http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KDO_yCYcuU
Posted on 10/05/2010 10:54:51 AM PDT by nmh
Yesterday afternoon, President Barack Obama told his Economic Recovery Advisory Board: "I realize that we are facing an untenable fiscal situation. What I won't do is cut back on investments like education." Meanwhile what our Commander in Chief is very willing to cut is defense. In Bob Woodard's new book Obama's War , the President is reported telling Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: "I am not spending a trillion dollars" on war costs. And he told Vice President Joe Biden exactly why: "I can't lose the whole Democratic Party."
Since 1960, federal spending on education has tripled while test scores have remained flat. Meanwhile, even after factoring the costs of Iraq and Afghanistan, our nation will only spend 4.9% of GDP on defense this year compared to a post-Word War II average of 6.5%. Education is arguably a local responsibility that should be controlled at the local level with as little federal interference as possible. And even if you think federal spending on education is necessary, it is not mentioned anywhere in the U.S. Constitution, and the Department of Education did not even exist until President Jimmy Carter invented it. But the phrase "provide for the common defense" is right there in the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution.
An explosion in domestic spending, particularly from entitlement programs--Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid--is the true source of our nation's "untenable fiscal situation," not defense. Furthermore, our nation's continued economic prosperity is entirely dependent on a peaceful world. With this in mind, American Enterprise Institute (AEI) President Arthur Brooks, the Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI) Director William Kristol, and The Heritage Foundation President Ed Feulner wrote in yesterday's Wall Street Journal:
...
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.heritage.org ...
But the Obama administration is simply not doing enough to ensure that our strength is preserved. We now have the smallest Navy we have ever had since 1916 and the oldest Air Force in recorded history. Heritage Foundation Research Fellow for National Security Studies Mackenzie Eaglen writes: "Between 2010 and 2015, total defense spending is set to fall from 4.9 percent to 3.6 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), even though the nation has assigned more missions to the military over the past two decades."
Cutting defense spending is not the answer to our economic woes. After years of presidents taking "peace dividends," by starving the Pentagon while drastically increasing spending in other areas, we are needlessly hollowing out our armed forces. When troops go to battle in the future, they will lack resources, and suffer unnecessary failures and our national security will be compromised. Like the looming Obama tax hikes, liberals would like to pin this problem on the Tea Parties, arguing that they are the ones arguing for spending cuts, which liberals say should include defense. For one, that presumes all Tea Partiers are alike, rather than a mix of conservatives and libertarians with differing views. But more importantly, it ignores that many in the conservative movement understand that a strong and modern defense system should not be sacrificed for the unhelpful pork and government largesse typical of recent Congresses. These Tea Partiers, which would include champions such as former Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK), Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), embrace President Reagan's motto of "peace through strength."
Sacrificing our nation's defenses at the expense of the entitlement state will neither lower our deficits nor protect our citizens. It appears to be the policy of this White House that Washington should no longer be a leader in the world, but instead should be content with managing America’s decline in a "post-American" world. This is not acceptable. Congress must better strengthen our nation by reforming entitlement spending while funding the people and platforms necessary for a balanced defense.
If you would like to get on their mailing list, go to this url,
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/10/05/morning-bell-peace-doesnt-keep-itself/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell
The upper right hand cornor has a place to sign up via e-mail.
Ever notice that Obama ROUTINELY violates our Constitution. His bold actions are making our right and COnstitution more and more irrelevant.
The upper right hand corner has a place to sign up via e-mail.
Ever notice that Obama ROUTINELY violates our Constitution. In fact it is so bad that if the Constitution forbids it, Obama DOES IT! His bold actions are making our right and Constitution more and more irrelevant.
He sounds more and more like he’s defeated and nearing desperation, like a kid who lied his way into a job that he’s beginning to realize he cannot handle.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KDO_yCYcuU
The Real issue here is the constitutional division of responsibility and authority.
The Federal Government was created by the people and their States to defend them from foreign threats Not to govern or dominate them domestically in the stead of their preexisting State and local governments.
Domestic matters are the domain of the State and Local government, that includes ALL education spending peroid.
The Federal governments exist to focus on defense and foreign policy matters.
If the Democrats don’t want to do Federal Stuff they shouldn’t run for Federal office. They should Stick to State and Local office where they can do all the social(socialist) engineering their State Constitution permits.
But while in Federal office they should be made to understand that their job is to provide for the defense of the United States against foreign threats Not to provide for education or any other matter of a domestic nature.
Simply put:
The Federal Government exist to provide for the Defense of the States against foreign threats that means military. If it doesn’t want to do that it shouldn’t continue to exist.
The States and local governments(Not Federal Government) exist to provide everything else domestic(As well as backup on foreign if invaded) which a government may legitimately do with the consent of the governed. It’s that simple.
Why not cut the education budget. I think a good case can be made that education in this nation would improve if we spent less money on it.
“Why not cut the education budget. I think a good case can be made that education in this nation would improve if we spent less money on it.”
So YOU equate more money with “better education?
LOL!
What we should do is roll out the OLD traditional text books abd give the kids a shot at KNOWING something and LEARNING.
We keep throwing money at “public schools” and kids do worse and worse and worse.
re-read my post. I said we should CUT their budget, further I implied that that the more money that has been spent on education it has gotten worse.
I think we agree with each other.
“re-read my post. I said we should CUT their budget, further I implied that that the more money that has been spent on education it has gotten worse.
I think we agree with each other.
“
Sorry about that. I need to slow down and read more carefully. I just get sick and tired of DUMB people that truly believe the more money you throw at education the better it will be. We both know that’s wrong.
Yes, we are on the same page.
Weary in New Jersy ...
“re-read my post. I said we should CUT their budget, further I implied that that the more money that has been spent on education it has gotten worse.
I think we agree with each other.
“
Sorry about that. I need to slow down and read more carefully. I just get sick and tired of DUMB people that truly believe the more money you throw at education the better it will be. We both know that’s wrong.
Yes, we are on the same page.
Weary in New Jersy ...
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.