i thought cutting was the goal?

[Danzig]

aren't we supposed to be trying to lower spending?

the 2012 military budget was passed, 336-87. 649 billion for fiscal 2012, up 2.7% from '11.
included: 119 billion for wars in iraq and afganistan (thought we were done in iraq, how odd), funding for a c-17 cargo plane that the air force does NOT want.

and the oh-so important 320 million to fund those military bands...because when i think strength, and needed defense, i think of trombones and tubas.
a new destroyer, 32 f-35sm 32 v-tols, 48 unmanned drones, 28 super hornets, 35 ospreys, two satellites, tanks, etc, etc, etc.


yep, they're right on target in d.c.


oh..and the bill to slow the rate of growth by only 1.3% instead of the end result above, of course that failed.

[Riot]

Yesterday the House Speaker turned down $4 billion in cuts, wanting only $2 billion in cuts. Naw, cutting is not what it's about.

What was that plane that the military didn't want, that Congress literally kept forcing them to take year after year? They just got rid of it this past year?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Riot

Yesterday the House Speaker turned down $4 billion in cuts, wanting only $2 billion in cuts. Naw, cutting is not what it's about.

What was that plane that the military didn't want, that Congress literally kept forcing them to take year after year? They just got rid of it this past year?

the c-17 in the budget is the same plane that has been unwanted in other budgets. there may be others, but that one keeps showing up. no doubt in my mind the plane is made in an area where a long-time senator is from. the military may not want it, but it's wanted by the company who makes/sells them!

the c-130 was another unwanted...that is made in ga--former senator newt gingrich was a pusher of that one. so was nunn.

[Danzig]

http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/a...ON01/302159971


here's another, from a year ago...

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...ojects-remain/



nothing ever changes.

[Danzig]

what i put in the initial post was from an article in today's paper; here's a link to msnbc's take on it..

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43688283...ime-austerity/

House boosts military budget in time of austerity (poor choice of words, this is no example of an austere appropriations bill!)
Measure includes $119 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan


On a 336-87 vote Friday, the Republican-controlled House overwhelmingly backed a $649 billion defense spending bill that boosts the Defense Department budget by $17 billion. The strong bipartisan embrace of the measure came as White House and congressional negotiators face an Aug. 2 deadline on agreeing to trillions of dollars in federal spending cuts and raising the borrowing limit so the U.S. does not default on debt payments.

While House Republican leaders agreed to slash billions from the proposed budgets for other agencies, hitting food aid for low-income women, health research, energy efficiency and much more, the military budget is the only one that would see a double-digit increase in its account beginning Oct. 1.


what asinine bullsh!t. does anyone here know that we outspend china six times over? russia? that 43% of military spending in the world is by us? that probably will increase with this bill. absolutely ridiculous. and what has that spending gotten us?? we can't even win a fukking war in afganistan with all these billions-so what's the point??

[Riot]

"While House Republican leaders agreed to slash billions from the proposed budgets for other agencies, hitting food aid for low-income women, health research, energy efficiency and much more, the military budget is the only one that would see a double-digit increase in its account beginning Oct. 1. "

Yeah - because in the middle of a great stagnant recession recovery, slashing billions from those things keeping people alive is exactly what is needed. While keeping people working at Halliburton and the other defense contractors, including their lobbyists, is good. For campaign funding.

You do not slash budgets in a recession recovery. Money is never cheaper than now. So you borrow at those cheap rates and have another huge stimulus, targeting infrastructure repair (bridges have to be fixed, why not do it with cheap money rather than expensive, and hire the currently unemployed, too? Duh!) and green technology advances.

That Obama has allowed the Republicans to highjack and control a routine deficit ceiling raise (that these same Republicans did seven times under Bush without a peep) and make the public discussion instead about spending cuts is something that will literally kill this country and any growth for two decades to come.

We borrowed in the past, we have to pay for it. That has nothing at all to do with future spending. Zero. Zip. Nada.