Tea Partiers support cutting military budget?

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

As Defense Secretary Robert Gates takes on General Electric, Boeing, Lockheed Martin and other “powerful people” in seeking cuts to major weapons programs, he may get help from an unexpected ally — the tea party movement.


Key tea party players, on and off Capitol Hill, are expressing a willingness to put the Pentagon budget on the chopping block if it will help rein in federal spending and eliminate a projected trillion-dollar-plus budget deficit.


Although generally hawkish and conservative with a libertarian streak — “we’re for strong defense” is an oft-repeated mantra in the movement — tea party leaders and allies contacted by POLITICO said that both fairness and common sense dictate that the military budget be scrutinized for such cuts, a view that puts them in sync with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and some of the most liberal members of Congress.


“Everything is on the table,” insisted Mark Meckler, a national coordinator with the group Tea Party Patriots. “I have yet to hear anyone say, ‘We can’t touch defense spending,’ or any other issue. ... Any tea partier who says something else lacks integrity.”


Tea partiers say they are concerned about “waste, fraud and abuse” within all government programs. To them, anything that government touches is riddled with inefficiency and corruption.



Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/38182.html#ixzz0qDa1MNvX

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

I really do not understand the tea party. They don't argue for any values and instead just simply argue for less government, Lincoln was the first socialist, obama is a socialist, and george bush was really a leftist.

[useful idiot]

I really do not understand the tea party. They don't argue for any values and instead just simply argue for less government, Lincoln was the first socialist, obama is a socialist, and george bush was really a leftist.

You're right that you don't understand the Tea Party, everything else in this post is false.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

I really do not understand the tea party. They don't argue for any values and instead just simply argue for less government, Lincoln was the first socialist, obama is a socialist, and george bush was really a leftist.

You're right that you don't understand the Tea Party, everything else in this post is false.

obviously.

[useful idiot]

I really do not understand the tea party. They don't argue for any values and instead just simply argue for less government, Lincoln was the first socialist, obama is a socialist, and george bush was really a leftist.

You're right that you don't understand the Tea Party, everything else in this post is false.

obviously.

I re-read your post and totally didn't get it the first time. I think it was the strange transition from arguing for less government to the Lincoln was the first socialist thing. In any event, I've never heard them call Lincoln a socialist.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Teabaggers are more likely to call Lincoln a fascist.

[useful idiot]

Teabaggers are more likely to call Lincoln a fascist.

It would certainly be more accurate than calling him a socialist.

[paul718]

The "tea party" isn't an organized political movement.  Why are you trying to assign a platform to them?

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

The "tea party" isn't an organized political movement.  Why are you trying to assign a platform to them?

what makes you sure they are not an organized political movement?

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

The "tea party" isn't an organized political movement.  Why are you trying to assign a platform to them?

what makes you sure they are not an organized political movement?

Because there were actual Tea Partiers protesting the Tea Party convention?

It's more akin to a heterogeneous mob than a unified bloc.

[Free Palestine]

It would be the non-hypocritical/stupid thing to do.  I find it hilarious how these people who support "fiscal responsibility" also support hawkish foreign policy and/or foreign aid, which is really just another form of welfare.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

The military budget needs to be the first thing to be slashed.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

The military budget needs to be the first thing to be slashed.

why? so you can have your private contractors fill in the void of a defunded military?

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

The military budget needs to be the first thing to be slashed.

why? so you can have your private contractors fill in the void of a defunded military?

Because too much money is wasted on that costly government boondoggle.

[perdedor]

Good to hear. However, I'd bet that if you polled tea baggers asking who they blamed for the bloated military budget that the majority of them would blame Obama/Democrats and not Reagan/Bush I&II.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Good to hear. However, I'd bet that if you polled tea baggers asking who they blamed for the bloated military budget that the majority of them would blame Obama/Democrats and not Reagan/Bush I&II.

Why stop at Reagan? The country has never really demilitarized since the dark days of FDR.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

The military budget needs to be the first thing to be slashed.

why? so you can have your private contractors fill in the void of a defunded military?

Because too much money is wasted on that costly government boondoggle.

lol just look at the private prisons since 1997 and what happens when those share holders decided to jump ship!

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

The military budget needs to be the first thing to be slashed.

why? so you can have your private contractors fill in the void of a defunded military?

Because too much money is wasted on that costly government boondoggle.

lol just look at the private prisons since 1997 and what happens when those share holders decided to jump ship!

No, I'm not going to go look at private prisons right now.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Good to hear. However, I'd bet that if you polled tea baggers asking who they blamed for the bloated military budget that the majority of them would blame Obama/Democrats and not Reagan/Bush I&II.

Why stop at Reagan? The country has never really demilitarized since the dark days of FDR.

Not so.Truman did attempt to demilitarize after World War II.

For instance, as of 24 June 1948 (start of the Berlin Blockade) the U.S. Navy had just six carriers in commission, the three Midway-class carriers, and three of the Essex-class carriers (Boxer, Leyte, and Kearsarge).  Only one battleship was in commission (Missouri).  Seven capital ships in all, making for a smaller Navy than had been seen since before World War I.

Granted, the Navy suffered the most of the services under the draw down that occurred between World War II and the Korean War, but all of the military was heavily pruned.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Good to hear. However, I'd bet that if you polled tea baggers asking who they blamed for the bloated military budget that the majority of them would blame Obama/Democrats and not Reagan/Bush I&II.

Why stop at Reagan? The country has never really demilitarized since the dark days of FDR.

Not so.Truman did attempt to demilitarize after World War II.

For instance, as of 24 June 1948 (start of the Berlin Blockade) the U.S. Navy had just six carriers in commission, the three Midway-class carriers, and three of the Essex-class carriers (Boxer, Leyte, and Kearsarge).  Only one battleship was in commission (Missouri).  Seven capital ships in all, making for a smaller Navy than had been seen since before World War I.

Granted, the Navy suffered the most of the services under the draw down that occurred between World War II and the Korean War, but all of the military was heavily pruned.

Truman didn't do anything to dismantle the global military empire left over from World War II, and in fact got us geared up for the first of a long series of undeclared wars, Korea. Of course military spending fell after the end of World War II, but we never returned to a true pre-war peacetime economy.

Eisenhower did make an attempt to hold down military expenditures, however milquetoast his efforts may have been.

[Derek]

No we can never afford to cut our military budget. Not after 9/11.

[SvenssonRS]

No we can never afford to cut our military budget. Not after 9/11.

So we should just live in eternal fear of another attack, wasting needless amounts of money on a military that we shouldn't have even built up for Iraq in the first place?

Derek, GTFO.

[Derek]

Cutting the military budget is a September 10th fad.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Cutting the military budget is a September 10th fad.

The movement to cut the military budget is growing rapidly.

The military budget needs to be cut by >90%.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The military can't even account for trillions of dollars.

http://articles.sfgate.com/2003-05-18/news/17491492_1_pentagon-gao-financial-accounting