A Moral (Case) Dilemma

As a number person, when I look at the stats on the Presidential Election, one month ago, the overriding sense is that we should have won. The numbers all point to it:

On the issues that most people considered to be the top issues Governor Romney won. On the qualities of Leadership, Values, and Vision Governor Romney won. On the Economy, Governor Romney won. Unfortunately, Governor Romney lost. But why? Was it because he was too Conservative? Not Conservative enough or didn’t provide a clear alternative? No.

We sold people on the numbers. We sold people on the fact that unemployment was up, that a free market was the only way to turn around the economy. That PEOPLE make a better self decisions than government does. And that the President Obama did not have a successful vision for the future. But we still lost, why?!

The answer is in the one quality that Romney lost: Cares About People Like Me. See we won the numbers arguments, but we lost the moral argument. The President won this argument with one simple statement: Fair Share. His argument was that the rich needed to “pay their fair share”. And what person could really argue? Sure the top 1% pays 40% of the nations bills, and the top 5% pays 75% of the bills. But try being the one to tell the unemployed single mother who has a hard time paying their bills that the executive that made a record profit shouldn’t pay a little bit more. The problem is not the numbers, it is the argument.

The argument that we keep using is “With new leadership, that woman can get a job”. But that doesn’t help her now. What helps her now is the welfare state mentality that the President propagates  It is the idea that government has the resources to keep me going and to provide for my family right now. The idea that the most successful should “Pay their fair share”. Our argument is great long term but when a person doesn’t know whether they can make it a month, let alone long term, we lose. We need to stop spouting numbers and facts and start connecting with people. So what is the argument?

Our argument needs be one word: opportunity. The Republican free market approach provides an opportunity for every person, no matter the income or the zip code, to receive a solid education.  The opportunity to raise your family in a safe environment. The opportunity for every person in America, no matter immigration status, to experience the American Dream.

The moral case (or lack thereof) is what lost us this election, but it is what can win us the future.

Let’s Talk 2016…

Alright folks, I know that we just closed out the 2012 campaign, but it is time to stop moping and focus on the next election. So here are my opening thoughts on some of the potential candidates for the Republican nomination:

• Jeb Bush- Jeb is the former Governor of the great state of Florida. One of his greatest strengths is also his greatest weakness. His last name. His donor list is huge and the Republican establishment loves him. He also focuses on the issues that matter, education and immigration. He is a charismatic, smart, bilingual person who genuinely loves and cares for the minority community. While I doubt he would match his brothers success among Hispanics at the polls, he will give us a much needed improvement in that area. His biggest weakness: his name, he is a Bush. While I think most Americans will have moved past Bush hatred by 2015/2016 it could hinder his campaign. Expect him to use just his first name in the campaign: “Jeb 2016″.
• Marco Rubio- Rubio is a young charismatic, well spoken, Conservative, Floridian. He is most likely to be the preferred choice of the Tea Party. He will start with a HUGE groundswell of grassroots support, and he has already established himself as a television superstar. Fox News loves him, Iowa likes him, and he will definitely carry the ‘Santorum voters’. The biggest question is whether he can garner enough of the establishment vote to win the primary. He also hasn’t been really tested in a general election (2010 was an easy race for him), expect that to change in 2016. If he comes through that strong then he could be the man to beat in 2016.
• Scott Walker- Walker is already a veteran of the brutality of the DNC/Unions. He faced them both and won in a VERY purple state. He remains a polarizing figure in politics but is considered a rock star among the GOP (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9F7YIF7Z0No and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTL16-ziaWE&feature=related and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfjQZ0VEYxE&feature=related). He can and will raise as much as anyone else. He can draw both establishment and the Tea Party. The problem is, he does nothing to help with the GOP’s problem among minorities.
• Chris Christie- Christie is a bulldog. He will be blunt and he will be brutal. His problems are 3 fold: 1) He is a moderate. The Tea Party respects him, but they won’t support him whatsoever. 2) Some Republicans won’t forget nor forgive his embrace of Obama 1 week before the election. 3) His weight. Not to be rude, but he doesn’t look the part, get on a treadmill man.
  With that being said, he is not a bad pick, but I just can’t see him winning the nomination.
• Paul Ryan- Paul is a household name, he is a star among Conservatives, and he is a great fundraiser. I just don’t think he wants to be President after this past election cycle (I think he wants to be Speaker of the House). And I think that if Walker runs, Ryan will automatically not run out of respect for him.
• Rand Paul- I respect Rand, I appreciate his support of Romney this past election cycle, but the fact is that I think he will have a hard time coming out of the shadow of his father. He will never be fully trusted by either the establishment or the Libertarian wing. He does have a few things going for him: He is young, smart, a Paul, and he is a national brand already.

There are going to be a lot of other potential candidates, the GOP bench is LONG, and we will discuss them at length in the weeks,  months, and years to come. It is going to be a lot of fun.

Is the Republican Party Broken?

Since Election Day, many people have posted articles, statuses and tweets, saying that the reason why Governor Romney lost was because he was not Conservative enough. They think that if a “Tea Party” candidate had won the GOP nomination then we would have won the election. And they think that in the coming years we must nominate more Conservative candidates and people who are not willing to “compromise”. They think that the Republican Party must transform itself into being more aligned with the Tea Party ideals in order to survive. They think that the Republican Party is Broken.

Friends, they could not be further from the truth. The truth is this: America is NOT a ‘right’ or ‘far right’ county; America is a ‘center right’ country that is closer to the ‘center’ than the ‘right’. American’s wants someone that represents the views of AMERICA, not the views of the extreme. Now, President Obama DOES represent the views of the ‘extreme left’, but he was able to convince America that Governor Romney represented the views of the ‘far right’. The Democratic Party spent weeks trying to convince the American public that Governor Romney condoned the idiotic statements made by Congressman Akin and Richard Murdock. Obama’s Campaign was very good at selling Governor Romney as an extremist and this was what ended up turning off voters in states like Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Iowa and Wisconsin. In those five states Governor Romney did not lose because of the Hispanic or black vote. He lost because the Democratic Party used the extremes of the Republican Party against Governor Romney.

Now, I applaud and stand with the Tea Party for holding elected candidates responsible for their actions; I applaud and stand with them in their enthusiasm for fiscal responsibility; however, I do not applaud them for their other statements and actions. It is not the Republican Party that needs changed. What must change is that the Tea Party was allowed to dictate our message for so long and force so many irrational comments during the GOP Primary. What must change is the idea that it is their way or the highway. What must change is the idea that compromise is such a dirty word. That’s what needs to change.

We need to listen to the needs and desires of the various minority communities, instead of allowing extremist dictate to them what we will do for them. We need to approach them the same way President Bush did in 2000 and 2004, with love, compassion and, most of all, respect.

What ever happened to “Compassionate Conservatism”? What ever happened to common sense?

If the GOP wants to survive then we will go back to practicing those two things. If we don’t, if we continue to allow the Tea Party to tell us what to do and what to say, we will never survive.

What a Year!

For Congress 2011 will most likely go down as one of their most partisan years. Some of the highlights(or lowlights) were the budget battle between Paul Ryan and the entire Democratic party, the Debt-Ceiling crisis, and the payroll tax credit fight. All of these were fiercely partisan and caused a great deal of angst between the two sides of the aisle, but the one thing that I am proud to see were that both sides of the elected aisle generally tried to retain a level of civility.

However, if we can safely say that the year was a partisan one in Congress, we can surely say that it was much worse for those outside Congress. Whether it was from the thousands of people who protested in Wisconsin, Ohio, and Michigan over bills relating to unions; to the Occupy movement that has burst forth, this was a year of protests. Unfortunately, unlike the members of Congress, the protest movement was not quite as civil. Whether it was hundreds of protesters chasing Sen Glenn Grothman around the WI State Capitol, the very real death threats that were received, to the Occupy movement calling for shooting of cops; the protest movement had an aura of anger, hatred, and violence. I do not believe that every person that protested would praise violence against others, in fact I would believe that the majority of them would condemn those actions. But that doesn’t leave the fact that a substantial part of that movement is fueled by hatred.

In a year that saw the tragic shooting of Cong. Giffords, I was hoping for a better chance at civility amongst the two sides of the political spectrum only to be sorely disappointed. Instead of unity and working together to help further the American way of life I saw divisiveness.

Maybe next year….

Maybe in a year when the Conservative side of the politcal spectrum(myself included) is going to throw the kitchen sink to ensure that Barack Obama is a one term President, maybe then will we see a level of civility. Maybe in what will most likely be a nasty recall governors race in Wisconsin will we see both sides coming together. Maybe in a year when more money is going to be spent on negative campaign ads than ever before, maybe then will we see that unity that only once in my life have I seen among Americans. Only once did I look around and see that we truly were all united. Only after 9/11. Maybe in this year, 11 years later, will we see that spirit again. Maybe, just maybe….

I understand that the likelihood of this happening is next to none, but so is the likelihood that you will go to the gym more often than last year, or any other New Years Resolutions you might have. I know mine might be a bit abnormal(anyone that knows me will say that I am abnormal to match it), but I want us to be able to put our differences aside not just today but everyday. So I am going to do my part. Tonight and all year I am going to pray that Cong. Giffords continues to recuperate, I will pray for Rep. Grigsby(D-Milwaukee) will recover from cancer, I will pray for Sen Reids family as his wife battles with cancer, I will pray for President Obama and that he will lead with wisdom, and I will continue to pray for the people of America. Will you join me this year in a call for civility? Why not this year!

Tim Tebow and his ‘Oppressive’ Home Arena

There are a lot of reasons why some football fans don’t like Tim Tebow. If you are from the SEC you have a perfect reason to not like him. He spent 4 years of his life tearing apart your defense. If you are in the AFC West he is doing that to you now. If you are a fan of the classic quarterback then his throwing motion is simple enough reason to not like him. If you are a fan of the Brady Quinn or the other quarterbacks on the Broncos roster then the fact that he is starting and your player is not is a reason.

But there is a sect of people that attack him for a completely other reason. They  attack him for his faith. They don’t like the fact that he is quite open about his faith and will take every chance to talk about his love of Christ. They attack him for kneeling down and praying during a football game. And now they are attacking him for not being a man slut. In the opinion of the people that are attacking him, the fact that he is a virgin is evidence enough that he is gay. But the sickening part is that it is not just anyone doing the attacking. It is the Executive Director of the gay-rights advocacy group “Catholics for Equality”. His name is Phil Attey, and he is a raging liberal.

Today on his Facebook he posted a link to a radio show host talking about why he believes Tim Tebow is hated. Phil posted this with the following comment: “WE DON’T HATE TIM TEBOW … WE PRAY FOR HIM! Too many good kids, who are gay, grow up in devoutly religious families, and “saving yourself for marriage” or “wanting to become a priest or nun” is an easy way to avoid coming out. But it’s a sad, frustrating and unnatural life, that often leads to your sexuality manifesting itself in harmful and dangerous ways. Tim, and all gay kids who grow up in oppressive arenas, need not only our prayers, but our support. I’M PROUD TO LOVE TIM TEBOW!”

I immediately took a great deal of offense to this statement, and posted this statement on my own Facebook: “I find it reprehensible that there are many people that think that just because Tim Tebow has chosen to save himself till marriage that he is a homosexual.” And from there it was on. But let me just pose these questions: since when is not having sex a sign that you are gay? I know thousands of people that have waited till marriage to have sex. I have also met hundreds that have chosen to wait till marriage to even kiss. So is this a sign that they are all gay? Phil went on to say that it is a clear sign that since Tim Tebow was afforded the opportunity to have sex with nearly any girl at the University of Florida but he refused to do so. So since Tim Tebow has the will power and self control he is gay?
Another area I took great offense to was when he claimed that “Tim, and all gay kids who grow up in oppressive arenas, need not only our prayers, but our support.” OPPRESSIVE??? It is called a church! It is called a Christian home, with loving parents and a Godly example. I am proud to have grown up in a home where my entire family went to church multiple times a week, in fact most of my teen years where spent at my church doing odd jobs and hanging out with my church friends. Does this mean that I grew up in an oppressive home? Who gives these people the gall to claim that anyone that lives in a manner that they disagree with was raised in an oppressive home? The utter lack of civility and the utter lack of respect is absolutely disgusting.

But lets just say that Tim Tebow is gay and is in the closet. Who Cares! Who gave Catholics for Equality the job to get him out of the closet? Who made them the ruler supreme of the Homosexual closet? Who gave them the duty to classify whether someone was raised in an oppressive home? The liberals love to lecture my side of the aisle on individual freedom and choice. How about they take heed of their own rants.

Why Newt?

Over the last couple of weeks, Newt Gingrich has surged to the top of the polls in nearly every state. So even for the most adamant of the Anti-Newt sector of the Republican Party we must ask ourselves ‘Why Newt?’. I have three reasons as to why all of us should listen to Newt Gingrich.

Newt will eventually say something we like.

• Newt has for many years claimed to be a member of the Rockefeller sect of the GOP. This is how he broke into the GOP and came to power. This was during the Nixon/Ford years of the GOP. Then Gingrich became a member of the Reagan sect of the GOP during the popular years of the 80′s-90′s. Then he became apart of the Teddy Roosevelt part of the GOP during the GWB Presidency. NOW he claims to be a Reagan Republican AND a Teddy Roosevelt sects of the GOP. This simply depends on where the he is talking. So whether you are with the Reagan part or the Teddy part he is part of you.
• Newt believes in the Al Gore philosophy of climate change. That is unless you want him to believe in NO climate change. Then he will say he never believed in Cap and Trade unless you wanted him to back in 2009.
• Newt LOVES a Federally Sanctioned Individual Mandate(1993, 2003, 2007,2008,2011). Unless he is trying to get your vote and you don’t like it, so he is against it(2011).

Newt will use  demagoguery just like the liberals do. NO really I mean EXACTLY like the liberals.

• On Paul Ryan- “I don’t think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering…I’m against Obamacare, which is imposing radical change, and I would be against a conservative imposing radical change.”
• Or how about on Mitt Romney’s career- ”I would just say that if Gov. Romney would like to give back all of the money he’s earned from bankrupting companies and laying off employees over his years at Bain, that I would be glad to listen to him.  I’ll bet you $10, not $10,000, that he won’t take the offer”(These are THE SAME arguments that Debbie Downer and the other idiots at the DNC use to attack Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney.)

Newt will be faithful

• Well maybe to himself
• Definitely not to his wife(as seen by his multiple marriages)
• Definitely not to his God(as seen by his multiple conversions)
• Definitely not to his beliefs(as seen by his constant flip-flops)
• BUT never fear. As a ‘historian’ he will be faithful to the other ‘K Streeters’ to get them access as the utmost DC ‘Insider’ out there.

If you want the epitome of the Washington Insider and MORE of the same that we have been getting then go with Newt. Newt will be brought to you by ‘whatever winds are blowing’ and will make you feel good about your vote. That is…until tomorrow.

Newt Who?

The GOP Presidential Primary has spent the last year attempting to find the ‘perfect candidate’ and the ‘Conservative alternative’ to Mitt Romney. So far the GOP ferris wheel has rested on Sarah Palin, Donald Trump, Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, Herman Cain, and now Newt Gingrich. Now most people don’t know who Newt Gingrich is. Newt is a Washington outsider, he is the conservatives conservative, the antithesis of all things Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi. He is one of a kind. Right? That’s what he would have us believe, he wants to make it look like he the champion of Conservative causes but is he really? Lets see:

Newt on Global Warming:

• “I think is that the evidence is sufficient that we should move towards the most effective possible steps to reduce carbon-loading of the atmosphere.” — Newt Gingrich - April 10, 2007
• And who can forget his lovely ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi6n_-wB154

Or

• “I actually don’t think global warming is occurring.” — Newt Gingrich - November 8, 2011

Newt on healthcare:

• “Personal responsibility extends to the purchase of health insurance. Citizens should not be able to cheat their neighbors by not buying insurance, particularly when they can afford it, and expect others to pay for their care when they need it.” — Newt Gingrich - June 2007

Or

• “I am against any effort to impose  federally mandated ( health insurance ) on anyone because it is fundamentally wrong and I believe unconstitutional.” — Newt Gingrich - May 16, 2011

Newt on cap and trade:

• “I think if you have mandatory carbon caps combined with a trading system, much like we did with sulfur, and if you have a tax-incentive program for investing in the solutions, that there’s a package there that’s very, very good. And frankly, it’s something I would strongly support.” — Newt Gingrich - February 2, 2007

Or

• “A carbon cap and trade system … would lead to corruption, political favoritism, and would have a huge impact on the economy.” — Newt Gingrich - April 21, 2008

Newt on Libya:

• “Exercise a no-fly zone this evening … Provide help to the rebels to replace [Qaddafi] … All we have to say is that we think that slaughtering your own citizens is unacceptable and that we’re intervening. And we don’t have to send troops. All we have to do is suppress his air force, which we could do in minutes.” — Newt Gingrich -March 7, 2011

Or

• “I would not have intervened. I think there were a lot of other ways to effect Qaddafi … I would not have used American and European forces.” — Newt Gingrich -March 23, 2011

Newt on prosecuting terrorists in criminal courts:

• “Well, I think if [members of the Bush administration] believe they have enough evidence to convict [Jose Padilla], going through the process of convicting him and holding him, I suspect, may be for the rest of his life without parole would not be — would hardly be seen as a loss. I think this administration is still wrestling with what are the real ground rules for dealing with people who are clearly outside of normal warfare? They’re not wearing a uniform. They’re not part of an army. They are openly threatening to kill thousands or even millions of people.” — Newt Gingrich – November 22, 2005

Or

• “Why would you take a Nigerian national who just tried to blow up a plane over Detroit … Why would you take that person, put them in the American criminal justice system, give them an attorney, read them their Miranda rights?” — Newt Gingrich - January 4, 2010

Newt on Immigration: I don’t see how the party that says it’s the party of the family is going to adopt an immigration policy which destroys families that have been here a quarter of a century, And I’m prepared to take the heat for saying let’s be humane in forcing the law without giving them citizenship, but by finding a way to create legality so they are not separated by their families.–Newt Gingrich- November 22, 2011

So you think that Newt can go up against Barack Obama? Here is what Barney Frank said during his press conference to announce that he was retiring from Congress about Newt, “I did not think I lived a good enough life to see Newt Gingrich as the Republican nominee. He would be the best thing to happen to Democrats since Barry Goldwater … It’s still unlikely, but I have hopes.”– Barney Frank- November 28,2011

Stand With Walker!

Tuesday, November 15th is almost upon us! For people in many states that means rifle season for deer. For the people of Wisconsin, this means another round of recalls. That’s right, it was just 3 months ago that the Unions spent $30 million and took home a 33% success rate. Now they want to spend much more and go after the big fish: Gov Scott Walker. Not very many people are unaware what has been happening in Wisconsin, but for a brief recap here it goes:

• Feb 11- Scott Walker presents AB act 10
• Feb 14- Students are told by their TA’s to go protest the bill
• Feb 15- Thousands of crying teachers skip work and come protest
• Feb 16- The first of thousands of out of state unions come protest
• Feb 17- Wisconsin Senate Dems go on vacation to Rockford IL
• Feb 18- Mar 9- The Union thugs occupy the Capitol and Capitol square causing hundreds of thousands in damage along with hundreds of death threats
• Late June- AB 10 goes into effect
• Early July- New Budget goes into affect
• Today-REFORMS ARE WORKING!

So what do the union thugs(Democratic Party of Wisconsin) think that they will accomplish with the recall effort? Well they think they can win, but no one else does. Even PPP which is a Democratic polling firm has stated that it will be VERY hard to defeat Walker. BUT that doesn’t mean they won’t try. The unions have near unlimited funds, they are looking at spending upwards of $50-$70 million on this recall effort. We need to fight back. Wisconsin today is Open for Business, and the reforms that have been put in place are working remarkably well. But if the thugs get their way then those reforms will be all for naught. I am proud to call Gov Scott Walker my friend and one of my heroes, and I am proud to support him in this recall effort.

I Stand With Walker! Do You?

Show you’re support by telling all of your Facebook friends and twitter followers to ‘Stand with Walker’. He is gonna need all of our help, he is gonna need our time contacting Wisconsin voters, he is gonna need our prayers, and yes he is gonna need our financial help. Give what you can. This would not just be a Wisconsin tragedy if he were to be defeated, this would be a National tragedy.

CNBC Debate: Winners and Losers

Tonight’s GOP debate on CNBC was the first debate in a long time when the candidates didn’t really attack each other. Normally that would lead this to be a tough debate to grade, but, as Politico said this morning, this is the start of the elimination round. So with that being said this one was relatively easy to grade. So without further ado here are the winners and losers, and what that means for each candidate.

Winners

Mitt Romney- Mitt Romney showed tonight that he was sticking to his guns on his plan. He reiterated his stance on the auto-bailouts, he took China to task, and on every chance he took aim at Obama. He showed true class in his response to the ‘gotchya’ question about the Cain allegations. Throughout the debate he showed that he is not running against the other GOPers, he is running against Obama. He showed leadership, and in doing so he once again showed why he is the frontrunner. I think that this will help some people who were on the fence about him to get off of it.

Newt Gingrich- Every debate shows just how smart Newt is! He excels in the debates, and he is an encyclopedia of information. This is why he wants to challenge Obama to a lot of debates. Newt should get a boost in the polls, but he needs to get that boost in Iowa. He is clearly going to take supporters from the Perry, Bachmann, and Cain campaigns. But is it enough to win? Can he get over his bashing of the Paul Ryan budget? Can he get out of Campaign debt?

Ron Paul- Ron Paul was in his element, he lives to debate fiscal policy. He might see a small bump in the polls, but I think that he is going to stay about where he is in the race and monetarily.

Status Quo

Herman Cain- (Pro’s)He did a good job in the debate, and looked good at answering the question about the allegations. He was enthusiastic with his responses, and he had one of the lines of the night in “Princess Nancy”. (Con’s) He walked back from the “Princess Nancy” line after the debate! Don’t do that! Stick to your guns and use that line to fundraise! I seriously think that Herman Cain believes that 999 will solve every problem in the US. It would not surprise me if he uses 999 during the foreign policy debates. Dear Mr. Cain, 999 is not the savior of the country!

Jon Huntsman- WHO?! Once again he looked like a Democrat onstage, he talked for way over the time limit, and the country still doesn’t know his name. Time to save your personal money and drop out of the race.

Losers

Michele Bachmann- She needed the debate of a lifetime, but she was irrelevant throughout the debate. Her 15 minutes of Presidential fame are over, now it is time for her to go run for her Congressional seat.

Rich Santorum- Like Bachmann he needed the best debate ever. Instead he reminded us that he was part of the Washington culture that got us into this mess, and that he lost in 2006 by 16 points! Mr. Santorum would make a great leader of a Socially-Conservative minded thinktank. But he will never be the President, and should save his family the money and head ache.

BIGGEST LOSER OF ALL TIME!

Rick Perry- Yesterday I tweeted that Rick Perry seemed very Presidential in his interview with ABC NEWS/Yahoo NEWS. Today he effectively ended his campaign. It was so bad that one of his top fundraises said “Rick Perry’s campaign is over, time to go back and lead Texas”. He will go down as one of the worst debaters in Presidential politics history. Rick Perry is a great man, but he ruined his only shot at being the GOP nominee this cycle.

With all this said I will say this: Tonight showed that in regards to the economy there is NO debate. Any of these candidates are MUCH better than Barack Obama!

Defense Cuts and My Upcoming War

Defense Cuts

In early August President Obama and the GOP made an agreement to increase the debt limit. Here’s the gist of the compromise:

• The agreement cut spending more than it increased the debt limit. In the first installment (“tranche”), $917 billion would be cut over 10 years in exchange for increasing the debt limit by $900 billion.
• The agreement established a Congressional Joint Select Committee that would produce debt reduction legislation by November 23, 2011, that would be immune from amendments or filibuster. The goal of the legislation is to cut at least $1.5 trillion over the coming 10 years and should be passed by December 23, 2011. The committee would have 12 members, 6 from each party.
• Projected revenue from the Joint Select Committee’s legislation must not exceed the revenue baseline produced by current law.^{[citation needed]}
• The agreement specified an incentive for Congress to act. If Congress fails to produce a deficit reduction bill with at least $1.2 trillion in cuts, then Congress can grant a $1.2 trillion increase in the debt ceiling. This would trigger across-the-board cuts (“sequestration”) of spending, equally split between defense and non-defense programs. The cuts would apply to mandatory and discretionary spending in the years 2013 to 2021 and be in an amount equal to the difference between $1.2 trillion and the amount of deficit reduction enacted from the joint committee. The sequestration mechanism is the same as the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. There are exemptions—across the board cuts would apply to Medicare, but not to Social Security, Medicaid, civil and military employee pay, or veterans.
• Congress must vote on a Balanced Budget Amendment between October 1, 2011, and the end of the year.
• The debt ceiling may be increased an additional $1.5 trillion if either one of the following two conditions are met:
  • A balanced budget amendment is sent to the states
  • The joint committee cuts spending by a greater amount than the requested debt ceiling increase

So if the ‘Super Committee’ as it is known is not able to reach an agreement what are we looking at?

$ 1.2 trillion in deficit savings split between Medicare and defense spending. Meaning $600 billion in cuts to the most important job of the United States government, Defense. Some people argue that the defense could handle having less money. They are wrong: Secretary Panetta said that by these cuts we would be “”Shooting ourselves in the head.” I, and most defense people, are not saying that the military shouldn’t tighten the belt, we are not saying we shouldn’t stream line our operations to save on overhead. But we are saying “Don’t chop us off at the knees”. Many people are arguing we should bring all of our troops home and that could save us billions of dollars. But what if we get attacked(9/11 anyone), and what if we need to deploy quickly. The American military(especially the Marine Corp) is an expeditionary force, meaning we mobilize quickly and we move in and kick ass. But if these cuts are done to the military we greatly weaken the capabilities of our military to do be that kind of a force.

My War

If the super-committee can not reach an agreement and that causes the defense cuts to take place, I am going to use every breath in me to hold those that are responsible accountable. Meaning that since the GOP finally was willing to compromise on revenue and put it on the table, that the Dems need to come up with something better. I am not a fan of the mindset that some have in the GOP that is “Cut everything but don’t touch taxes and defense”. I believe we should slow down the rate of spending on defense, but I think that pushing for a $600 billion cut is wrong. In fact I have gone so far as to say that it is borderline treasonous! So what is my war? If the Democrats(and any Republican) refuses to come to an agreement and causes the military funding to be cut in such a Draconian measure, I will use every ounce of energy and every available resource to get those members out of office. If you want to drastically underfund the United States Military then you have no right to be a member of Congress.