Comments on: McCain: Pay For Corporate Tax Cut With Defense Cuts

By: Parthenon

Parthenon — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 15:26:08 +0000

“a lethal strike force better suited to last century warfare”

This is an excellent point. Post-WWII asymmetric wars are far more common than good ol’ state-to-state ‘capture capitals and occupy territory wars.’ As we’ve seen in Vietnam and possibly Iraq (though it may be too early to tell), the guerrillas have the advantage.

By: Bill L.

Bill L. — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 05:34:16 +0000

Right, and the Pentagon didn’t cop recently to being completely unable to account for over 1 TRILLION in expenditures. Maybe we should consider diverting those funds to energy research, space exploration, medicine, infrastructure or any of a million other things that will make us more secure than maintaining a lethal strike force better suited to last century warfare or securing oil.

By: somejackass

somejackass — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 04:33:40 +0000

I fail to see how the US is even remotely in need of “military readiness”, Duros.

And as much as crony capitalism disgusts me, I’ll take it over machine guns and nukes any day.

By: Duros62

Duros62 — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 00:09:04 +0000

Clearly, military spending needs some sorely needed oversight. We could save a shit load of money if the Pentagon had to justify their needs and the Congress didn’t muck about, as noted.
(reminds me of Independence Day when the President comes into Area 51; “How do you get the money for this?”
“$3,000 hammers? $8,000 toilet seats?” Hello?!

But funding corporate tax cuts at the expense of military readiness? That’s just crazy.

By: Parthenon

Parthenon — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 23:49:29 +0000

Oliver,

I have been reading your blog for only a short while, but it surprises me that you’re not for a reduction in defense spending. The defense spending of the US accounts for almost half the world’s total (although still relatively low as a percentage of GDP). Does this not strike you as inappropriately high? (I’m not endorsing this particular attitude, only raising the issue to you.)

I will endorse, however, that to pay for a tax cut to the oil industry with defense cuts is a bad idea. This doesn’t seem to jive with McCain’s desired image of himself as a Teddy Roosevelt-style conservationist trust-buster Republican.

By: Niraj

Niraj — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 20:51:11 +0000

Defense spending, like all appropriations, are driven by Congress. The Defense Appropriation Bill is a favorite place for political pork of all shapes and sizes. This is where Congressman order expensive weapon systems that not even the military wants. If the Air Force wants to order 100 F-22s, for example, Congress will up it to 150, just to keep defense plants in their districts and constituents who work in them happy.

However you may want to see it, this is wasteful spending. McCain is being consistent here.

By: Duros62

Duros62 — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 20:27:16 +0000

But wait, what about Airbus?