Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sen.-elect Paul: GOP must consider military cuts
The Daily Caller/AP ^

Posted on 11/07/2010 2:06:31 PM PST by fabrizio

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican Sen.-elect Rand Paul says GOP lawmakers must be open to cutting military spending as Congress tries to reduce government spending.

The tea party favorite from Kentucky says compromise with Democrats over where to cut spending must include the military as well as social programs. Paul says all government spending must be “on the table.”

Paul tells ABC’s “This Week” that he supports a constitutional amendment calling for a balanced budget.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: blameamericafirst; iranianbloodmoney; libertarian; liebertarian; military; paul; paulantimilitary; paulbots; paulestinians; paulistians; paultards; randpaul; ronpaul; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-179 next last
Now, I know full well that it's still better to have elected Paul rather than the alternative and I know that the Daily Caller is a RINO organ that hates the guts of the Tea Party and AP is a bunch of pro-terrorist SOBs who'd love to spread division and quarrels among conservatives BUT:

if this is true we have another libertarian who doesn't understand the proper role of government and the fallacy of cutting military expenditures, all the more at this time with the Afghan situation, to balance the budget. Secondly, amendment on balancing budget HOW? By cutting the armed forced down to size in the era of Bin Laden and Ahmadinejad? And one could "balance budgets" by increasing the fiscal pressure, and that is NOT the constitutional way to balance budgets.

I repeat: I could be wrong, and I would like to read the full text of Paul's statements, but I do hope he's not turning into his lunatic father. Compromise with the Dhimmicrats my @§§

1 posted on 11/07/2010 2:06:36 PM PST by fabrizio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Jim wrote,

Woo hoo!! Closing in on the finish line!! Less than $2,100 to go!!


Let's git er done!!


If you enjoy reading or posting to FR and haven't donated yet, please consider doing so today!

2 posted on 11/07/2010 2:08:19 PM PST by onyx (If you truly support Sarah Palin and want on her busy ping list, let me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio

Military spending has gone up because of two wars.

Shouldn’t the military be decreased as those wars wind down?


3 posted on 11/07/2010 2:12:27 PM PST by earlJam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio

He is right. Nation building is ridiculous.


4 posted on 11/07/2010 2:13:05 PM PST by screaminsunshine (the way to win this game is not to play)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio

Considering we are in two wars now that are fairly pointless because we have an Islamic POTUS and Saudi mole plus open borders.

We are broke and there appears to be no strategy or plan except our troops cannot shoot back, bomb, use artilleryy etc.

I get the impression that FR is filled with people who work for defense companies sometimes with that union scum on the factory floor at UTX, Raytheon, Lockheed, Martin Marietta, Boeing, etc. Eff those union goons.


5 posted on 11/07/2010 2:13:19 PM PST by Frantzie (Imam Ob*m* & Democrats support the VICTORY MOSQUE & TV supports Imam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio

I do not support cutting the actual constitutional parts of the budget. Military spending is not a huge part of the budget, social spending is. I would rather cut govt. employees of the myriad depts, but not defense, our military strength may be all that saves this nation if our economic strength is brought down by socialism.

In this I feel Paul is wrong, and we must not cave to the dems in any way.


6 posted on 11/07/2010 2:14:15 PM PST by Horusra (The Democrat party is now the National Socialist party (nationalize the banks, socialize healthcare))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio

NO Rand Paul you @$$! Look elsewhere for funds (givaway entitlements) that can be cut. The military has already been cut and corrupted enough with the O-Bozo PCism and socialist agenda.


7 posted on 11/07/2010 2:14:38 PM PST by SandRat (Duty, Honor, Country! What else needs said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio
I used to work in military manufacturing. The waste of money on unproductive paperwork is staggering. There is huge opportunity to get more for our money.
8 posted on 11/07/2010 2:15:43 PM PST by Carry_Okie (The environment is too complex and too important to manage by central planning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio

You don’t think that some of our military spending is pure pork/waste?

How about let’s stop building a missile shield for Europe - they can afford to pay for it themselves. Or perhaps we can stop trying to fight Columbia’s drug war, considering that most of it is ineffective anyway.


9 posted on 11/07/2010 2:16:59 PM PST by eclecticEel (Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness: 7/4/1776 - 3/21/2010)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio

Senator-elect Paul would be wise to remember, or to learn if his education was deficient on the point, that the armed services have express sanction in the Constitution and a vital role to play in keeping this nation’s citizens free and prosperous. For him to place the mission of the armed forces on the same level of legitimacy as liberal’s extra-constitutional social programs is not merely ignorant—it’s damned ludicrous.


10 posted on 11/07/2010 2:17:49 PM PST by behzinlea
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Horusra

Exactly, that’s precisely what I mean. And, when anyone uses the term “compromise” with the Dems after an historic wipeout you know there something REALLY wrong with them.


11 posted on 11/07/2010 2:19:18 PM PST by fabrizio (Restore the Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio

I notice that he doesn’t have the balls to say exactly what he would cut in the military. Jets? Warships? Nuclear weapons? Troop numbers? Nuclear Submarines? Pay and benefits for troops? Cut spending for disabled veterans? Research and development of weapons? Run from Afghanistan and leave it to the Taliban and al Quaida? Watch China’s military grow exponentially while we shrink our own? If he can say military cuts should be on the table, then he needs to have the balls to say what gets cut, or else he needs to shut up. The people who elected this man should stand up and tell him the first federal cut should be in HIS pay check and HIS benefits.


12 posted on 11/07/2010 2:19:46 PM PST by jiminycricket000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onyx
State government concerns should go first.

Department of Education

HHS

Ect.

These are state issues and concerns

Defense IS the proper role of central government and should be the last to be abolished however THAT can be cut too.

Retirement and health care is an individual concern and shouldn't be political at all.

That is why we have charity.

Federal government needs to recede back to their proper role as dictated by the Constitution.

13 posted on 11/07/2010 2:19:59 PM PST by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: behzinlea

No you guys are wrong.

He said that defense is Constitutional duty of federal govt.

I listened to the whole interview.

I think he wants everything on the table.


14 posted on 11/07/2010 2:22:20 PM PST by preamble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

Better save somthing for the war with China.


15 posted on 11/07/2010 2:22:56 PM PST by tired1 (Federalize the Fed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: behzinlea

If we cut our troop strength in Europe the Europeans might have to increase their defense spending. We wouldn’t want to overburden them. It’s in the Constitution that we must be the world’s cop. I just can’t find where.


16 posted on 11/07/2010 2:24:06 PM PST by BiggieLittle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio

The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.


17 posted on 11/07/2010 2:25:31 PM PST by dawn53
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio

Republicans, you were warned.


18 posted on 11/07/2010 2:25:31 PM PST by EternalVigilance (A republic, if you can keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

I’ve always assumed that. The military isn’t exempt from wasteful spending and inefficiency. There have to be ways to reduce spending without reducing the actual strength of our military.


19 posted on 11/07/2010 2:27:05 PM PST by conservativebuckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio
I know very little about Paul....

but I do know this...

military spending is just as much out of hand as other govt spending and the pensions and medical benefits alone are astronomical...they are paid too soon, and are too large....

having said that, defense is a nations' first priority above all else...

20 posted on 11/07/2010 2:28:19 PM PST by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-179 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson