The lies of the treasonous Slate magazine

The treasonous Slate magazine, by writing that “Another option is cutting discretionary, or nonentitlement, spending, which made up 35 percent of the 2010 budget. The Obama administration recently called for federal agencies to cut their budgets by 5 percent. It’s a drop in the ocean of overall spending—but the ocean is made of drops. If there’s going to be significant discretionary spending cut, it’s going to be on the military side. Military dollars are sacrosanct in Washington. But there is fat to be trimmed: A panel convened by Rep. Barney Frank recently recommended nearly $1 trillion in defense cuts.”
claimed that 1) If there is going to be a significant discretionary spending reduction, it’s going to be on the military side of the discretionary budget, i.e. if there will be a significant DSR, it will be a reduction of military spending; 2) it should be; 3) military spending is sacrosanct for Washington; 4) there is $1 trillion of fat to be trimmed at the DOD; 5) Frank’s recommended defense cuts are right.
All of these claims are false and treasonous.
Defense spending accounts for merely 37.5% of the FY2010 discretionary budget ($1421 bn). Total military spending accounts for a minority of the discretionary budget (46%). The majority of the discretionary budget is civilian spending. No significant discretionary spending reductions can be made by cutting military spending, because it accounts for only a minority of the discretionary budget. No significant savings can be made by cutting military spending.
There shouldn’t be and mustn’t be any defense spending cut.

Military dollars should be sacrosanct for Washington, but they aren’t. If they were, the federal government and the Congress would’ve never reduced defense spending.

There is very little fat to be trimmed at the DOD – only unneeded bases and unneeded bureaucrats. Only a few billion dollars per year. There is no $1 trillion waste (or any kind of fat even similar to that sum) to be trimmed at the DOD. Cutting defense spending by $1 trillion would mean abolishing the entire DOD budget and the entire US military for 2 fiscal years. Moreover, any defense spending reductions are treasonous and wrong, and must not be made.

Barney Frank and his panel of pacifists have falsified their report, because they are anti-military liberals. They are pacifists who believe that any kind of defense spending and defense program is bad. They want to weaken and ultimately eliminate the US military entirely and that’s why they proposed their $1 trillion defense spending cut.

They don’t want to balance the budget. They’re not concerned about budget deficits. They don’t want to save taxpayers money – they want that money to be reinvested in wasteful domestic programs such as welfare programs, the porkulus and the TARP program.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s