in as much that if the cuts need to be done, do them.

The issue though is that Defense always seems to be used as deep pockets and they need to keep their promise that they will cut 100 billion without using any defense cuts to make that number. They can cut them and should cut them if it is able to be done without lowing our safety, the safety of the men, and our military prowess but it needs to be done above and beyond the 100 billion.

Really the point should be that our leaders in the republican party should be a little more careful about their promises. They need to carefully consider their words or they end up looking like liars and if they break this promise, the left will play it to the populace over and over and over…………..again.

Al Gore and Bill Clinton “re-invented government” and cut a lot from the budget. That sounds nice until it becomes known that 85% of the cuts were Department of Defense. The Army was cut from 20 to 10 divisions, Reagan’s 600 ship Navy was slashed to less than 300. Now we are involved in regional conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan and one of the greatest concerns is that our troops are rotating back to combat too early. It would seem that ten more Army Divisions would be helpful at this point. Cutting more from DOD doesn’t make sense to me.

What I would like to see is the beginning of cutting out unconstitutional programs such as Health and Human Services, Labor, Education, etc. and let the states handle those functions as outlined in Amendment X. This would save far more than the budget deficit and would rapidly shrink the debt.

THE PLAN:
House presents a two-year defense budget (etc) and gets it signed into law (this budget will, therefore, not expire until after Obama is voted out.) Then they do the HHS, labor, education, etc. budgets with severe cuts. If the senate and/or president reject it, there will be no budget for these programs and, therefore, according to the Constitution can not be funded. So the choice of the Democrats in the Senate and White House is half a loaf or none. Of course, I realize this would require courage on the part of House Republicans.

The problem is that regardless of what words were used, the public believes that defense spending was exempt. If the Republicans try to parse the meaning of the pledge thay are going to lose votes in the next election. People relly hate weasel words.

How about taking the $16B both from the rest of the budget AND defense. At $4 T for the year, $100 B is only one day’s funding. Surely we can get a 4th of July and Labor Day as well as Christmas!!

And civilian contractors.

Soldiers on extra duty can mow the lawns and trim the trees. Gives the NCOs something to give those soldiers to do.
And if there aren’t enough on extra duty, then they can spend a couple hours on area beautification like they used to do. It would certainly give the soldiers a break from the monotony of hip-pocket training.

streiff, I agree that the pledge was nonsense, but they made it, it’s one of the few things we have to hold them accountable, and it was built on the premise of underdelivering. Couple points: 1) I don’t have a problem with looking for waste in defense. That wasn’t my point. My point was that it was not what they promised. 2) You and I disagree on what the pledge says, but there really has been zero disagreement in DC policy circles that the $100 billion was a nonsecurity target (until the last day). 3) Is it really that hard to defend an additional $16 billion in cuts to get them all the way there and remove any doubt? House GOP hasnt even begun to negotiate with the Senate and the White House, so why wouldnt they want to establish the best negotiating position possible. 4) Even these security cuts are very likely not going to happen, because they are bound to be added back by an upcoming supplemental this year.

of people take Ron Paul seriously is the day the Republic ends. We can survive rule by knaves and charlatans. We can’t survive a cretin.

Department of Education must be shutdown. As a money saving measure officially but in reality because it has become an indoctrination tool (see: http://nation.foxnews.com/arabic/2011/02/08/mandatory-arabic-classes-coming-texas-schools )

So it HAS to be shutdown immediately, it is poisoning future generations of Americans.

Then teachers union has to be disbanded using section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. In fact, all unions have to, because legally what they do is a price fixation on the labor market, that could not and should not be legal.

Then public schools have to be cleansed from communist teachers.

Then there will be hope.

…and the “pail” is so “pale” you can’t even see it!

Government spending does not beget an increase in government revenues.

We should be Slashing government employees across the board at all levels of government. They Cost more than they give in taxes, by definition.

The question isn’t whether they provide a needed good or service, it’s whether we Need that good or service?

Civilian contractors in the DoD? The vast majority can be dropped Tomorrow and not affect the military adversely. In fact, those the military even notices the lack of will Help the military by disappearing.

Cooks and MPs will finally have something to do again stateside. Soldiers on extra duty will have something more useful to do than online classes. Conducting area beautification will improve physical fitness. Engineers can actually practice their trade again stateside…

The list goes on and on…

NPR, and Planned Parenthood, another half billion! and they would be the SWEETEST cuts of ALL!!

For our troops in Korea, perhaps?
As a vital portion of the supply line to Afghanistan, maybe?

There are better and easier ways to cut the DoD budget.