Just when I thought I couldn’t possibly vote for John McCain, Obama comes out with this spot:
He is actually campaigning in this video that he will not fund future development of next-generation weapons. I thought that Clinton gutted our military, but this Obama is plain out there. I just don’t understand his mentality and pandering to the far left, doesn’t he already know that he is the nominee? I thought these guys were supposed to move to the middle now. Instead, he is running on a campaign of weakening our national defense. Is Obama even going to try to go after Reagan Democrats or does he think all he needs is limousine liberals and college kids?
May 30th, 2008 at 10:14 am
I just noticed that McCain had posted about this video clear back in February. How in the world was this out there and no one has seen it?
May 30th, 2008 at 10:28 am
yep i was thinking maybe he is just stroking the far left of his base… just to keep them engage for him rather then simply against mccain.
May 30th, 2008 at 10:31 am
he will not fund future development of next-generation weaponsHe said he would slow spending on systems, not end it.
One of the problems with the debate over defense spending is that in the current political climate it is impossible to oppose “any” spending for fear of being attacked over it, that basically gives the Congress a blank check to fund systems that even the military doesn’t want (e.g. the Osprey for example).
A number of military leaders have stated that they’d much rather have the money that goes to advanced weapons systems instead go to things like housing, base renovation, and benefits for servicemembers).
You know, another guy once argued for a slowdown or elimination of spending on next-generation weapons programs, perhaps you recognize the name?
Congress has let me cancel a few programs, but you’ve squabbled and sometimes bickered and horse traded and ended up forcing me to spend money on weapons that don’t fill a vital need in these times of tight budgets and new requirements. “You’ve directed me to buy the V-22, a program I don’t need. You’ve directed me to buy more M-1s, F-14s and F-16s… Congress has directed me to spend money on all kinds of things that are not related to defense, but mostly related to politics back home in the district.”
Sec. of Defense Dick Cheney, 1992
May 30th, 2008 at 10:52 am
video is not working for me. says it’s no longer available.
bryan, who are you kidding?! you were never going to vote for obama, anyway.
May 30th, 2008 at 10:58 am
Actually, that’s not true, I was/still am thinking of voting for Obama simply as a protest vote against McCain. I’m in a grouchy mood these days and the GOP has pissed me off to no end. I figure if they really get their asses handed to them this fall, they’ll go back and reevaluate what and who they are. Never confuse me for a party partisan, I am a Conservative first and foremost, party be damned it they abandon those convictions.
May 30th, 2008 at 10:59 am
Anyone else having problems with the video, seems to be working fine for me.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:00 am
I got it to work now.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:05 am
I have to say, a world without nuclear weapons sounds impossible to me. And the reason is obvious: Who wants to be the first to give them up? How can we trust that others aren’t hiding weapons? And don’t we want to have the capability to wipe lots of people out at once, if it should be necessary for some reason?
So, Obama’s position on nukes is as quixotic as Bush’s position on “spreading democracy.”
On the other hand, what’s wrong with streamlining military spending? It does seem like there’s a lot of waste going on in developing high tech weaponry despite the fact that no other country in the world comes close to our arsenal or tech spending; meanwhile, soldiers are being electrocuted in their showers, living in squalor, and veterans are being treated like second-class citizens. Not to mention a crumbling infrastructure here at home and an economy that has been a mess for nearly a decade, with no signs of improving.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:13 am
Psynoir;
“an economy that has been a mess for nearly a decade, with no signs of improving.”
Bulls**t.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:26 am
Micky go check out a 20-year line graph for the S & P 500 and then tell me the economy hasn’t been a mess. It hasn’t been this bad since the ’60’s. As for it improving, Alan Greenspan and Warren Buffett have both forecast a long, deep recession. They are on opposite sides politically and are not exactly economic lightweights. But I guess you’re probably an expert, given that you own a restaurant and annoy people online for a living.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:32 am
sorry, i meant the ’30’s.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:35 am
You annoy people for free.
And you dont have to be an expert to see that the economy has taken a dive only as recently as 6 months ago.
The last 20 years ?
God your lost.
First you say the last ten years when we all know damn well tha Bushs tax incentives kept the markets and economy from crashing right after 911.
And then theres the 8 years previous to Bush. I will even give credit to the Clinton administration for balancing our budget and bringing in a surplus.
Although its easy to do when your depleting the miltary and not spending a dime to go after our enemies.
I may not be a finacial expert , but I sure do know that yer talkin outta yer a$$
May 30th, 2008 at 11:41 am
Micky, i said going on a decade: check out the s & p price in 2000, now check it out now. You are the one who is lost. If you invested 10,000 10 years ago, you’d have 10,000, if you’re lucky. Banks have been better, on balance.
My father is a financial consultant, so I kinda think I know more than you on this one.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:48 am
Pysnoir.
“Micky, i said going on a decade: ”
And then you said;
“Micky go check out a 20-year line graph for the S & P 500 ”
Theres a huge difference between a decade (10 years) and 20 years.
The standard and poors is not reflective of everything please.
My father was an animal trainer and a theme park manager.
I know nothing about either profession.
May 30th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Oh Bob, you are trying to change the subject. Obama is talking about de-funding satellite weapons programs and land-based missle defense. That would be a spectacular change in strategy and wreckless unless you want our kids living under the threat of Chinese lasers and missles forever. In reality, these problems will reduce spending because they will end the new arms race.
He isn’t talking about your topic, or what Dick Cheney was discussing. Obama is proposing a sweeping surrender of the military power that has kept us safe for decades.
May 30th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
micky, i said look at the 20 years so that you could see how good things were going the 10 years prior to 2000. You really are picking nits, aren’t you? And my father and I are close and I’ve learned a lot about economics from him, so clearly we’ve had different experiences in that regard. You’re right the S&P isn’t everything, but they don’t call it a benchmark for nothing.
May 30th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Yes Micky, Bush proved what Ronald Reagan previously proved, you can generate economic activity by massively increasing spending, cutting taxes, and ballooning the federal debt.
Just do us a favor and don’t tell the kids what we did to their country, OK?
BTW, you might want to look at bit closer at the time line. The recession of 2001 occurred from March to November of 2001. The Bush tax cut was first proposed in 1999, while the economy was booming. Yet partisans push the myth that Bush responded to the recession. Even though the economy began to grow again after November of 2001, it continue to shed jobs until 3Q 2003.
Yet folks continue to push the myth that 9/11 sent us into a recession and Bush miraculously pulled us out.
May 30th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Then, on the seventh day, just as quickly as the ice had come in at 3 a.m. a week earlier, our captor sets us free. The engines are turned on and soon we are racing to make up time.Well then MCCAIN, are you leaving the country if wins, or will you put your family and yourself in danger by staying?
May 30th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
BTW, the missile defense program has been a real success! MIT scientists have suggested that the limited gains in that technology have been and will be easily matched by technological advances in the missiles the MDP is supposed to protect against. Prevention, intelligence gathering, and stifling arms races seems a much better strategy (and along the lines of what Obama is suggesting), although I do worry whether it’s possible to reverse course completely. But perhaps we could reach a healthy plateau. (There have been many improvements since the cold war in this regard.)
May 30th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Bob, last I checked Bush wasnt in charge of anything in 99.
Here Bob, real numbers, real facts. Not some crap you pulled ouuta yer rump.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/TaxReliefActUpdate_Feb02wp.pdf
There are no “myths”. 911 did not send us in the direction of a recession ? You’re high.
The Bush tax proposal in 99 was just that, a “proposal”, in 2001 it was enacted and took effect in Nov 2001.
Yea, makes sense that the relief would take a couple months to have its effect.
So whats yer point ?
May 30th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
We were already well on our way to recession when 9/11 happened. Ever heard of the “tech bubble?” 9/11 simply worsened and prolonged a piss-poor economic atmosphere, driven by the “irrational exuberance” of the 90’s.
May 30th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
You’re grasping at straws, man. Pick a new fight. You’re arguing against the opinions of Alan Greenspan and Warren Buffett, two of the most respected men in finance. Buh-bye!
May 30th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
Eh, I’ve lost all respect for Buffett, he’s bought into this taxation as fairness crap. I don’t know where it was written that just because you make more money there is some kind of justice served by taking more of your money and giving it to poor people.
As for our current economic forecast, I think both Greenspan/Buffet could be right, especially if we don’t start using nuclear power, drilling for our own oil and use cap and trade ponzi schemes to offset our “carbon footprint.” If Congress keeps ignoring our energy crisis, we sure as hell are going to be in a deep recession that we won’t get out of for a long time.
With that said, as much as the media keeps hoping for one, a recession seems far off.The GDP was just revised upwards, again. Once we get the housing market settled our economy will be just fine. The fundamentals of our economy are very solid, assuming we don’t start taxing business owners more then we do, redistributing wealth and let government spending remain out of control (thanks GOP).
May 30th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Show me !
Grasping at straws ?
Greenspa and Buffets carry only opnions.
I gave you the numbers.
But like most libs your gonna go by some emotional connection to your source instead of the facts.
You cant argue with the numbers.
But you can try.
Like I said, all you got is yap.
Again.
May 30th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Given all of Obama’s accomplishments in the Senate, would it be fair to call this the Obama Recession? but this isnt a thread about economics so you guys are off topic.
Back to national defense, does anyone have confidence that Obama would defend our interests if necessary? If so, what has he said or done that gives you that confidence? Be specific please.