spends over $100 Bn.

US spending is greater than the next 9 countries COMBINED.

Maybe we need to spend smarter (and less)???? This ridiculous spending level has been going on for a long time. As usual, both parties at fault.
and our wealth, economic size and scope of global commitment also outstrip those other countries by far, so it's not that simple.
Yes many areas of our spending are far greater than the rest of the world, not only the military. Should we spend smarter and less? yes! across the board, however this administration is only interested in downsizing when it comes to the military. Why is that?

[Clocker]

And has nothing to do with being right or smart.
Whenever a republican and a democrat agree on anything, you better run the other way.

Politicians agreeing on something is no more proof of something being right than consensus science is proof of the way the world works.

[BlueShoe]

If you are against it, I am for it. The last thing we need in the world are the opinions of a foolish old man who thinks there are still Bolsheviks in the world.
Why thank you Comrade, it is always heartening to receive an endorsement from you. :D Would suggest though, that you bring your interpretation of the word up to today's meaning. In modern usage, it is a disparaging, sarcastic label given to a person with far left political ideology. Any resemblance of these persons to the members of the Russian Social Democratic Workers Party, which seized power in 1917 Russia, is purely coincidental. Or is it? :rolleyes:

[plainolebill]

and our wealth, economic size and scope of global commitment also outstrip those other countries by far, so it's not that simple.
Yes many areas of our spending are far greater than the rest of the world, not only the military. Should we spend smarter and less? yes! across the board, however this administration is only interested in downsizing when it comes to the military. Why is that?

I agree, we should be trimming where we can. Downsizing the military some is prudent, putting a chokehold on the congressmen and senators that push unwanted hardware on the military would be great.

[PaceAdvantage]

There is no need for an armed forces. The world absolutely loves us and would never think of doing us harm.

Our Dear Leader Obama has been true to his word and the words of those who throw roses at his feet...he has brought peace upon the earth with his gifted tongue.

[Ocala Mike]

Trimming the fat from the armed forces is not crippling them. I fail to see how the actions of this administration of the past 5 years, including the surge, the bringing down of Bin Laden, and drone strikes support the sarcastic comments by some that our "Dear Leader" is not attuned to extant world threats to our security.

Short of either turning white, becoming a Republican, or resigning, it is clear that
nothing the man does or can do will ever satisfy his detractors.

[hcap]

There is no need for an armed forces. The world absolutely loves us and would never think of doing us harm.

Our Dear Leader Obama has been true to his word and the words of those who throw roses at his feet...he has brought peace upon the earth with his gifted tongue.Just wait till Hilary is in charge :lol: :lol: :lol:

I am sure her womanly weaknesses will be skewered particularly if she will not nuke the first evildoer country that crosses the The Holy of Holies neocon line drawn in the sand

[Greyfox]

Just wait till Hilary is in charge :lol: :lol: :lol:

I am sure her womanly weaknesses will be skewered particularly if she will not nuke the first evildoer country that crosses the The Holy of Holies neocon line drawn in the sand

I think we'll find out that Hilary has bigger balls than the current Commander in Chief.

[Tom]

Let's tell the whole story, OK? Since 2003 we have been engaged in two wars, one in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. Your figures are only for Afghanistan.

RIF.
The topic of this thread is about today, and about Obama.
Not Bush.
The data I posted was to illustrate the performance of the current president and his policies. He grabbed defeat fro the jaws of vicotry in Afghanistan.
No surprise, as he publicly stated that he did want victory there.

[BlueShoe]

I certainly agree with trimming fat and controlling wasteful costs. Those old stories of $700 hammers and $300 toilet seats that the Pentagon paid are still around. Also agree that we are overextended around the globe, and that our people should be pulled out of nations that should assume full responsibility for their own defense.

My objections to this cutback are twofold. First is our overall strategic ability to meet and defeat threats to our security from our many foes worldwide. Next, the effect on our people in uniform. They will be asked to do the job with fewer people, less hardware, longer deployments away from home, while at the same time being asked to take a cut in pay and benefits. Morale will plummet, and our best people will leave the service. If there is one thing you do not do to someone in uniform, it is to screw with their pay. Do that, and you are going to have a bunch of real pissed off troops.

[Light]

I'm surprised anyone believes anything Obama says anymore, right or left. He has proved that what he says and what he does are two totally different things. For example he says POT is no more dangerous than alcohol, but has had far more federal raids on POT dispensaries than Bush had. His hypocrisy list is long.

On national defense, once again the prince of peace is pulling your leg. The numbers are in from his first term and he increased the budget for defense by 10% or $55 billion (adjusted for inflation) while ending the war with Iraq. I wouldn't get too worked up on another "lie" by the master of deception. This guy is as right wing as Bush was if not more. He just presents himself as "liberal". What he does is anything but.

[LottaKash]

I believe the tip of the current Military Iceberg began just a little while back, starting with two waves of "firings" of many of our Top Military Leaders, which included one of them, who was at the top of the Nuclear chain of command....With these Gen's /Adm's now out of the picture, it has made it very ez for BO to do what he has wanted to do all along....Hollow out Amerika, especially the Military, in order for us to get closer to a newer "Kinder and Gentler Brave New World"...

[thaskalos]

"You have to always keep your institution prepared, but you can't carry a large land-war Defense Department when there is no large land war", one senior Pentagon official told the US Daily.

"We're still going to have a very significant-sized army", the official added. But it's going to be agile. It will be capable. It will be modern. It will be trained."


Can any of us really argue with that?

Where is the "crippling of the Armed Forces"...that the title of this thread suggests?

[Clocker]

The topic of this thread is about today, and about Obama.
Not Bush.


You need to get with the agenda. Everything is always about Bush.

[hcap]

Old deadeye dick.

From Dick Cheney, commenting on President Obama's proposed military budget, presented yesterday by Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel:

I think the whole thing is not driven by any change in world circumstances, it is driven by budget considerations. He would much rather spend the money on food stamps than he would on a strong military or support for our troops.

Andrew Sullivan:

He could have made an argument why he thinks we should maintain the stratospheric levels of defense spending that have been in place since 9/11; he could have argued that the US needs to maintain the ability to fight two major land wars simultaneously in perpetuity. He could have said a lot of things. But he decided to accuse the commander-in-chief of not supporting the troops and actually wanting to keep people in poverty. There is this belief out there that Republican extremism comes from the base and not the elites. But Cheney proves otherwise.

Some pertinent info

http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_military_spending.jpg

[BlueShoe]

From Dick Cheney, commenting on President Obama's proposed military budget, presented yesterday by Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel:

I think the whole thing is not driven by any change in world circumstances, it is driven by budget considerations. He would much rather spend the money on food stamps than he would on a strong military or support for our troops.
Bingo, right on target. Just what I said earlier.

[hcap]

I guess ole' deadeye dick could always shoot a family on food stamps. Like he did to a buddy on a hunting trip; and in the face.

That way he kills at least two birds with one stone. Unless they have 2 kids in which case it's four with one stone. :rolleyes:

Cost effective use of ammo too. Bet Hagel would like that part. :rolleyes:

[delayjf]

starting with two waves of "firings" of many of our Top Military Leaders, which included one of them,

I have heard of the above, do you have a link? Certainly would explains why the brass has been laying down on the women in combat / gays issue.

[JustRalph]

Turning away from boots on the ground, to highly technical air assets makes sense to me. It has been envisioned for two decades. There are unmanned aircraft everywhere now. Laser weapons are coming online. Space weapons are already in use to listen and locate the bad guys.

We can cut a tank in half from an airborne laser now.

Following through on the tech side is a must though. If they fail on that, then this is a problem

[lamboguy]

there is enough in the military budget to blow up the whole world about 20 times over, how much more do they need?

[Steve 'StatMan']

there is enough in the military budget to blow up the whole world about 20 times over, how much more do they need?

The need the balls to blow up what needs blowing up, if indeed anything needs blowing up. But a lot of blowing up, and where it needs blowing up, will send radiation our way. Our nukes are useless. But not for those nations that hate us that are west of the Pacific Ocean, where the radiation won't blow back over the ocean directly at us.

By the way, I agree with the other poster, that Hillary has bigger balls that Obama. And I think she'll be more apt to shove them down our throats, than the little ones Obama has already been rubbing on our faces, to the delight, approval and obliviousness of some on this board. (cry, you know who you are).

[Steve 'StatMan']

add: By the way, I don't think Hillary will use her balls elsewhere in the world. She'll use them on her and the Liberal Democrat Enemies, more so than Obama already has.

[FantasticDan]

Great Jon Stewart bit, climaxing with incredible Dick Cheney hypocrisy :lol: :bang:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-february-26-2014/the-empire-cuts-back

[Greyfox]

Laser weapons are coming online. Space weapons are already in use to listen and locate the bad guys.



Sooner or later the "bad guys" will also have that technology as well.
A lone terrorist could create tremendous havoc and ruin.

[Clocker]

Great Jon Stewart bit, climaxing with incredible Dick Cheney hypocrisy

Not one of his better bits. A minor chuckle on a "Dick" joke, and a hatchet job on an old man who is out of power and of little relevance today even to conservatives. A weak twist on the standard "Bush's fault" meme.

What is relevant is the hypocrisy of those in power, making life-altering decisions based on politics and elections. Harry Reid is a bigger hypocrite than Dick Cheney on his best day, way ahead of Cheney on the fast track to senility, and a major influence on the government and people of this country. If Stewart wants a target-rich environment, Pelosi was just a teaser of what he could do with Reid.

[hcap]

Actually "dickhead" is more appropriate.

Btw, it WAS all Bush and dickheads fault. :eek:







.

[Clocker]

Actually "dickhead" is more appropriate.

Btw, it WAS all Bush and dickheads fault.

.

Cheney and the neocons gave Bush bad advice, and pressured him to act on it. Bush was incompetent in accepting it because he wanted to believe them. None of that absolves Obama and his minions of responsibility for a train wreck of an administration.

The fact that Bush was a poor president does not negate the fact that Obama is worse. The mess Obama inherited is partly Bush's fault (and partly the fault of the Dem Congress). Obama's ignorance and fecklessness is not Bush's fault.

BTW, Bush often spoke in error, but there is no proof that he knowingly lied. For Obama, lying is an everyday fact of life.

[Greyfox]

The fact that Bush was a poor president does not negate the fact that Obama is worse.

Spot on! :ThmbUp:

[hcap]

Actually Fox does it again.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/116749/dick-cheney-blames-obama-defense-cuts-forgets-about-sequester
...FEBRUARY 25, 2014

Dick Cheney appeared on Fox News's "Hannity" last night to discuss Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel's announcement yesterday that he was going to cut the size of the Army and reduce military spending. That didn't go over well with the former vice president, who called the cuts "absolutely devastating" and said that Obama "would rather spend the money on food stamps than he would on a strong military or in support of our troops."

"I have not been a strong supporter of Barack Obama," he added. "But this really is over the top. It does enormous long-term damage to our military."

So whatever you want to believe about Bush is no longer da Prez, is besides the point. Dickhead weighed in stupidly on the military cuts, NOW, recently on 2/25/2014. So you decide to zero in on my annoyance with bush and cheney, and forget what this debate is about. If it makes you feel any better, I will stipulate to what I think is obvious. I hated them both. But that is not what this debate is about. Ok, I will reiterate--the relevance of Bush's mediocrity or Dickheads dickheadedness is not relevant to this discussion :rolleyes:

By MICHAEL R. GORDON, Special to The New York Times
Published: June 20, 1990

Defense Secretary Dick Cheney today sent to Congress his promised plan for cutting the armed forces by 25 percent over the next five years, outlining a smaller Army, Air Force and Navy than proposed by the military services.Cheney threw his hat in the ring now. Jon Stewart calling him out was right on on target. When you babbled your usual nonsense you and your bullshit arguments deserve also to be called out.....and a hatchet job on an old man who is out of power and of little relevance today even to conservatives. A weak twist on the standard "Bush's fault" meme.Btw, Cheney said something about food stamps as though that was meaningful. He'd ( Obama ) much rather spend the money on food stamps than he would on a strong military or support for our troops.

As for Cheney's comment about Obama and food stamps, here's how much the federal government spends on food stamps versus defense:

http://www.newrepublic.com/sites/default/files/u185021/military_food_stamp.png

Don't forget I said it again Fox does it again. It is hardly a surprise. Fox has a policy of supporting all sorts of conservative non-proven talking points. So the very fact that they showcased guys like dickhead or Napolotano, and did not issue a disclaimer about what those guys said, pretty much indicates

a)-It is does not go against with their conservative talking points. And

b)-it was not offensive enough to for R. Murdach et al to say "the policies of dickhead or Da Judge were only their opinions and do not reflect the views of the network.

MSNBC does something similar from the left.
BFD. So what?

I am siure you can find some idiocy there and you would be dead to rights if you said MSNBC doers it again

[Tom]

Spot on! :ThmbUp:

Dittos :ThmbUp:

[Tom]

So whatever you want to believe about Bush is no longer da Prez, is besides the point. Dickhead weighed in stupidly on the military cuts, NOW, recently on 2/25/2014.

Yes, he did, and he dis so as a private citizen.
A fact you have grabbed onto as a form of denial as to what a total loser and tainwreck Obama and all of the dems have been.

You have so little of substance with your loser,. I can't blame your desperation.

[Clocker]

Don't forget I said it again Fox does it again.

Congratulations on the acquisition of another dead horse to add to your extensive stable.

[Clocker]

Yes, he did, and he dis so as a private citizen.

Bush and Cheney will never be private citizens in the collective mind. They, especially Cheney, will live forever as the warlords of the Dark Side, eternally responsible for the failures of the moonbats to establish heaven on earth.

[hcap]

Congratulations on the acquisition of another dead horse to add to your extensive stable.Fox and it's troglodytes are alive and well. Just count the conservatives on this board who think Fox is just dandy and the Daily Caller is just swell.

[hcap]

Bush and Cheney will never be private citizens in the collective mind. They, especially Cheney, will live forever as the warlords of the Dark Side, eternally responsible for the failures of the moonbats to establish heaven on earth.For all those who believe Obama is the anti-Christ, and yes, you know who you are, Cheney easily disproves that.silly notion.

[JustRalph]

there is enough in the military budget to blow up the whole world about 20 times over, how much more do they need?

You might have to blow up the same spot multiple times.........thus the excess

[Clocker]

For all those who believe Obama is the anti-Christ, and yes, you know who you are,

Since you address that comment to me, I can only assume that you are painting me with that broad brush. You are seriously in error.

If Obama was intelligent and competent, I might worry about such a thing. I shudder to think of the smoldering wreckage of this country today if Obama was an effective leader.

French President Sarkozy was reported as saying he found Obama to be naive and grossly egotistical. I think that is as good a summary as any if you add feckless. The anti-Christ would have wreaked havoc. Obama has achieved nothing. Even his "signature achievement" was accomplished in spite of him rather than because of him. He was clueless about the contents of the bill, even after it was passed. Truth in advertizing would require that it be called PelosiCare.

Calling him the anti-Christ is laughable. He is an empty suit, running as fast as he can to stay at the forefront of the pack of his followers. The mob propelling him forward are not evil either. They are criminally negligent, but not purposefully evil.

[hcap]

Since you address that comment to me, I can only assume that you are painting me with that broad brush. You are seriously in error.Not to you. Stuff about the anti-Christ is garbage. I was joking about Cheney and the idiotic accusations made against Obama. However there must be many boxcars out there, and more on the right than the left

Google "Obama is the anti-Christ" I get about 37,300,000 results
Cheney is the anti-Christ only gets about 409,000 results
Even Bush only gets 1,410,000 results

Qed, there are more crazy righties than lefties :rolleyes:

[Saratoga_Mike]

HCAP - I'm not a Cheney fan by any means, but how was his food stamp comment invalid? Look at food stamp spending under Obama (and the last yr of GWB)--way up. Cheney didn't say Obama has recommended spending MORE on food stamps than defense. You on the left have so much ammo to use against GWB/Cheney, yet you still resort to BS.

[Greyfox]

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/files/2013/08/obama-putin-better-1024x689.jpg (http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/files/2013/08/obama-putin-better.jpg)

B.H.Obama. - "Vlad, in my country, our citizens are allowed to make jokes about me and call me stupid."

V. Putin- "Barry, in my country, our citizens are allowed to make jokes about you and call you stupid too!"

[Clocker]

Qed, there are more crazy righties than lefties :rolleyes:

Is that consensus science?

[hcap]

Is that consensus science? 37,300,000 is no walk in the park.

[rastajenk]

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/files/2013/08/obama-putin-better-1024x689.jpg (http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/files/2013/08/obama-putin-better.jpg)
"After the election, I'll have more flexibility."

"Good, you're gonna need it when we bend you over and make you squeal like a pig."

[hcap]

HCAP - I'm not a Cheney fan by any means, but how was his food stamp comment invalid? Look at food stamp spending under Obama (and the last yr of GWB)--way up. Cheney didn't say Obama has recommended spending MORE on food stamps than defense. You on the left have so much ammo to use against GWB/Cheney, yet you still resort to BS.

http://www.newrepublic.com/sites/default/files/u185021/military_food_stamp.png

A comparison shows there is much more fat to cut on the military side than on the poor folks and the poor and middle class families side. In fact military families represent a substantial chunk of SNAP recipients.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/19/food-stamps-military_n_3462465.html

"Food Stamps: Military Families Redeem $100 Million A Year In SNAP Benefits "

You can drone on and on about fraud and waste, stuff like spending food stamps on hookers or gambling or alcoholm is relatively miniscule and grossly exaggerated. Particularly compared to defense contractors padding the bills and $1000 dollar hammers etc.

[Saratoga_Mike]

[img]

You can drone on and on about fraud and waste, stuff like spending food stamps on hookers or gambling or alcoholm is relatively miniscule and grossly exaggerated. Particularly compared to defense contractors padding the bills and $1000 dollar hammers etc.

Again, you haven't invalidated his point.

And please don't assume you know what I think - the fact of the matter is most fat at the DoD is the result of local congressmen/senators protecting the hometown bacon. On your point about bill padding, I absolutely support prosecuting any company that rips off the DoD.

[NJ Stinks]

....If Obama was intelligent and competent, I might worry about such a thing. I shudder to think of the smoldering wreckage of this country today if Obama was an effective leader....

....Obama has achieved nothing. Even his "signature achievement" was accomplished in spite of him rather than because of him. He was clueless about the contents of the bill, even after it was passed. Truth in advertizing would require that it be called PelosiCare.

Calling him the anti-Christ is laughable. He is an empty suit, running as fast as he can to stay at the forefront of the pack of his followers. The mob propelling him forward are not evil either. They are criminally negligent, but not purposefully evil.

One of us is a moron. Isn't it amazing that Obama's greatest achievement goes right past that marvelous brain of yours?

Deny that for the last 5 years that Obama has kept us safe at home from foreign terrorists. If you can't deny it, stop and think before you post garbage.

[Saratoga_Mike]

One of us is a moron. Isn't it amazing that Obama's greatest achievement goes right past that marvelous brain of yours?

Deny that for the last 5 years that Obama has kept us safe at home from foreign terrorists. If you can't deny it, stop and think before you post garbage.

CNN's wording:

Boston Marathon Terror Attack Fast Facts

By CNN Library
http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/03/us/boston-marathon-terror-attack-fast-facts/

[NJ Stinks]

CNN's wording:

Boston Marathon Terror Attack Fast Facts

By CNN Library
http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/03/us/boston-marathon-terror-attack-fast-facts/

Quote from the CNN article:

They are of Chechen origin and legally immigrated to the U.S. at different times.

Quote from the NY Daily News:

Tamerlan and Dzokhar Tsarnaev immigrated to the United States legally. Tamerlan as an adult in 2006 and Dzhokhar as a child in 2002.

Link: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/boston-bombing-suspects-affect-tone-immigration-debate-article-1.1322471#ixzz2uZVXgyc1

[JustRalph]

Funny, nobody mentioning the FBI guy who infiltrated the Osama Bin Laden inner circle in 1993

[woodtoo]

Please tell.

[Clocker]

HCAP - I'm not a Cheney fan by any means, but how was his food stamp comment invalid? Look at food stamp spending under Obama (and the last yr of GWB)--way up.

Cheney was never known for his diplomacy. While the comment about food stamps was taken by some as heavy handed, the principle behind it is a valid description of Obama's intent. Just before the Pentagon decision was made public, Obama announced the end of the era of austerity in government spending and his desire to fund a lot of new spending programs in the next budget.

The two announcements, taken together, clearly spell out a simple conclusion: Obama is planning to cut military spending and increase spending on social programs. Scarier than any increase in food stamps is Obama's reiteration of his desire to provide "high quality preschool" to all children in the country.

[hcap]

Again, you haven't invalidated his point.

And please don't assume you know what I think - the fact of the matter is most fat at the DoD is the result of local congressmen/senators protecting the hometown bacon. On your point about bill padding, I absolutely support prosecuting any company that rips off the DoD.Of course I have invalidated Cheney. There is also deciding priorities in addition to cutting the fat. The military versus the hungry. is a presidential decision. Many agree with the duly elected democratic chief executive and CIC.

The recent increase in SNAP is overwhelmingly due to the recent recession

Appearing on Fox News’s “Hannity,” he said President Barack Obama “would rather spend the money on food stamps than he would on a strong military or support for our troops.” to our military,”

He went on to say that the president has always wanted to downsize the military, and that the cuts would be “absolutely devastating.”

http://www.takepart.com/article/2014/02/26/dick-cheney-food-stamps-pentagon-budget

Cheney assumes we still need sky high levels of military spending. Meanwhile well-established trends in military spending—postwar forces have been drawn down in similar measure since the Korean War The economy is recovering but people are still in need.

And Food stamps have just been cut. Obama recently signed a new version of the farm bill that cut SNAP spending by $8.7 billion. SNAP enrollments increased by 16.2 million people between 2001 and 2009. In the first five years of the Obama administration, SNAP enrollments have increased by 15 million people.

http://www.offthechartsblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11-20-13fa.png

http://www.trivisonno.com/wp-content/uploads/Food-Stamps-Yearly.jpg

....advocates certainly wouldn’t mind diverting cash from the military budget—which represented a full 20 percent of federal spending in 2011, compared with 13 percent for all safety net programs; they widely considered SNAP to be underfunded before last November’s budget reduction and the cuts in the new farm bill came along. But that windfall isn’t heading hungry Americans’ way. As for the Pentagon, $496 billion may look lean and mean in the highly militarized post-9/11 context of the Global War on Terror. But China, the world’s second-largest military spender, pumps just $166 billion into the war machine every year.

B TW, food stamps now average less than $1.40 per person per meal.

[Steve 'StatMan']

Scarier than any increase in food stamps is Obama's reiteration of his desire to provide "high quality preschool" to all children in the country.

If every child has government paid 'pre-school' and would be behind if they didn't participate, then they should change the name to just 'School'. Everybody starts School before Kindergarden, and everyone is expected to attend 14+ years of school by the time they reach 18. Guess they all the non 'disadvantaged' are doing that already.

[Tom]

V. Putin- "Barry, in my country, our citizens are allowed to make jokes about you and call you stupid too!"

GF - very nice! :lol: :lol: :lol:

[JustRalph]

Please tell.

Stick this in Google

"FBI osama 1993"

[Clocker]

Deny that for the last 5 years that Obama has kept us safe at home from foreign terrorists. If you can't deny it, stop and think before you post garbage.

What has Obama done to increase Homeland Security beyond what he inherited from Bush? How many terrorists have the TSA stopped on Obama's watch?

We have been safe in this country because under Obama, the terrorists have had much easier pickings in the Middle East. Like Benghazi.

[NJ Stinks]

What has Obama done to increase Homeland Security beyond what he inherited from Bush? How many terrorists have the TSA stopped on Obama's watch?

We have been safe in this country because under Obama, the terrorists have had much easier pickings in the Middle East. Like Benghazi.

You are more than qualified to be a figure skating judge in the next Olympics. ;)

[Clocker]

You are more than qualified to be a figure skating judge in the next Olympics. ;)

Not true. I can be bought, but I am nowhere near that cheap.

And I sure ain't gonna sell out for nothing on some anonymous forum.

[delayjf]

The military versus the hungry.

How many people starve to death in this country?
also, You can add the Ft Worth shootings to the list of terrorist attacks in the US on Obama's watch.

[Clocker]

You can add the Ft Worth shootings to the list of terrorist attacks in the US on Obama's watch.

If you mean Ft. Hood, the libs and the administration have swept that one under the rug by redefining the language. Because the shooting was done by a US citizen, it is not foreign. And because he worked on the base, it is not terrorism, it is workplace violence.

And because it was not terrorism, the victims are not eligible for any benefits associated with combat service, including the Purple Heart (http://townhall.com/columnists/larryprovost/2014/01/11/bury-their-purple-hearts-at-ft-hood-n1773555).

The Soldiers who died at the Ft. Hood Terrorist Attack were not awarded Purple Hearts for giving their lives in service to their country. The administration refuses to label the Ft. Hood Terrorist Attack as a terrorist attack even though the terrorist, Major Hasan, states his actions were very clearly acts of Islamic terrorism.

The award of the Purple Heart is not only a tangible symbol of physical sacrifice, but the award opens up a door of benefits such as priority of Department of Veteran’s Affairs Medical Care, burial at Arlington National Cemetery, and a host of other benefits. However, the administration labels the Ft. Hood Terrorist Attack as “workplace violence” that were acts of a disgruntled employee. It also says that labeling the Ft. Hood Terrorist Attack as a terrorist attack would not ensure a fair trial for the accused.

Even if this was not defined away as workplace violent, it would still not be terrorism, because the Dept. of Homeland Security has redefined acts of terror as man-created disasters. See, no problem. Control the language, you put an end to terrorism. Welcome to 1984: War is peace.

[rastajenk]

Unless they're perpetrated by a right-wingnut militia group. Then it's terrorism. Thank God, or Obama, either one, that we've been protected from that.

[hcap]

How many people starve to death in this country?
also, You can add the Ft Worth shootings to the list of terrorist attacks in the US on Obama's watch.I mentioned that the new Farm bill already cuts the SNAP program. And I doubt the old school military cold war oriented budget will be affected in terms of anti-terrorist intel or tactics. There still exists non military anti-terrorism agencies separated from the military budget.

[Saratoga_Mike]

1) I mentioned that the new Farm bill already cuts the SNAP program. And2) I doubt the old school military cold war oriented budget will be affected in terms of anti-terrorist intel or tactics. There still exists non military anti-terrorism agencies separated from the military budget.

1) Reduces the rate of growth (and removed the one-time bump-up from early in the recession), correct?

2) I do think our military resources should be redirected, as the threat has certainly changed over time. Let's just hope we aren't cutting to the bone when it comes to traditional capabilities - it appears that we're close.

[fast4522]

Me thinks Odrama is living up to that great democrat tradition last shared by Clinton. When Clinton left office the United States Navy's aircraft carrier's had a high percentage of elevators not working, you know the ones that lift the jets to the flight deck.

[JustRalph]

Sooner or later the "bad guys" will also have that technology as well.
A lone terrorist could create tremendous havoc and ruin.

Terrorist don't have the money etc to build their own laser weapons. But they could buy some? I guess .....

[Tom]

And because it was not terrorism, the victims are not eligible for any benefits associated with combat service, including the Purple Heart.

This was a no-brainer for Obama - why the hell would he care about his troops when his credibility was at stake.

He will burn in Hell for that move, count on it. I

[Clocker]

This was a no-brainer for Obama - why the hell would he care about his troops when his credibility was at stake.

He will burn in Hell for that move, count on it. I

That's why he kept calling the Benghazi attack a spontaneous demonstration against an anti-Muslim video. He had already declared his personal killing of Bin Laden and the decimation of Al Qaeda. So if it was an Al Qaeda attack, he would be shown to be incompetent.

Like that's hard to do. :rolleyes: