TPMDC
« TPMDC Morning Roundup | Home | GOP Rep: Obama Cutting Pentagon Budget, Trying To Charm Enemies Instead »

The 'Defense Spending Cuts' Meme Grows

The soft-on-defense spending cuts meme is spreading today, both in the media and among Congressional Republicans--and now even a Blue Dog Democrat is picking it up.

Politico, again, reports that "Defense Secretary Robert Gates is steeling himself against blowback from Congress over his sweeping defense cuts, but he's also girding for a fight within the Pentagon's five walls."

But while there is some evidence that there is early opposition within the Pentagon to some specific cuts, Gates has, once again, proposed a budget whose bottom line is higher than last year's.

That's not stopping Republicans on the House Armed Services Committee from piling on, though.

The committee's ranking member, John McHugh, said, "[i]f implemented, this proposal will be tantamount to an $8 billion cut in defense spending," though he seems to be using a peculiar definition of "tantamount".

He is joined by Rep. J. Randy Forbes (R-VA), who tied the supposed cuts to the financial sector bailout and the stimulus. "Today's announcement of defense cuts is a reaction to the fiscal strain caused by trillions in bailout and stimulus spending, rather than a result of regular strategic review and overall threat analysis," Forbes said.

Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO) joined in the fun, arguing that "[w]hile President Obama is pushing for mind-boggling increases in domestic spending, the one place he wants to cut spending is defense"

"This makes no sense," Akin went on, "not only because the world is not becoming safer, but because these cuts will eliminate thousands of well-paying jobs across America."

And Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-CO) released a peculiar statement diffusing responsibility for the budget's authorship--"Secretary Gates, acting on behalf of the Obama administration, has recommended some serious changes to the FY2010 defense budget"--and then lambasting it: "I strongly urge the administration to reconsider these drastic defense spending cuts that will weaken our national security," Lamborn said.

These Republicans are joined by, so far, a lone Democrat--Dan Boren of Oklahoma, and also a member of the Armed Services Committee. Boren joined much of the Oklahoma delegation in criticizing the Gates proposal in a series of statements reprinted on the website of Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK).

One of those delegates is Rep. Mary Fallin (R-OK), a committee member, who says, "President Obama's military budget cuts reflect misplaced priorities and a sense of naïveté we can ill-afford. With the United States fighting two wars and threats growing from rogue nations like Iran and North Korea, now is not the time to pull the rug out from under our armed services."

Oklahoma stands to lose quite a bit if Gates gets his way--he has proposed the elimination of the so-called Future Combat Systems, a program which is produced in part in The Sooner State.


31 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

"This makes no sense," Akin went on, "not only because the world is not becoming safer, but because these cuts will eliminate thousands of well-paying jobs across America."

I'm always amused at how conservatives hate government jobs and describe them as "not real" jobs, unless of course, they are defense-related.

And actually, the world HAS become safer since the days when a full-scale nuclear war was a real and imminent threat.

user-pic

What I find most interesting about this criticism is the tacit admission that government spending does indeed produce jobs and help the economy.

user-pic

Also added within this comment by Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO) joined in the fun, arguing that "[w]hile President Obama is pushing for mind-boggling increases in domestic spending, the one place he wants to cut spending is defense"

"This makes no sense," Akin went on, "not only because the world is not becoming safer, but because these cuts will eliminate thousands of well-paying jobs across America."

Uh I thought the GOP memo/talking points was the agreed upon conclusion that former Pres. GWB had made America safer by going into Iraq and Afghanistan? If there mission was accomplished, then was it not with the obvious goal of making the middle east a safer place? Clearly these GOP congressmen do not agree with their own GOP conclusions. However one can attribute this to the usual clown-ery that makes up the two most distinct GOP motto's throughout the 90's-00's: We like to have our cake and eat it too, and secondly Do as I say and not as I do!

The hypocrisy is astounding but not particularly surprising and coupled with much of the MSM's inability to actual cover this nonsense there seems to be little hope of a change in the future.

Palin telling us that her daughter who is now a single un-wed mother, not that there is anything wrong with that (except for the entire morality fantasy that many in the GOP keep alive by talking fantasy while living in reality), is an advocate for abstinence is like saying that David Vitter is an advocate for faithful marriage.

user-pic

What that should tell you is that rhetoric aside, Republicans never had a problem with spending a lot of money, their complaints about spending too much were always in response to what it was spent on. No amount is too much for military spending, but anything is too much for social programs. It's always about not having the say on what and where the spending is for, not that money is being spent. As for the cuts in programs, the complaints are parochial. They are unhappy with cuts that will affect their districts, and are little concerned with how the misallocation affects the country as a whole.

user-pic

This pattern is becoming predictable and amusing to watch.

Republicans & media allies seize upon a misleading meme about some Obama initiative, and beat it like a dead horse.

When the time is right, Obama steps to the plate, explains his plan in clear, unambiguous language, sets the record straight, and leaves the Republicans wondering, yet again, why their public approval keeps going down the toilet.

user-pic

Slapping down this kind of more spending = cuts, black is white, up is downbrand of stupid is an Obama forte and, indeed, appears to be something of a hobby.

The only question is whether he does it tomorrow, next week, does it next week or whether waits until another another MSM tool puts on his "HUMILIATE ME!" sign and asks a question based upon the false MSM narrative at his next press conference.

user-pic

I think the GOP has some problems with decrying budget cuts, when a few weeks ago they were calling for more cuts.

I get the sense the public is aware of our fiscal situation, and the crunch our military is under.

Obama could easily frame this like Gates did:

Every dollar spent on wasteful, ineffective Cold War era weapons, is a dollar not spent to protect our troops in harms way. How is "future combat" and other boondoggles going to help the guy in Iraq who just needs an armored humvee???

user-pic

This is a fight Obama shouldn't have picked yet. The M-I-C is too big and entrenched to try and fight with so many other things on his plate right now.

user-pic

He doesn't have a choice: We have two wars, not enough troops, and no extra money.

Like an adult, he chose to prioritize and spend finite resources wisely. I wish their were more adults in town.

user-pic

yes, to preserve our security, we must make sure to spend as much as the next 3, no 4, no 5! countries combined. Only then will we know safety. Of course spending more than that would make us a nation of suckers, wouldn't it?

user-pic

Uh, sorry to correct you, but we spend more than the next 25 countries combined according to gates. 2-freaking-5 countries??????????? And our navy is larger than the next 13 nations COMBINED, ll of which are allies. WTF. The "enemy" is dressed in rags, armed with a 20 year old kalishnikov, and living in caves?? Why do we need to spend so much based on that enemy? They have no navy or radar. Give me an f'n break.

user-pic

pssst -- turn snark detector on....

i'm just sayin'

user-pic

Oops. Duh.

user-pic

i mean with an icon like that, you might perceive a little irony.

i'm just sayin'

user-pic

You would think. I need some more coffee.

user-pic

but to be fair, a lot of people don't realize how big our millitary is vis a vis everyone else combined. maybe you thought i was one of them. understandable -- those people drive me nuts.

user-pic

Actually, I think that we're still spending as much, or more, on the military as all other countries combined.

Feeling safer? Me neither.

user-pic

I don't think this has any legs, no matter what the media or the GOP or Democratic military pork recipients say or do. The whole, "he's defunding the troops", line is old, tired, and cliche. People don't buy it anymore. They know that there is fat to be trimmed in all areas, including defense. Even if these did result in a new reduction of defense spending - and they do not - I think people are willing, in times like these, to see that spending reduced a bit, especially given that we are supposedly winding things down in Iraq. The fact that these are being put forward by Bob Gates - a holdover from the Bush admin - and were endorsed pretty enthusiastically by John McCain makes the silly framing of the GOP and the media less dangerous for the administration.

Bottom line - the media and the GOP are still living in 2002. Actually, more like 1984.

user-pic

Wait, this is seriously an issue?

How fucking hard it is to put on a pitying look and ask the frothing Republican, very kindly: "Could you please explain how increasing the defense budget from 513 to 524Bn is a cut?"

I mean, were I a talking head, I would be hard-pressed to not use the word "idiot" and gratuitous references to pre-schoolers' math abilities in the question somewhere.

user-pic

Playing devils/nutters advocate, i believe the meme is that if you took Shrub's DOD budget from last year and added to that the most recent year's (I cant do fiscal date math) off-the-books supplemental spending for Iraqmire, then the combined DoD amount spent during Shrub's clusteronious tenure would be more than what Obama/Gates are setting the budget at for 2010. And so any figure from Obama that is not Bush's DOD 2009 budget plus supplemental is a cut. That, i believe is the.... "rationale".

However, the fact that the Iraqi's sale of oil will pay for Bush's OperationSpreadTheDemocracy would surely nullify the supplemental jujitsu. The Iraqi oil sales coupled with the "Peace Dividend" that John McCain spoke of, and the fact that Sarah Palin can keep an eye on the Ruskies from her house should, all together, save Merca big bucks.

user-pic

I admit that I don't pay much attention to traditional media but it appears to me that it's the GOP and Politico perpetuating the myth that Obama is cutting military spending. They have fully embraced wingerland.

Personally, I wish Obama would at least halve military spending but this budget calls for an increase.

user-pic

You must have missed Politico's Motto:

"Reach arounds for Republicans and Blue Dog Dems!"

user-pic

Where are the democrats on this, asleep at the wheel again I see. Dems stand and let the fire sweep across the nation and nary a word or protest. We need new leadership in congress and for the white house to be better prepared for bs like this. There should be a smack down on this kind of stuff as soon as it happens. Repugs dominate the airways thus the debate and dems wonder why with control of the white house and congress we are still having trouble getting things done. Some people never learn. I just want some leadership with backbone, who aren't afraid to stand up and tell the truth. A good swift kick in the crotch is what the gop needs from dems who are willing to finally put up a real fight. Otherwise obama is going to be gone in four years.

user-pic

Nothing new here. Republicans say it and MSM spews it. Why do research and investigating when the republicans can spoon feed you your scripts. We all know how honest and reliable the republicans are.

user-pic

Once again the coward spineless democrats don’t have Obama's back

user-pic

The M-I-C is in their States and districts as well.

user-pic

Well, we could always hope that this is another rope-a-dope by Obama's team.

Don't hit back hard right away, let them get in deep, then conduct a cool, coordinated strike against a ludicrously weak and feckless argument. Hit them to hard and fast and you may actually give credence to this foolish line of mis-reasoning.

I know he's cutting out older, obsolete systems, so can Gates propose getting rid of the GOP as well?

user-pic

Today's GOP:
Obama (and Gates, Bush's guy) want to gut the military -
by adjusting expenditures away from old cold-war systems to new needs, not by reducing the Pentagon's budget
They won't mention Gates

It was OK with these guys when Bush and Rumsfeld broke the military with stop-loss, wars with no exit strategy, insufficiently armored vehicles, and electrocuting showers built by KBR.

It was OK with the GOOPers when Cheney closed military bases in the 90s in the wake of the Soviet collapse because all of the bases and weapons programs were in Democrats' districts. Dick made sure of that.

The GOP has Fox, Limbaugh, O'Reilly and Hannity to catapult their propaganda.

user-pic

We should be framing this as Weapons Welfare. You can't really expect Dems with arms factories in their districts to do it; it's up to the rest of us.

user-pic

What we really need is some of the good guys to step up and talk non-smackdown to the Republicans.

What's wrong with Sanders or another comfortable liberal calmly pointing out to Republicans that there would be more of the money they say should be used for programs Gates says we don't need if the stimulus bill didn't include billions in help to business in the form of tax breaks, billions in help to home buyers taking out what were formerly "jumbo" mortgages, billions in education credits to families making over $120K, etc. We Democrats thought this was a bi-partisan thing to concede, but since no Republican representative voted for it, we'd entertain a bill to strip those items of what they must consider spending that isn't as important as the missile defense system. Would they give up the second home mortgage deduction for the Future Combat System? Which is more important?

user-pic

Slapping down this kind of more spending = cuts, black is white, up is downbrand of stupid is an Obama forte and, indeed, appears to be something of a hobby.

The only question is whether he does it tomorrow, next week, does it next week or whether waits until another another MSM tool puts on his "HUMILIATE ME!" sign and asks a question based upon the false MSM narrative at his next press conference.

m65 kamagra

Leave a comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

Josh
Marshall

Bio

Matt
Cooper

Bio

Eric
Kleefeld

Bio

Brian
Beutler

Bio

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address