SecDef Panetta's Commute

[Blackhawk]

Were you born yesterday? Are you aware of how many large corporate conferences take place in Vegas every single year? The city is practically built on the profits of such conferences. A conference in Vegas is not an unusual thing, as much as the anti-Obama forces wish it were.

Corporate conferences done so with private funds. This is a government fling using my tax money in a government bleeding in red ink, run by people who claim there is nothing to cut, who wag their fingers at us and tell us we need to tighten our belts, and who railed against people going to Vegas for shindigs. It is the hypocrisy of it, the attitude that they can wear Armani suits and yuck it up on our dime.

 

[HVYMETALDRVR]

Its a little obnoxious too when you consider all the cuts the military is undergoing right now... I recently had a TDY where they cut the training short by one day just so they didn't have to pay us our BAH... Or the cuts they want to make to Tri-Care... and on the same song and dance, they spent millions of dollars on the new Army Service Uniform (ASU) which was virtually not needed at all...

But its a mute point, this stuff never changes.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Corporate conferences done so with private funds. This is a government fling using my tax money in a government bleeding in red ink, run by people who claim there is nothing to cut, who wag their fingers at us and tell us we need to tighten our belts, and who railed against people going to Vegas for shindigs. It is the hypocrisy of it, the attitude that they can wear Armani suits and yuck it up on our dime.

It doesn't matter whether it's a private conference or a government conference: if a conference is going to be held, it's usually cheapest to do so in Vegas. Other locales are more expensive, and most aren't set up for large conferences. And I doubt any of them are wearing Armani suits. Armani doesn't look too good in the business environment.

 

[Blackhawk]

It doesn't matter whether it's a private conference or a government conference: if a conference is going to be held, it's usually cheapest to do so in Vegas. Other locales are more expensive, and most aren't set up for large conferences. And I doubt any of them are wearing Armani suits. Armani doesn't look too good in the business environment.

"One clip features a red carpet entrance into a conference room gathering, during which GSA officials discuss what designer clothes they are wearing. Acting GSA Administrator Jeff Neely, who ​

reportedly encouraged​

event organizers to make the conference "over the top," tells the camera he's donning all Armani, before urging people to "dispense with the notion that what's done in Vegas stays in Vegas." Later, a female employee with a self-described "talent for drinking margaritas" is handed a massive goblet filled with the beverage. Terlaje himself makes a cameo without his ukulele, during which he jokes that the board of directors should get a raise."​

Again, my issue is that the current President wagged his finger at us and lectured us about using private money in Vegas, then we turn around and see government employees having a conference in Vegas at our expense. And they are having this conference.... because...?​

​

And yes, it most certainly matters if it is private money verses public money. If someone wants to flush their own money down a toilet I really could care less. When people flush our money down a toilet, I get a little irritated.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Did you get a little irritated when $1 trillion of our money got flushed down the toilet on a silly war in Iraq? Do you get a little irritated when we spend more money on the military every single year than the rest of the world does combined?

Until the so-called conservatives start advocating a complete gutting of the defense budget, none of this whining has any credibility.

 

[HVYMETALDRVR]

Did you get a little irritated when $1 trillion of our money got flushed down the toilet on a silly war in Iraq? Do you get a little irritated when we spend more money on the military every single year than the rest of the world does combined?

Until the so-called conservatives start advocating a complete gutting of the defense budget, none of this whining has any credibility.

Well there's a little more to it than that... But yeah basically we are really good at blowing our money... Though its become obvious at this juncture that in a good economy or bad, Dem or Republican this is one thing that won't change...

 

[Blackhawk]

Did you get a little irritated when $1 trillion of our money got flushed down the toilet on a silly war in Iraq? Do you get a little irritated when we spend more money on the military every single year than the rest of the world does combined?

Until the so-called conservatives start advocating a complete gutting of the defense budget, none of this whining has any credibility.

"Section. 8.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
....

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"

You may disagree with spending on the military but it is an enumerated power of congress in the Constitutuion in order to provide for a common defense.
Most conservatives don't have an issue with some cuts in military spending- along with every other part of government. Economy is good? We have to spend on things and waste money. Economy bad? We have to spend on things and still can't cut the budget. Is a program doing poorly? Throw more money at it.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

You may disagree with spending on the military but it is an enumerated power of congress in the Constitutuion in order to provide for a common defense.

And the Commerce Clause is an enumerated power of Congress in the Constitution, as well, which allows Congress to delegate funding for things like Medicare, Social Security, Welfare, etc. But conservatives get pretty worked up about that. Spending is only bad for conservatives when it's on things that they don't like. When it's spending on killing people and blowing things up, they're all for it.

Most conservatives don't have an issue with some cuts in military spending- along with every other part of government.

That's the talking point, but it's not reality. Take a look at the latest budget proposal from that twit Paul Ryan. Draconian cuts for every sort of social safety net ever imagined, but no cuts to the bloated military budget. The actions do not back up the anti-deficit rhetoric.

 

[pullup]

That's the talking point, but it's not reality. Take a look at the latest budget proposal from that twit Paul Ryan. Draconian cuts for every sort of social safety net ever imagined, but no cuts to the bloated military budget. The actions do not back up the anti-deficit rhetoric.

I would like to see the Defense Budget gutted like a fish. It is so bloated and mis-managed that it's not even funny.

Step 1: End the "wars"

Step 2: Everything else

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Nice. I think you might be the very first conservative who I've ever heard admit that the defense budget needs huge cuts. Bravo, sir!

 

[Nark]

For all of you pinko liberals out there:
There is a lot more to the Defense budget than building bullets and bombs.

Please explain to my thick hawkish persona how the civilian crew of the Maersk Alabama would have benefited from more social spending?
In case you didn't know this, the DOD does many, many, many operations saving dumb-ass American citizens from harms way all over the world. I personally know of 2 such operations in Central Africa where we (as in Marines, not me personally) picked up a number of Granola eating hippies treading in land they shouldn't.
How much do you think it cost to evacuate Lebanese citizens during the war in 2006?
Or how much do you think it cost to evacuate Pakistani's from the earthquake ridden area in 2005?
I personally helped to set up a dental and medical clinic in the Philippines in 2006 as part of a US Military paid for operation.

Our Defense spending also has more "social" spending than you think, but it's not a good talking point in you coffee shops now is it?

I shook more Iraqi's hands than those I shot.

 

[jtrain609]

I shook more Iraqi's hands than those I shot.

Unfortunately Iraqi's did not give their fellow citizens the same courtesy.

See: power vacuum.

 

[MikeD]

They're indeed not mutually exclusive, in a matter of speaking. There are many ways cuts are needed and can be trimmed in the Defense budget, and they need to be done, yet at the same time not affecting or diminishing many of the capabilities we've worked hard to build and need to retain, lest we need them again and don't have them, as has happened time and again in our past.

When I talk areas of cutting, Im not necessarily talking specific forces like some of our Special Operations forces; I'd start with things like consolidating a military academy or two, or some of the social programs in the military itself.....things like Tops In Blue in the USAF, and other programs in both the DoD as well as specific services that if someone took a close look at, would see we likely don't need.

Insofar as "front line" items, one thing that needs to be revamped that wastes money is the entire acquisitions system for weapons systems, bloated and inefficient as it is, with its many outside influences and congressional nitpicking. Systems themselves that are fraught with cost overruns and/or don't operate to the standard they should. Etc, etc.

There are many ways that Defense needs to and can be cut; as well as many ways it can be improved, as well as many portions of it we need to insure we retain and continually improve upon. There's no one "talking point" answer, or even simple answers that can go into talking points, on either side of the table

 

[Ian_J]

as well as specific services that if someone took a close look at, would see we likely don't need.

Oh, pretty please be specific.

Oh wait... Do you mean services performed by the military or services OF the military? Because I thought you were about to piss off a bunch of Marines.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

For all of you pinko liberals out there:
There is a lot more to the Defense budget than building bullets and bombs.

Please explain to my thick hawkish persona how the civilian crew of the Maersk Alabama would have benefited from more social spending?
In case you didn't know this, the DOD does many, many, many operations saving dumb-ass American citizens from harms way all over the world. I personally know of 2 such operations in Central Africa where we (as in Marines, not me personally) picked up a number of Granola eating hippies treading in land they shouldn't.
How much do you think it cost to evacuate Lebanese citizens during the war in 2006?
Or how much do you think it cost to evacuate Pakistani's from the earthquake ridden area in 2005?
I personally helped to set up a dental and medical clinic in the Philippines in 2006 as part of a US Military paid for operation.

Our Defense spending also has more "social" spending than you think, but it's not a good talking point in you coffee shops now is it?

I shook more Iraqi's hands than those I shot.

That's all well and good, and I didn't say to completely get rid of the military. We should continue to be able to conduct such activities. What we don't need to be able to do is conduct uesless $1 trillion wars in the middle of a desert thousands of miles away.

 

[MikeD]

I would like to see the Defense Budget gutted like a fish. It is so bloated and mis-managed that it's not even funny.

Step 1: End the "wars"

Step 2: Everything else

Nice. I think you might be the very first conservative who I've ever heard admit that the defense budget needs huge cuts. Bravo, sir!

Nice to see the biartisanship.

But there's one big problem with ending the wars here: For all the taxpayer money being spent on the wars, too much money is being made by having the wars continue. Just take a look over here if you ever get the chance.....war is big business. Contractors of all types abound: logistics, services, security and yes.....even aviation contract companies. Companies, who alot of their business depends on war work over here. Im not saying these companies aren't providing a service, but the service is needed because of the war needs, and there's money to be made in doing so. So it pays to keep the war going. The amount of money we waste in this place called Afghan, is simply astounding.

Unfortunately, in my job, all I do is pick up the remains.....living and dead.....of those charged with keeping a war going that has no end in sight, and even fewer realistic objectives.

 

[Nark]

Oh, pretty please be specific.

Oh wait... Do you mean services performed by the military or services OF the military? Because I thought you were about to piss off a bunch of Marines.

MikeD, are we going to have to throw down?

 

[Cruise]

He didn't order the Colombian hookers?

Of course he did. The SS fallout was simply another fine job by the agency taking rounds for the President.

 

[derg]