Liberal blogger Jack Hunter, who is the Official Ron Paul Blogger and often writes anti-defense screeds at the Daily Caller, has written another anti-defense piece of garbage, blaming ONLY the US military for America’s fiscal woes and calling on the Congress to cut military spending to pay for Hurricane Irene. He has also endorsed the plan to cut defense spending by 850 bn bucks over a decade.
Here are the FACTS:
1) Hunter claims that “Conservatives used to explain away Bush’s irresponsible spending by saying, “Well, we are fighting two wars.” The implication was that reasonable people understand that wars cost money.” No, that’s not what conservatives were saying at the time. In fact, some conservatives, like me, OPPOSED Bush’s big government programs and big spending. What Bush’s apologists were saying at the time was that this spending was “needed” to, supposedly, repair America’s infrastructure, improve its education system, and finance Bush’s prescription drug entitlement. Regardless, the vast majority (ca. 90%) of Bush’s spending hike went to DOMESTIC SPENDING, not military spending. So Hunter is lying.
2) John Adams is LYING
. America’s current (FY2011) core defense budget is 528.9 bn USD, not 549 bn bucks, which means it’s over 20 bn dollars smaller than what he claims it is. (549 bn bucks was the REQUESTED sum, which was never authorized or appropriated.) Moreover, he’s deliberately lying about the hike of the defense budget over the last 10 FYs by NOT ADJUSTING the FY2001 budget (which was passed and signed into law in calendar year 2000) for inflation, which greatly distorts dollar figures and erodes the value of the dollar over time. $
297 bn in CY2000 dollars is $389.66 bn in CY2011 dollars. This means that defense spending has increased over the last 10 fiscal years by only $140 bn (over 10 fiscal years!), far less than what Adams claimed. The fact that Adams has used a distorted figure unadjusted for inflation discredits him by itself, because it shows that he’s willing to falsify figures and lie for political reasons.
3) The claim that the only people opposing the proposed $850 bn defense spending hike are supporters of DOD business-as-usual is a blatant lie. I, for one, don’t work at the DOD nor in the defense industry, and have never worked for either. My districts does not have any military bases or weapon factories. My only concern is to ensure that the US military willl be unquestionably the strongest military in the world, capable of defend America and its allies.
4) The claim that cutting defense spending by a whopping $850 bn will not harm the military is a blatant lie, as testified UNDER OATH by ALL FOUR service Vice Chiefs and Obama’s own nomineee for Chairman of the JCS, as well as stated by SECDEF Leon Panetta. It’s also debunked by common sense. $850 bn would be $85 bn per year, on average. To make such budget cuts, the DOD would have to either halve the military’s size or completely stop modernization and all RnD projects. This would be a disaster, as confirmed by SECDEF Leon Panetta and many other experts.
6) Hunter claims that: “Something doesn’t compute. We know that wars cost money, which was the conventional Republican reasoning behind why Bush spent so much of it.” But it wasn’t. That was not the reason Republicans gave at the time.
7) In case Hunter hasn’t noticed, the Libyan war is over, and the last American troops are scheduled to leave Iraq on December 31st.
8) Eric Cantor has never said that military spending will be or should be off the table. In fact, he has said the opposite, which is one of the reasons why I oppose him and am trying to recruit a primary challenger against him.
9) The fact is that military spending is NOT bankrupting America and is not “unsustainable”. It accounts for just 4.6% of America’s GDP and less than 19% of the total federal budget. The core defense budget – the 528.9 bn dollar sum – amounts to just 3.61% of GDP and less than 15% of the total federal budget.
10) Jack Hunter’s entire ridiculous screed is proof that he opposes ONLY military spending, and no other kind of spending, and that it’s the only kind of spending he wants to see cut. (Of course it’s not surprising to see the Official Ron Paul Blogger write something like this – his boss has also singled out MILITARY SPENDING ONLY for cuts.) On this website, Hunter NEVER calls for cuts to any kind of spending other than military spending, never protests against civilian spending, and never decries any civilian agency or its policies. He rails ONLY against military spending. It’s the ONLY kind of federal spending he has singled out for cuts. All of his screeds are, without any exceptions, rants against military spending and military spending ony. He never protests against anything else. This fact proves that Hunter is NOT a conservative and not even a libertarian, but rather an anti-defense liberal trying to drive a wedge between fiscal conservatives and defense conservatives and promoting fissures in the Republican coalition. Many of Ron Paul’s supporters are such people. Hunter’s conservative credentials are nonexistent and have always been.