Article

2008-10-28 Home Front: Politix

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by tu3031 2008-10-28 09:42|| || Front Page|| [3 views ] Top

#1 Does anyone really know where Mr. Obama's instincts lie?

Yes, as a matter of fact I believe I do.

Posted by Besoeker 2008-10-28 10:07|| 2008-10-28 10:07|| Front Page Top

#2 Will Obama Gut Defense?

Is water wet?

If they want to play accounting games, they can move military retiree pay and services from the DoD budget to the VA budget and magically reduce defense by an sizable amount.

Posted by Procopius2k 2008-10-28 10:24|| 2008-10-28 10:24|| Front Page Top

#3 I don't think it matters who is next president because either will have to seriously gut the federal budget. But that being said, there are far better and far worse ways of doing it.

There is no way we can continue to pay enormous salaries to military personnel. But with the economy in the crapper, ordinary pay will look mighty attractive.

R&D will take a major hit, because we have jumped technology for eight years now and are way ahead of the game. Drones are the one exception because they are a lot cheaper to build.

The Navy is going to get its butt kicked, and have to rely on old ships, because it wasted time and resources when it should have been building next gen. They will be lucky if the USS Ford and USS Bush are even completed.

But this is just defense. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are also going to take major hits.

Posted by Anonymoose 2008-10-28 10:40|| 2008-10-28 10:40|| Front Page Top

#4 This calls for the bear and newspaper picture.

Posted by Grunter 2008-10-28 10:47|| 2008-10-28 10:47|| Front Page Top

#5 Procurement holiday part II. Production lines kept idle, but open to provide jobs for all. Look for the real $$ cuts to come from O&M.

Bottom line? BOHICA

Posted by Minister of funny walks 2008-10-28 11:40|| 2008-10-28 11:40|| Front Page Top

#6 But this is just defense. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are also going to take major hits.

Somehow I can't imagine the Donks going for this. If anything they will seek to expand these problems in order to make more people beholden to them.

And how will they pay for it? Increase taxes of course. The taxes won't be directly on individuals but on businesses - which will tack it on the pricetag for goods and services. And sorry the numbers just don't add up and that $250K limit promised? Well it'll be closer to $50K....

Posted by CrazyFool 2008-10-28 11:44|| 2008-10-28 11:44|| Front Page Top

#7 (notso) CrazyFool "they will seek to expand these problems"

We will be in for be FDR's second "bill of rights". The stuff he never got passed. Joy.

Pray McCain wins. Pray hard.

Posted by Minister of funny walks 2008-10-28 12:10|| 2008-10-28 12:10|| Front Page Top

#8 Is a frog's a$$ water-tight?

Posted by Uncle Phester 2008-10-28 12:52|| 2008-10-28 12:52|| Front Page Top

#9 There is no way we can continue to pay enormous salaries to military personnel.

Enormous salaries???????????

Posted by lotp 2008-10-28 13:44|| 2008-10-28 13:44|| Front Page Top

#10 Afghanistan is "anti-war" Obama's favorite place to send our troops because it is most like VietNam--in that we can't really win there as easily (or at all) as we did in Iraw, and in that it will drain our resources and cut back on our volunteer force through higher casualties than in Iraq--he will first gut the military with a war there, then justify his disallowance for bringing military weaponry up, and justify vast military spending cuts as he encourages all to embrace the New World Order.

Obama's goal is to disempower America.

Posted by ex-lib 2008-10-28 13:48|| 2008-10-28 13:48|| Front Page Top

#11 Gotta pay for the bread and circuses somehow...

Posted by mojo">mojo 2008-10-28 13:51|| 2008-10-28 13:51|| Front Page Top

#12 The taxes won't be directly on individuals but on businesses - which will tack it on the pricetag for goods and services. I'm not going to comment on future taxes. I want to point out that businesses can jack their prices up as high as the moon, but if their customers are tapped out, vastly overextended in debt, and/or under- or unemployed, afraid for their jobs, many of those higher prices won't be paid. Bare necessities will still be purchased whatever their price, but beyond that markets will not be doing very well. Consumer confidence is now at the lowest ever recorded. Cutting government expenditures on defense & health care will most likely just make my scenario worse.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2008-10-28 14:01|| 2008-10-28 14:01|| Front Page Top

#13 More money for vital panem et circenses

Posted by Bright Pebbles 2008-10-28 14:02|| 2008-10-28 14:02|| Front Page Top

#14 Mojo, you read my mind.

Posted by Bright Pebbles 2008-10-28 14:03|| 2008-10-28 14:03|| Front Page Top

#15 There is no way we can continue to pay enormous salaries to military personnel. But with the economy in the crapper, ordinary pay will look mighty attractive... The Navy is going to get its butt kicked, and have to rely on old ships, because it wasted time and resources when it should have been building...

Does it hurt when you pull stuff out of your ass?

Posted by Pappy 2008-10-28 14:05|| 2008-10-28 14:05|| Front Page Top

#16 What enormous salary?????

whatever you are smoking i want some.

Posted by USN, Ret. 2008-10-28 14:22|| 2008-10-28 14:22|| Front Page Top

#17 What enormous salary :
the VAST bureaucracy of the Armed services and ALL the "Retiring on a Pension" officers.
THAT VAST SALARY!
In civilian life when you work for your salary and pension you typically create value of some sort for which you are compensated. There is the express idea that value is created through work.

Posted by Chease Platypus1825 2008-10-28 14:34|| 2008-10-28 14:34|| Front Page Top

#18 I think Cheesie boy is part of the "Licentia mihi, tamen non vobis," crowd.

Posted by DarthVader 2008-10-28 15:20|| 2008-10-28 15:20|| Front Page Top

#19 My guess is that Obama closes most forward bases and nearly every future arms research and development.

He might cut down the overall numbers of the Army and Airforce but will probably learn that the carriers/Marines are too useful for emergencies (Tsunami anyone?) and quick peacekeeping stuff.

I suspect a lot of foriegn military aid will also dry up and a lot of allies that bemoaned Bush will be unpleasantly surprised to find that the US is indeed isolationist by nature and a lot of Obama's cuts will not be seen as the bad thing they really are.

Posted by rjschwarz 2008-10-28 16:49|| 2008-10-28 16:49|| Front Page Top

#20 In civilian life when you work for your salary and pension you typically create value of some sort for which you are compensated.

Like cops and firemen? You usually don't need them till the situation arises. Of course, if you wait till then it's a little too late. Your military provides the same 'security' service that those local governments do in a very nasty Darwinist world where if you mess around, you don't get a second chance. Then again if you're a socialist you would have wanted the great Socialists of the 20th Century to win. They left such a lovely legacy - 100 million dead and lands of true poverty. At least the Chinese figured that it didn't work.

Posted by Procopius2k 2008-10-28 17:56|| 2008-10-28 17:56|| Front Page Top

#21 Cut, you mean like in fix

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2008-10-28 19:19|| 2008-10-28 19:19|| Front Page Top

#22 Tell ya what cheezewhiz, lets you take all the years I gave to my country in service, and add the value up: Soviet Union? Gone.

There, I win.

I don't even need to go into liberating Kuwait, or dozens of little actions that you never heard about but which secured liberty.

Now go away you ingrate.

Posted by OldSpook 2008-10-28 19:58|| 2008-10-28 19:58|| Front Page Top

#23 When it comes to defense, there are two Barack Obamas in this race. There is the candidate who insists, as he did last year in an article in Foreign Affairs, that "a strong military is, more than anything, necessary to sustain peace";...and seems to be as gung-ho for a surge in Afghanistan as he was opposed to the one in Iraq.

We've seen this schizoid behavior before. JFnKerry was for the war before he was against it. These guys (donks) will tell you anything, ANYTHING to get elected.

Posted by JohnQC 2008-10-28 20:00|| 2008-10-28 20:00|| Front Page Top

23:53 JosephMendiola
23:40 OldSpook
23:37 OldSpook
23:25 OldSpook
23:19 USN, Ret.
23:17 badanov
23:17 49 Pan
23:16 USN, Ret.
23:03 USN, Ret.
22:55 badanov
22:42 GK
22:40 Mike N.
22:38 Zhang Fei
22:31 tipper
22:30 mom
22:29 Mike N.
22:26 Mullah Richard
22:22 Sninenter B. Hayes9863
22:17 3dc
22:14 Mullah Richard
22:08 trailing wife
22:06 trailing wife
21:58 Eric Jablow
21:58 SteveS