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 1-5051-100101-150151-179 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]

To: behzinlea

“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.”

Yes, not one dollar less than the $600B+ a year they get now. How could the military possibly get by on less than that without jeopardizing our security. Why, if they had to scrape by on $500B, our entire way of life would collapse.


21 posted on 11/07/2010 2:28:41 PM PST by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jiminycricket000
So the consensus is absolutely no? Without the benefit of hearing what to cut? I suspect knee jerk here. Quite understandable, your list is the standard cuts threatened by liberals. Like the local mayor who wants a tax cut saying that police & fire will have to go, and that new playground will close too!

Why not consider pulling out of Europe? 65 years after the fall of Nazi Germany seems long enough. We still have troops in Japan too. Do we really need them there?

There may be good arguments to keep theses bases open, but assuming that planes ships and troop cuts are first on his list is premature.

22 posted on 11/07/2010 2:28:50 PM PST by kAcknor ("A pistol! Are you expecting trouble sir?" "No ma'am, were I expecting trouble I'd have a rifle.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: BiggieLittle

The fact is that our military defense has been subsidizing socialism in Western Europe and Israel for two generations. Let them dismantle some of their social welfare state too. If we’re going to have to pay for socialism in the world, I’d rather be paying for the social benefit of Americans than for Belgians or Germans.


23 posted on 11/07/2010 2:29:09 PM PST by Colonel Kangaroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio

Not so fast. If it’s a government program you can guarantee there is massive spending waste somewhere. I have a brother who works for a company that lives off military contracts. They readily admit in some departments it takes no more then a half hour a day to do their jobs. That and they are paid 60.00 an hour with unlimited overtime for a mid talent, non college degree positions. He and my sister in law rake in 120,000 a year each and the toughest part of their day is the job justification meetings.


24 posted on 11/07/2010 2:30:47 PM PST by liberty or death
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: preamble
I watched him on ABC (Arabic Broadcast Channel) with Christine and he said after the wars are over. This is being taken totally out of context. We are being manipulated and we must be aware. Glad you saw that too!
25 posted on 11/07/2010 2:31:59 PM PST by cameraeye (A happy kufir!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio

Cut everything that is unconstitutional out of the budget. Then come talk to me about the defense portion of that spending.

But when you start with defense, your motives are highly suspect as far as I’m concerned.


26 posted on 11/07/2010 2:33:21 PM PST by EternalVigilance (A republic, if you can keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio

You can CUT $30-60 BILLION out of the military budget without EVER touching a true military program.

Democrats have loaded the military bills up with that much Pork in the last 4 years.


27 posted on 11/07/2010 2:33:36 PM PST by tcrlaf (Obama White House=Tammany Hall on the National Mall)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; Arthur Wildfire! March; Berosus; bigheadfred; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; Delacon; ...
Thanks fabrizio.
28 posted on 11/07/2010 2:33:53 PM PST by SunkenCiv (The 2nd Amendment follows right behind the 1st because some people are hard of hearing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: conservativebuckeye

Paul is right in also looking at the military. My Army service doesn’t qualify me as an expert but I can tell you that mucho money is being wasted day in and day out. Starters, military seminars on diversity, Islamic relations, etc. Build the tanks, jets, and ships and cut out all the nonsense.


29 posted on 11/07/2010 2:34:35 PM PST by doosee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: preamble
I think he wants everything on the table.

Knowing the Paul family mindset, the first thing they want cut is support for Israel.

And I'm deadly serious about that.

30 posted on 11/07/2010 2:35:31 PM PST by EternalVigilance (A republic, if you can keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: earlJam
Military spending has gone up because of two wars. Shouldn’t the military be decreased as those wars wind down?

NO, wars cost things - equipment needs repair/replacement, troops need training to maintain readiness levels that let us kick tail like we have. Clinton cut our military to the muscle and bones, Bush was barely able to prosecute the war using our Guard and Reserves. Has the world suddenly become safer? There are realities and there are unrealities. Paul is treading dangerously into unreality. We cannot afford to cut our military spending.

31 posted on 11/07/2010 2:35:46 PM PST by Godzilla (3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio

20% across the board ACTUAL spending CUTS for ALL gov’t. If the Defense dept needs more they can explain why they need it just like all other revenue consumers. Limited gov’t means LIMITED gov’t. No one’s PORK is better than another’s. The US is broke. Everyone PAYS.


32 posted on 11/07/2010 2:38:11 PM PST by VRWC For Truth (Throw the bums out who vote yes on the bailout)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativebuckeye
There have to be ways to reduce spending without reducing the actual strength of our military.

It isn't just procurement either. If the public knew how much the military is spending on bogus environmental projects they'd be the ones up in arms.

33 posted on 11/07/2010 2:38:40 PM PST by Carry_Okie (The environment is too complex and too important to manage by central planning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio

Cutting the perks and salary of the politicians need to be on the table before any cutting of our military.

We need our military, we don’t need politician$ who make a career of instituting ‘control’ laws at our expense.


34 posted on 11/07/2010 2:38:51 PM PST by presently no screen name ("Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down.." Mark 7:13)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio
This is not a surprise - Rand Paul appeared on the radical left-wing anti-war radio show and pledged to align with the left to cut military spending. It became an issue during the primary and the Paul campaign did a 180 degree turn in its rhetoric, shifting to the right in favor of a "strong national defense", etc. Previously he supported closing Gitmo, which he also changed his position on after it became an issue in the primary. I, as well as others, who pointed this about Paul during the primary were called liars by his merry little band of followers right here on this forum. Now that he's comfortably elected, he can go back to being his real self. You can probably still find the anti-war radio interview to confirm these are in fact his views if you do a search for it. It used to be posted on YouTube - not sure if it is still there or not. He was also not really adverse to prosecuting Bush and Cheney other than to say it is time to "move on" in the same interview when asked.

Like you, I'm glad we kept the seat, and it is certainly better than Conway, which is why I didn't really engage in any further active criticism after Paul won the primary fair and square. He's spot on, like his father, when it comes to domestic welfare program spending, repealing the health care law and implementing other reforms (like breaking the barrier between state lines)...not so much on other things.

35 posted on 11/07/2010 2:39:46 PM PST by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio

cut the EPA, the NEA and repeal the EPA, cut the ATFE, cut the State Department, Cut NPR,Etc.

Leave the military alone.

Stay on the rails Rand!


36 posted on 11/07/2010 2:39:48 PM PST by Calamari (Pass enough laws and everyone is guilty of something.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name

What part of the US is BROKE do you not understand?


37 posted on 11/07/2010 2:40:23 PM PST by VRWC For Truth (Throw the bums out who vote yes on the bailout)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: cameraeye
To all

Military spending is not the problem!
It's entitlements, heck entitlements were out of control before Obama!
Now they are exponentially out of control.
In fact I would argue we need an increase in military spending. Our Navy is almost disastrously too small, and we are starting to border on losing our technological edge in air superiority. Now I agree that DOD spending is often misspent but that's a different problem.

This is one of the things that bother me about libertarians, they seem to be a fantasy driven in their ideology as any leftist.

38 posted on 11/07/2010 2:40:58 PM PST by Reily
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

True that - also need to see about innovating. Difficult when it comes to a monopolistic entity, but certainly something like military cannot be open to privatization and competition...that’s one thing that is certainly closed to such a reform.


39 posted on 11/07/2010 2:41:12 PM PST by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Reily

Military spending IS a POLITICAL spending PROBLEM. I say again, what part of the US is BROKE, do you NOT understand?


40 posted on 11/07/2010 2:43:05 PM PST by VRWC For Truth (Throw the bums out who vote yes on the bailout)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

I hadn’t thought of that but I think you are right. Besides, it is foolish to speak of “compromise” with the Dhimmicrats and believe that they will “compromise” on cuts to real wasteful spending and not to essential defense assets. “Compromise” means that the Dhimmicrats get what THEY want. And what they want is not good for the US, its security and its constitution.


41 posted on 11/07/2010 2:43:14 PM PST by fabrizio (Restore the Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio

Thank God a good chunk of the new freshman class in the House are military veterans, of THIS war.

And the House holds the purse strings, not the Senate.


42 posted on 11/07/2010 2:46:12 PM PST by EternalVigilance (A republic, if you can keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: fabrizio

As a veteran, I fully appreciate the need to have a strong military. Not only do we need a strong military, but the strongest. You cannot have a strong military without a strong economy. If it comes to a decision between nation building and America’s economic survival, I will take the latter. I supported Bush’s decision to liberate Iraq and the defeat of the Taliban in Afghanistan; however, it is time to bring the troops home and stop the money flow to Iraq. We are NEVER going to pacify Afghanistan. It is always going to be the wild west.


43 posted on 11/07/2010 2:46:21 PM PST by Nosterrex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RFEngineer
I'll reiterate: the armed forces have a legitimate and expressly constitutionally sanctioned role. They have performed that role DAMNED WELL. They've performed it so well, libertarian dopeheads and liberal dumbasses have freedom to bash them and tell them they receive TOO MUCH support.

The liberals' social programs are of another kind and quality of SUCK-ASS BAD altogether. They have not strengthened this country one damned bit. They have weakened it and undermined it. For Rand Paul to talk about military "wastefulness" and liberal social programs and Marxist wealth redistribution in the same breath shows he is appallingly stupid and uninformed, and that the good people of Kentucky may have made a mistake.

Senator-elect Rand Paul had better smarten up. His first steps out of the starting blocks looks like he's heading for a libertarian face-plant in the dirt.

44 posted on 11/07/2010 2:47:35 PM PST by behzinlea
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

In my opinion, hell NO.

Sorry, but shall we cut our military down as Clinton did and then spend years rebuilding it to get her back up to speed? If we have a threat, we need our military then. Not months or years later. We need several rotations of personnel, too, otherwise let’s go back to a draft. Maybe that’s the only way those of you who see little value to maintaining a strong, ready and capable military will come to understand the benefit. Too many in our most recent generations can’t comprehend a draft system. Maybe if pitifully-minded peacemakers were to actually serve with their minds, hearts, bodies and souls, our nation would come together as a united and proud America once again; where pledges were said, people didn’t speak during the National Anthem, flags displayed on homes were lit at night, our military could safely walk outside at night and not be murdered, and their votes could be protected.

Give me a break. How about ending the automatic pay raises for congresscritters first? Why not start there?


45 posted on 11/07/2010 2:48:10 PM PST by getmeouttaPalmBeachCounty_FL (****************************Stop Continental Drift**)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Everything needs to be looked at.


46 posted on 11/07/2010 2:48:44 PM PST by GlockThe Vote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

Wind down?...


47 posted on 11/07/2010 2:50:18 PM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GlockThe Vote
Everything needs to be looked at.

Starting with the defense budget, eh?

48 posted on 11/07/2010 2:50:45 PM PST by EternalVigilance (A republic, if you can keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: VRWC For Truth

Cut all unconstitutional agencies, departments and bureaucracy.

That’ll cut all spending by much more than 20%. Then worry about the military, which is one of the few things the fedgov is actually supposed to do.


49 posted on 11/07/2010 2:50:55 PM PST by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie
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.

Franzie, all you do is come here and call FReeper's stupid because they watch TV and don't fall in line with your childish demands that they heed your ridiculous posts.

Go spew your shit at the DUmp.

50 posted on 11/07/2010 2:51:26 PM PST by Las Vegas Ron (Moderates manipulate, extremists use violence, but the goal is the same.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-179 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