Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Cutting defense sounds attractive to many (including me)...
and me and most of the Defense Dept and the Generals too.
The only question is which line items of that budget are affected... and why.
If the R's wanted to have input on which line items the time to do something was last month
or last spring or last year for that matter.
They have consistently shown themselves unwilling to act responsibly...
rather choosing to hold out hope for some political change more to their taste.
Guess what? It isn't happening now either.
It is time for John and Eric and Mitch to pull up their big girl panties and get to work.
Maybe they'll even get to keep their jobs too.
Cutting defense sounds attractive to many (including me) until you realize that defense provides jobs for families as well. These are the people who make everything from bombs to rifles to helicopters to bandages. Just think of all the industries that share in keeping the armed forces going. In my own state, they were saying thousands would be laid off if we go over the "cliff". Across the whole country it might be hundreds of thousands who would be out of work. The secondary impacts of those job losses would mean even more losses. Cutting spending, any spending has strong economic repercussions. It is much easier never to spend in the first place than it is to cut.
What you just said is that the U.S. military is a big, liberal, non-productive U.S. jobs program, so we must keep spending on it. Aren't conservatives the ones fighting to save military spending? Buck McKeon (R) alone has made it his life's mission to ban all spending cuts.
Like it or not, we're all going to HAVE TO feel some pain to get back to a normal economy. Losing military jobs will have to be a part of it because we simply spend WAY too much on warfare. This chart is absolutely amazing:
I don't know why you'd ask if it is the end of Boehner. Unless there's been something in the news that i've missed, I haven't seen his position being in any danger. I haven't heard anybody saying they wanted to take over the speakership.
It’s not entirely clear whether Boehner will be the speaker of the House a month from today. The vote to elect the next speaker is on Jan. 3. To win, you need an absolute majority of the House, not a plurality. Even a hopeless conservative challenge that attracts only a handful of Republican votes could deny Boehner the speakership until a consensus candidate emerged. Tonight’s vote makes that challenge more likely.
It's entirely possible the nation will face Speaker Cantor on Jan. 3rd (so, the Mayans were off by a few weeks). All it would take to make Boehner's seat untenable would be 17 dissident Republicans - and more than that were ready to vote against Plan B.
It's entirely possible the nation will face Speaker Cantor on Jan. 3rd
(so, the Mayans were off by a few weeks).
That's (almost) funny.
I'd like to think that if the house members have enough sense to rid themselves of Boehner...
they'll have enough sense not to replace him with Boehner lite.
Who *else* (in what passes for R leadership) could be the winner?
What you just said is that the U.S. military is a big, liberal, non-productive U.S. jobs program, so we must keep spending on it. Aren't conservatives the ones fighting to save military spending? Buck McKeon (R) alone has made it his life's mission to ban all spending cuts.
Like it or not, we're all going to HAVE TO feel some pain to get back to a normal economy. Losing military jobs will have to be a part of it because we simply spend WAY too much on warfare. This chart is absolutely amazing:
I'm glad you posted this, because it's amazing how many people don't seem to get that:
1. When we're talking about government cutting spending, we're talking about CUTTING JOBS that are funded by the current level of government spending, and
2. Like you said, this opposition to cutting defense spending all because it will cut defense JOBS is the same thing as if liberals argued that we shouldn't cut any government spending because it will cut JOBS associated with the current level of government spending.
We are going to have to cut discretionary spending AND defense spending back to reasonable levels to get America's finances in order. But Republican opposition to the defense cuts means that when you hear them SAY that government needs to cut its reckless spending, they really ONLY mean the spending that Democrats favor. Any reckless unnecessary government spending that THEY favor- that spending should not be cut as far as they're concerned. So their talk about cutting government spending is really bogus, is insincere, is a "keep everything I want and cut everything the other guy wants" menatality.
As far as Boehner and the OP, I think he's a good leader, his problem is that his approach is a sensible get things done for the good of America approach, whereas a large part of his Republican caucus is a "we will only agree to doing things our way even if it means things don't get done for America, ie. we don't believe in compromise" caucus. Because of the reckless selfish petulant behavior of the right wing of his party, Boehner has probably the toughest job that any Speaker of the House has ever had. But maybe the new Congress in January will bode well for him- there will be more Democrats and fewer Tea Party Republicans than before, thus making approving in the House a compromise plan with the President and Senate less difficult than doing so with this Congress. I saw the news clip last night with the Republicans exiting their meeting and that Alan West of Florida looking all smug, and realized that's one smug obstructionist Tea Party fool who will be GONE when the new Congress starts in January.
I beleive once you get into Jr High school, you will start studing hitory and discover that the person you so strongly support is an anti-American communist who strives for the destruction of the USA.
He recently watched with glee, as his orders to kill four good Americans was played out while he watched on close circuit TV.
Now he is taking his pig wife on vacation while another good American sits in a Mexican jail. These are the kind of things that bring joy to obama's heart.
American body count are the only things that give that scum a stiffie...
Read a book, learn, do your part to save American from comrade obama...
I beleive once you get into Jr High school, you will start studing hitory and discover that the person you so strongly support is an anti-American communist who strives for the destruction of the USA.
He recently watched with glee, as his orders to kill four good Americans was played out while he watched on close circuit TV.
Now he is taking his pig wife on vacation while another good American sits in a Mexican jail. These are the kind of things that bring joy to obama's heart.
American body count are the only things that give that scum a stiffie...
Read a book, learn, do your part to save American from comrade obama...
For my part, I believe that no amount of reading or education will correct a certain sort of blind obsessive political paranoia.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
