Democratic Congressman Questions Obama’s Commitment To Our Security
Something to watch for for: Dems in Congress who, worried about cuts to defense programs in their states in the proposed restructuring of the Pentagon budget, cross over into questioning Obama’s commitment to national security.
We now have our first candidate: Blue Dog Dem Dan Boren of Oklahoma.
Oklahoma is home to a major defense contract that the restructuring puts on the chopping block. GOP Senator James Inhofe made a big splash yesterday by saying Obama is endangering our troops and “disarming America.”
Now Boren has added his voice to Inhofe’s chorus. “The administration’s announcement today of sweeping changes to key defense programs is a significant concern,” Boren said in a statement posted, tellingly, on Inhofe’s Web site. “Even in tough economic times, providing a strong national defense for the American people should remain a top priority of the federal government.”
Boren added that “it is important that we empower our military commanders by providing the resources they need” and called for the Obama administration to “keep these realities firmly in mind.”
The key is that Boren is treating it as an open question whether strong national defense is a “top priority” for Obama and whether he’s keeping the need to arm military commanders “firmly in mind.” The only other Dem to criticize the overhaul, Alaska Senator Mark Begich, stuck to substantive criticism and didn’t go this far.
The battle over the Pentagon restructuring promises to be a fascinating one, pitting Obama against some of the most entrenched interests D.C. has to offer.
The homepage of this blog is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
I’m sorry, but the phrase “endangering America” has lost just about all of it’s punch during the last 7 years that Republicans have been flinging it around like monkey poo. That type of language just doesn’t work any more. According the NYT pol, 61% of Americans trust Obama to make the right decisions on National Security.
It’s Oklahoma.
That’s all you really need to say.
It continues to amaze me that endangerment and national security seem to be the favorite words of those in congress who have defense contracts in their state. The military has been saying for years that they don’t need certain items but they continue to be produced only because of a congressional need, not a military need. Let the proper people make the decisions, not those looking for votes and ego boosts.
Dan Boren and Inhofe run the risk of getting labelled as pork barrel queens and unpatriotic by non other than Sec Def Bob Gates if they keep this up. I have never been a fan of that kind of rhetoric but Spencer Ackerman has been doing some great reporting on this issue for months and here are two links to things Gates said during the rollout of the budget that make it very apparent that Gates is ready willing AND able to pushback hard on the kinds fo attacks that Inhofe and Boren are engaged in.
.
http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/whos-ready-for-war-im-ready-for-war/
.
http://washingtonindependent.com/37721/gates-i-expect-the-services-to-get-on-board-with-my-reforms
.
I guess posting two links in a comment gets you put in moderation but I just commented about how Bob Gates is going to shape the debate and I think Boren is going to get his arse handed to him if he keeps this up and be on the wrong side of history.
Living in Oklahoma is a constant source of shame. Boren will not get my vote next time but sadly the state is filled with gun loving, uncouth and uneducated fanatics and he is playing to his base.
It’s about time the democrats and republicans pulled together and supported our president. Who knows if they let Mr. Gates and President Obama make the necessary decisions the two parties might be able to take some credit when the plan works. They never learn.
We need to continually remind all our honorable Congressional representatives and our dear President (though I think he already knows) that we are living in the era of smart government, and as such, we don’t necessarily mind paying our fair share as long as our elected representatives work to spend our money wisely and not just carry on the old stale dynamic of *** for tat campaign support for porkbarrel earmark legislation.
Until they realize their view of government is passe, the Oklahoma delegation and its brand will continue to use rhetoric which already has been deemed old and irrelevant in today’s political arena. -Kevo
From today’s NY Times…
Boeing, which spent nearly $17 million on lobbying in Washington last year, is the lead contractor on the Army’s modernization project and so would appear to lose the most in the proposed cuts. Boeing also has two missile programs that Mr. Gates suggested scaling back.”
That’s 17 million from just one corporation for one year funneled entirely into its lobbying efforts. Imagine the total from all military-related corporations and the pressures that will fall out from that.
Yes, we are certainly living under a Congress and administration that has abandoned the “old stale dynamic….” of “porkbarrel earmark legislation.” Everybody can clearly see this, from recent funding decisions made by both.
I don’t mind disagreement — that is the heart of what is supposed to make our system of government work. I don’t even mind hypocrisy, as long as it at least gives a nod to the intelligence of others. But saying something like this can imply only one of two things: Either the writer is terminally stupid, or he is absolutely certain that everybody else is.
Maybe these people like Boren should be reminded every now and again that we’ve been in Afghanistan for how many years and Iraq for almost the same, and we are still fighting. If we can’t win there in almost twice the time it took to win WWII, then something is drastically wrong and it needs to be changed NOW! It’s keeping the course that is endangering our security, NOT changing.
What a joke. We could cut the defense budget in half and be perfectly safe. We do not need the capability to destroy the earth more than once over. Slash and burn, Mr. President!
I would expect hawkish grandstanding like this from a Republican, but not from a Democrat. I think it’s time the Democratic leadership began exercising a bit of party discipline on its members in Congress. We all have the right to our own opinions, but political parties exist for a reason; and congressional members of our party (I am a Democrat) ought to be showing a little unity and getting behind the President rather than playing the provocateur for their own political benefit. I sincerely hope Madame Speaker will have words with Boren in these regards.
It’s hard to know where to begin here, but I’ll start with Tena. “It’s Oklahoma; that’s all you have to say.” A typical elitist comment. I lived in Oklahoma for awhile; the people there are as good as you’ll find anywhere else. You’re not better than them, Tena. As for Deanna, “living in Oklahoma is a constant source of shame …” that’s sad. Many of your neighbors are good people. I’m not much for guns myself, but I’ve no problem with those that have them.
It is important to remember that National Security is a key role of the federal government. The areas Mr. Obama is increasing spending – education & healthcare, not to mention running a car company, are not key roles of the federal government.
Ms. Minier makes a better point that some of the people who are likely to criticize the President for running down national security are those districts where national security is a large financial player. True. Just like it is with agriculture in the Plains States, the auto industry in Michigan and Ohio, hurricane insurance in the Coastal States, textiles in the Southeast, computer privacy issues in Silicon Valley, etc. It’s nothing new.
As for complaints about lobbyists, understand that that culture started under the Democrats, and Democrats have always made up the majority of lobbyists in Washington, even when Republicans were in power.
As for Texas Aggie, comparing Iraq and Afghanistan to WWII displays a certain ignorance of how war works. First of all WWII went 7 years, 1938-1945. Secondly, WWII was a large-scale conflict; Iraq and Afghanistan are insurgencies. Those are two completely types of wars. Think thunderstorm for WWII and drizzle for Iraq. One is loud and fast; the other isn’t as intense, but it goes on a long time. The typical insurgency lasts 15-20 years. Bush’s big mistake in Iraq was thinking there wouldn’t be an insurgency at all. Remember this – one major reason why there wasn’t an insurgency in Germany is because we had already devestated the country, at a cost of literally MILLIONS of Allied and Axis lives. (And by the way, the hardest work by FAR was actually done by the Soviets, much of it before we ever landed at Normandy. 90% of the soldiers lost to the Germans were Soviets.) When we first went into Iraq, we tried to do it surgically, leaving the country as intact as possible, and kill as few people as possible. Even now, the number of people dead in these wars, tragic as it is, is far, far, far less than that lost in WWII, which you apparently think was done well.
Badjuggler “We could cut the defense budget in half and be perfectly safe.” Boy, I’m glad you’re not in charge. There is indeed waste in the defense budget.
kevo: “We are living in the era of smart government”. Uhh, kevo, your smart government just decided to run up the national debt by another $3.6 trillion. The head of your smart government didn’t show the normal respect given the Queen of England (a friend) and then bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia. God knows if Bush did that, you’d have hanged him as an idiot. Your smart government is apparently headed by a group of people who don’t know enough to pay their taxes. Your smart government isn’t as smart as they think they are.
This article doesn’t mention any of the drastic cuts that Oklahoma would be facing if the proposal passed. Odd. I think I would expect members from a state that would be decimated by the prosal to step up and voice opposition. A pretty shameless and uninformative headline.
I think these Senators and Congressman need to put country first read and comprend if that is possible what Secy. Gates & President Obama are trying to do. As a wife of a 30 year retired Marine and a mother of a son being deployed in 2 wks to Afghanistan what pisses me off is that the Pentagon still hasn’t gotten these kids the equipment they need to fight these wars. See last Friday’s USA today talking about still no good MRAPs for Afghanistan and way to few. We’ve been there 7 years, what the heck! 75% of the deaths in Afghanistan this year due to IED’s, that is insane! We don’t have to bail out GM or the other one have them build what we need like they did in WWII.
Give me a break! These Oklahoma yahoos could care less about our national security. The only thing they are worried about is some unwarranted dollars leaving their precious state. And yet, they seem to have no problem at all with leaving $500 million dollars on the table for the unemployed in their state by rejecting stimulus money. Self-righteous hypocrites!
For the first time I am embarrassed by the behavior of our current President. I refer specifically to the incident of bowing before the King of Saudi Arabia at the G-20 meeting in Europe. President Obama tossed centuries of American precedent and pride into the ashcan..
Our President’s advisors must be aware of the precedent of NOT bowing before foreign dignitaries.
In Imperial China visting officials performed a ceremony for the Emperor that included bowing and placing ones head near the floor and, in some cases, actually striking the floor with thier forehead. It was at best a sign of reverence for the Emperor- at worst a humiliating display of groveling by subjects eager for favor.
When American diplomat Frederick Low was advised that he would be required to perform the “kowtow” he refused. It was a significant gesture to the Chinese Court on how the United States expected to be treated. If my memory serves me correctly the French official gladly performed the ritual.
Confucian’s believe that body expresses the wishes of the mind. Lowering oneself converts ones mind to a position of respect. Respecting the King of Saudi Arabia as an equal is not the case here. President Obama lowered the status, of not only himself, but our entire country. Frederick Low must be shedding a tear for us now.
Conservatives and security hawks have rightly emphasized over these past eight or so years that the biggest threats to American security are individuals or small groups armed with weapons of mass destruction. Given that, it’s hard to understand how fighter jets help us combat them. It seems that Rep. Boren is more concerned about bringing home the bacon to his district than national security, at least in this case. Also, representing as he does the only state in the union in which every county voted for McCain over Obama, opposing the president is always going to be smart politics.
Dee,
1. You’ll find Mr. Boren is not exactly, to use your perjorative term, a “yahoo”. He, like his university president father, is educated to a degree that even an elitist could respect.
2. Many Oklahomans care about national security because many of them are actually a part it. From air force bases to army posts to the national guard, many Oklahomans stand on the wall for the country. How about you? Have you lifted a finger for the country?
3. As far as the stimulus country is concerned (and be advised, the Governor is a Democrat), here’s the problem — the federal government put strings on the money. In order to get it, states have to agree to much larger unemployment payouts. Then in 2 years, the stimulus money goes away. Put another way, to get TEMPORARY help, the state has to make PERMANENT changes that will further destabilize their economy down the road. Far from being “uneducated” in not taking the money, the state is being far-sighted. You might want to learn something about how the stimulus works before you criticize those who oppose it. Just like the Democrats should have allowed time for Republicans to read the bill before voting on it. We’d have probably caught the executive bonuses provision if you’d done that.
This isn’t about making us less safe and endangering America, it’s about smart spending. Spending more on what is actually needed and eliminating the unneeded spending on items of no use. Bags of money were being sent to Iraq under Bush without any supervision or documentation on how it was used. I’d rather see our tax dollars being spent wisely rather than wastefully as it has been during this senseless war.
Maybe Oklahoma politicians will now have to work for a living instead of relying on Defense Contracts to support their state. As long as they can depend on Defense Contracts, they don’t have to do anything for their state, like bring in business and industry, provide decent paying jobs and all that boring stuff.
This is why we can’t cut defense spending…too many political mouths to feed. Congress and Obama should simply slash the Defense Budget by, say 33%. Then let the Generals/admirals figure how to optimize their allocations. Seriously, what are we defending if we become a 3rd world country in the process?
Since Mr. Obama has already buried my children and future grandchildren in debt while supporting earmarks, welfare for CEO’s, crooks appointed to his administration, inept government running our fiscal system, etc, why shouldn’t he cut military spending AND get rid f nuclears weapons when N. Korea just launched a rocket and God knows what Iran is up to with nuclear technology as it pays terrorists in Iraq in Palestine (etc) to kill non-Arabs. Sure, why not? This most polarizing president in history is even more ignorant than Bush but 82% of democrats aren’t honest enough to admit it (I think they’re blinded by his expensive suits and silver tongue).
To the Voice of Dissent,
Where to begin indeed. You might want to grab a dictionary and a history book for this.
First off, the US didn’t commit troops to WWII until late 1941. I’m not sure what form of mathmatics you use, but in my system 1945 minus 1941 equals four years. Russia did lose the most soldiers to Germany, but it wasn’t becouse they did the hardest fighting, it was becouse their military machine was relitively obsolite when the Germans started their invasion of Russia. As in any war when you send mass troops up against a smaller but better armed force you will incure mass casualties.
Secondly, we are not in an insurgency in Iraq, we are in a war (or perhaps you could call it an occupation). The insurgency in Iraq is being perpitrated by dissedents in Iraq and surounding areas opposed to us being there. I didn’t know that war was defined by the number of participents.
Finally, there was no budget cut in the millitary. For that fact the fiscal budget actually increased defense spending for the year. All they are trying to do is rearrange the budget to make the spending they do to be more inline with what the Commanders in the field are asking them for.
Side note: I’m well aware I need a spelling dictionary myself.
Boren sat on the fence during the primaries. He didn’t publicly endorse either Clinton or Obama. He voted for Obama when it became obvious who was going to win the nomination. His district went for Clinton and he could have endorsed her, but didn’t. He’s a blue dog wuss.
Dee – I’m a liberal who lives in OK and I am among the first to criticize it as an ill-informed and generally backward state. But we do have a Democratic governor for the time being and I don’t believe he has refused any stimulus funds. We need all the funds we can get.
Who honestly cares about “National Security” anymore? The biggest threat to our security is Economical. Importing all of our oil from the middle east and selling all of our debt to the Chinese.
Maybe Obama should cut taxes. That’ll fix everything. Global Warming isn’t even real, but if it was, we could just cut its taxes. That’d fix it.
@FLNonny
Good job cutting and pasting right wing talking points. Not an original idea or thought in there. Your brain must be well rested.
FY2009 Defense Spending: $513B
FY2010 Proposed Defense Spending: $534B
$534-$513 = +$21B
+$21B = increased defense spending
Got that? Those aren’t talking points by the way – those are facts and figures and math.
Boren is a good guy just sticking up for his military institutions. He voted for the stimulus, voted for the bank plan, voted for the auto plan.
He did vote against the budget, but so what.
He comes from a conservative state.
Oklahoma voted for Bush. As they say you pay for your thrills so in strict political terms Oklahoma should lose some of their defense contracts, what’s fair is fair. It doesn’t help that Inhofe and the Boren’s are mentally stuck way back in the early 20th Century and are trying to hold back America as the GOP has done for the last eight years to drastic results. When are the people of Oklahoma going to get their heads out of their butts.
Give the the young guy a break, he is trying to keep his seat–we can overlook him on this one. Its all politics. With a weapon industry in his State he has to come out against it, if it means that his state will get the short end.
By all means lets keep the military industrial complex fed, fat, and overweight because war is one thing that this country does well and often.
“Oklahoma is home to a major defense contract that the restructuring puts on the chopping block. GOP Senator James Inhofe made a big splash yesterday by saying Obama is endangering our troops and “disarming America.”
That’s the money comment – that explains it all.
“Oklahoma is home to a major defense contract that the restructuring puts on the chopping block. GOP Senator James Inhofe made a big splash yesterday by saying Obama is endangering our troops and “disarming America.”
That’s the money comment – that explains it all.
Sorry, forgot to add great post! Can’t wait to see your next post!
The danger to America is a completely
out of touch budget including the defense
budget.
Our budgets need to be in tune with present
reality, using money efficiently to do what
we need as a country now and for our future.
Old contract patterns and interests will
bankrupt our country far more than borrowing
to prevent economic collapse.
Responsible representatives will take the opportunity
President Obama offers to put things right.
This is an excellent site, I’ll be sure to add you to my morning routine