Aptos Psychologist: Paul Ryan calls Obama’s bluff [military budget cuts]

Paul Ryan calls Obama’s bluff on cuts to the military.

Compare the blue military portion of federal budget with the green and red portions for entitlement costs.

The world is not a safer place. Yet, as though it were a safer place, Obama lowers the standards the military must meet. Akin to asking a marathon runner if he can run a 5 kilometer race the military dutifully yes they are prepared to run the race per Obama’s lower standards. They have no choice except to accept the standards of their Commander in Chief.

Obama claims fiscal responsibility as reason to slash military budget — which makes up only 1/5 of the budget. Entitlements – social security, medicare & medical – make up over 50% of the budget.

So, if you were looking at your family budget and want to rein in costs would you go for the ‘small fry’ or focus on the Big Expenses?

Maybe Obama figures he will be long gone and so what if the middle classes grandchildren are burdened with the BILLIONS that he has added to the deficit.

More info from the Heritage Foundation below:
_______________

James Carafano

March 30, 2012
Representative Paul Ryan (R–WI) generated a few headlines defending his defense budget.

When pressed about why he wanted to invest more in the military than the Pentagon brass asked for, Ryan had an answer that raised eyebrows: “We donâ€t think the generals are giving us their true advice,” Ryan said at the National Journal Live Budget Policy summit, adding, “I think thereâ€s a lot of budget smoke and mirrors in the Pentagonâ€s budget.”

Ryan has good reason to be skeptical—not of the integrity of senior military leaders but of the budget that they are duty-bound to defend.

Just two years ago, the Obama Administration signed off on a Quadrennial Defense Review that required a substantially larger and more capable military. Now they are producing anemic budgets where 75 percent of the cuts, by the Secretary of Defenseâ€s own admission, are reductions in military capability.

Has the world become dramatically safer in two years? Of course not. Obamaâ€s defense cuts are driven by his strategy of slashing support for the military to pretend he is being fiscally responsible. The reality is that defense is less than one-fifth the federal budget, but the President slapped it with one-half of his proposed cuts.

Why is the brass signing off on this? Well, thatâ€s their job. I know well how this works. I saw it first hand serving in the Pentagon. The Constitution establishes civilian supremacy over the military. The President is commander in chief. He defines strategic requirements, so the way he gets the military leaders to agree is simple: He just lowers the bar of expectations. He dumbs down the requirements.

So when Congress asks the brass, “Do you have enough?” They have no choice but to answer “yes.” It is like telling marathoner who has not had time to train that he only has to run a 5-K race. Sure, heâ€s ready—unless he actually has to run a marathon.

So we shouldnâ€t be surprised when the military rubber-stamps the Presidentâ€s budget. Nor should we be surprised when Congress questions them. That is the job of the Congress. The Constitution charges Congress with raising and maintaining the Armed Forces.

Ryan has just called the Presidentâ€s bluff. The generals and admirals are stuck in the middle.

If you donâ€t like what is going on in the Pentagon, blame the commander in chief, not the generals—after all, that is who they work for.
Posted in Protect America