Pentagon to Cut 100,000 Ground Forces to Accommodate $487 Billion in Defense Cuts
- Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:23pm by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
WASHINGTON (AP) — Pentagon leaders outlined a plan Thursday for absorbing $487 billion in defense cuts over the coming decade by shrinking U.S. ground forces, slowing the purchase of a next-generation stealth fighter and retiring older planes and ships.
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta outlines the main areas of proposed spending cuts during a news conference at the Pentagon, Thursday, Jan., 26, 2012. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
In a bid to pre-empt election-year Republican criticism, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said the plan shifts the Pentagon’s focus from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to future challenges in Asia, the Mideast and in cyberspace. More special operations forces like the Navy SEALs who killed Osama bin Laden will be available around the world, he said.
“Our approach was to use this as an opportunity to maintain the strongest military in the world, to not hollow out the force,” he said in a statement prepared for a Pentagon news conference. Some lawmakers were quick to dispute him.
“Taking us back to a pre-9/11 military force structure places our country in grave danger,” said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee that will hold hearings on the Pentagon budget plan.
Panetta announced that the administration will request a 2013 budget of $525 billion, plus another $88 billion for operations in Afghanistan. Combined, those totals are about $33 billion less than the Pentagon is spending this year.
Panetta said, however, that the Pentagon’s base budget will grow to $567 billion in 2017. At that point, the cumulative budgets over five years would be $259 billion less than had been planned before the administration struck a deficit-cutting deal with Congress last summer that requires projected defense spending to be reduced by $487 billion by 2022.
Among the details Panetta disclosed:
The Army would shrink by 80,000 soldiers, from 570,000 today to 490,000 by 2017. That is slightly larger than the Army on 9/11.
The Marine Corps would drop from today’s 202,000 to 182,000 – also above the level on 9/11.
The Air Force would retire some older planes including about two dozen C-5A cargo aircraft and 65 of its oldest C-130 cargo planes.
The Navy would keep a fleet of 11 aircraft carriers but retire seven cruisers earlier than planned. It also would delay purchase of some other ships, including a new Virginia-class submarine.
Purchase of F-35 stealth fighter jets, to be fielded by the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps, would be slowed.
Current plans for building a new generation of submarines that carry long-range nuclear missiles would be delayed by two years. The current fleet of nuclear-capable bombers and land-based nuclear missiles would be left unchanged.
Military pay raises will remain on track until 2015, when the pace of increase will be slowed by an undetermined amount.
President Barack Obama will ask Congress to approve a new round of domestic base closures, although the timing of this was left vague and there is little chance that lawmakers would agree to this in a presidential election year.
The defense spending plan is scheduled to be submitted to Congress as part of the administration’s full 2013 budget on Feb. 13.
Prominent in the Obama plan is a renewed focus on Asia, where China’s rapid military modernization has raised worry in Washington and rattled U.S. allies.
The Pentagon has embraced a proposal by special operations chief Adm. Bill McRaven to send more manpower and equipment to worldwide “Theater Special Operations Commands” to strike back wherever threats arise, according to a senior defense official who spoke to The Associated Press, and other current and former U.S. officials briefed on the program. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the details of the proposal are still being worked out, including how fast the changes could be made.
The stepped-up network would put top special operations personnel closer to the problems they face, better able to launch unilateral raids like this week’s Somalia mission. McRaven also wants the newly invigorated commands to build new relationships with foreign armies to help them lead their own operations, the senior defense official said.
Panetta also has made clear the administration will resist any effort to shrink the Navy’s fleet of aircraft carriers. He said last weekend while on board the fleet’s oldest carrier, the USS Enterprise, that keeping 11 of the warships is a “long-term commitment” that Obama believes is important to keeping the peace.
“Our view is that the carriers, because of their presence, because of the power they represent, are a very important part of our ability to maintain power projection both in the Pacific and in the Middle East,” he said.
Obama has said he hopes to further reduce the size of the U.S. nuclear arsenal, but Panetta said the basic structure – a “triad” of land, sea and air nuclear forces – will be maintained. The Pentagon said it will study the potential to shrink that force later.
The defense budget is being reshaped in the midst of a presidential contest in which Obama seeks to portray himself as a forward-looking commander in chief focusing on new security threats. Republicans want to cast him as weak on defense.
Obama has highlighted his national security successes – the killing of Osama bin Laden, the death of senior al-Qaida leaders and the demise of Libya’s Moammar Gadhafi – to counter Republican criticism. He also has emphasized the completion of the U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq and the start of a drawdown in Afghanistan as turning points that offer new opportunities to scale back defense spending.
But several congressional Republicans see a political opening in challenging the reductions in projected military spending that the GOP and Obama agreed to last summer as part of a deal to raise the nation’s borrowing authority. They‘ve echoed Obama’s potential presidential rivals Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum, who plead for fiscal austerity but contend that sizable cuts would gut the military.
Popular Stories
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 575 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 404 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 403 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 372 Comments
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 341 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 403 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 404 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 341 Comments
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 150 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 302 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 403 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (90)
HKS
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 6:00pmSince Obummer has never had a budget for anything, I’m not impressed that he would start here. This is his only job, (protecting the country) and he’s cutting here? I think that board or punched thing works here.
Report Post »iblvingd
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 6:20pmObama is doing what George Sorros wants him to do. Destabilize the country and its defenses so he can march in with UN troups.
Report Post »mamawalker
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 6:21pmYes! Soros is buying up all the gun manufacturing companies…hmmm, wonder why?
Report Post »iblvingd
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 6:34pmSorros is buying the gun companies to get the guns away from Americans.
Report Post »The_Almighty_Creestof
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 6:42pmWell…I hope they enjoy their vacation…cause the way things are going, they’ll get a letter in a few months telling them to report again.
Report Post »smithclar3nc3
Posted on January 27, 2012 at 9:31amDoes civil war count ahs fundamentally changing a country….BECAUSE THAT WHAT’S HEADING DOWN THE PIPE.
Report Post »THANKS OBAMA
V-MAN MACE
Posted on January 27, 2012 at 10:29amThey know a lot of troops won’t follow orders to pull triggers on American civilians!
So they don’t need them! They have TERMINATOR 3- TYPE ROBOTIC UNMANNED DRONES IN MULTIPLE FORMS!
GIGANTIC 18-WHEELER AUTONOMOUS TANK-TRUCKS WHICH DEPLOY TREADED ATV-SIZED AUTONOMOUS TANKS BRISTLING WITH ALL SORTS OF ARMAMENTS AND SENSORS!
Autonomous spiders which crawl up next to you and explode…
ALL SORTS OF CRAZY $#!T
RESIST!!!!!!
Report Post »woodyb
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:56pmJust curious — is congress still providing funding for that huge cargo aircraft that the pentagon has been saying, for years, that THEY DON”T WANT?????????????
Report Post »iblvingd
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 6:37pmIt would be great if we could believe anything we hear anymore. I wonder how much of the military funding goes to the costs of the Jets, fuel, personnel and tons of chemicals they spray over our cities on a daily basis! All you have to do is look up….it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know they are not contrails.
Report Post »Alastair
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:51pmOK – I‘ve read the comments here and I don’t think many of you understand something; this is one of the brick walls that the democrats like to throw in front of anyone suggesting that the federal government needs to cut spending. This essentially removes that play card from their deck and now we say “OK, we cut the military, time for the next thing to cut”. Now the way should be more clear for them to come to grips with the spending situation. Of course, just because the way is clear, doesn’t mean they will take it, haha
Report Post »maynardb61
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:43pmThese cuts do not include the support from contract workers either. So add another 200,000 or so to the numbers.
Report Post »Alastair
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:41pmI just find the title “defense cuts” to be silly… these are OFFENSE cuts!!! This is the same thing that people mis-understand about Ron Paul wanting to close the foreign US bases.
Report Post »Silat
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:33pmCut the budget to 0 for the lazy lib turds and their followers!
Report Post »LeadNotFollow
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:33pm…
Report Post »Obama wants our military to be weak, so his fellow Muslims can take over America, with little resistance.
Lamarr01
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:55pmObama thinks America is an evil empire using the dark forces of the military to imprison the peaceful Muslim countries.
Report Post »iblvingd
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 6:44pmMore like Sorros and the UN troups take over, they’ll deal with the Muslims when they have to, right know the Muslins are needed to help weaken our defenses. Sorros lastest announcement of the state of the world says it all.
Report Post »Todd Decker
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:18pmWhile I don’t want to see defense “cuts,” the fact is, thanks to baseline budgeting, defense spending will continue to grow. As such, I’m trying to figure out why the military needs such a major slashing when they will get more money each year, just not as much as they’d hoped.
Report Post »heavyduty
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:17pmDoes that mean that the Politicians are going to take their place? If they do then we are really screwed. But I do hope that Obama will lead them in the charge.
Report Post »ChiefGeorge
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:11pmDon’t worry so much…when push comes to shove our government will know exactly what to do!
Report Post »Lamarr01
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 6:11pmThe Defense Department and the industrial complex deplore budget cuts. After Clinton cut the military, there was an event that caused the Defense budget to soar. The USS Enterprise is heading to the Strait of Hormuz. A slow-moving aircraft carrier is an easy target for Iranian missiles. Clinton failed to respond when the USS Cole was bombed. What will Obama do?
Obama does exactly the wrong thing at the wrong time.
Report Post »Kinnison
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:09pm…And where are we going to get all of these new Special Ops operators? They can’t be shake-n-baked or ordered on the internet like “just in time” parts to assemble Subarus in Indiana. It takes years of training to produce even a basically-qualified Special Operator—SEAL, Marine Force Recon, Delta Force, Special Forces, Air Force PJ—and the attrition rate in training is very high. These men are the military equivalent of Olympic athletes; there are only so many of them around that can take the training and achieve the performance level required. And you “dumb down” the SpecOps qualifications at our peril.
Report Post »hauschild
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:08pmIt would be great if this money would be used to pay down the debt, but it’ll only go to the slugs in this country, and the crony capitalists.
Report Post »RJJinGadsden
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:15pmYou got that right. He will just divert the funds to buy future voters. Just as Clinton did during his program to destroy the military in the ’90s. That is why we had to send so many reserve and guard units at the beginning of Afghanistan and Iraq.
Report Post »Tri-ox
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:05pmAmerica – imperiled further by enemy-obama and his cabal.
Report Post »fixer
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:28pmAbout the only thing that the Federal Govt.is supposed to do according to the Constitution is National Defense.In times like we are in nowdays,the only crap they are cutting is National Defense.Why doesn’t somebody hang this ****** we call a president for treason charges in a time of war.
Report Post »gsp9993
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:36pmAnd where are the jobs going to be for these people when they are released from the military???
Report Post »georgepatton
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:59pmHow about firing Panetta and barry’s ASS!
Report Post »ChiefGeorge
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:03pmGotta find more food stamp monies somewhere?
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:51pmObama is finally giving the Left all that they have wanted in regards to the military; break it to the bone and then crush it even more.
Report Post »inblack
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 10:24pmCome on, this is the dollar cost of the Iraq troops – it has been a bulge in the budget for 10 years. Why can’t we cut it now that we have finished the war?
Report Post »bernbart
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:50pmThere is a lot more waste in the military and the Pentagon than here is a in either SS or Medicare.
Report Post »Why do we even need to different ground forces. If they just combined some of the overlapping duties of each branch they could save billions. Our deficit came from reducing taxes on the 1%, who do not create jobs, only personal wealth, while fighting 2 unfunded wars.
Blackhawk1
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:00pmHey idiot, if Obama confiscated all the money from your so-called wealthy it wouldn’t cover 24 days of his spending which is about 240 Billion. Gee maybe we can be lucky enough after you liberals do away with our military to be attacked again and with any luck they will hit the WH this time while your messiah is there.
Report Post »georgepatton
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:03pmBERNBART
Get over it dude, Roosevelt set up the ss scam; you can’t have a ponzi scheme and think it will work……..especially with so many people out of work, it’s a freight train going off a cliff.
Report Post »@leftfighter
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:17pmYou clearly have *zero* understanding of why there are different military forces, particularly as it pertains to tactics and strengths and difficulties.
In short, dolt, we have more than one type of ground force because we have more than one situation that could face us in the future.
Marines – rapid deployment force and the Navy’s ship security.
Army – ownership of battlefields specializing in any kind of terain (little known fact, the Army has more ships than the Navy does).
You want to look at wastes of money? Look into Obama’s venture capital attempts, Medicare, Medicaid welfare, food stamps, or literally any other domestic agenda item. I guarantee you’ll find fraud, waste, and abuse on the order of 10 times what it is in the military.
BTW, that’s not to say there aren;t things that the military can do to trim the fat, just that you should be looing at the big parts of the budget before you look at dropping our defenses.
Report Post »SgtB
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:20pmYour comment about there being more waste in the military than in social security and medicare is a lie. Soc. Sec. and medicare are themselves waste, fraud, and theft. There is no constitutional authority, right, or justification for such programs. That said, we do need to cut back on military spending. Personally, I’d like to see us have alot less active duty and ALOT more reservists. The military reserves are far cheaper and allow us to have the same if not a larger number of military personnel for when we need them. The entire reason why the USMC is over 200k right now is because we are acting in a role that the Marine Corps was not designed for. The Marines are supposed to be used for amphibious assaults in total war. They are not an occupation force. There is no reason why we should have to have 200+ thousand Marines. It is a waste of taxpayer dollars.
And as for the weaponry, why are we developing submarines to shoot even longer range nuclear warheads? Last I checked, we have the largest and most advanced nuclear powered submarines in the world. Why can we not just use the nuclear warheads and missiles that we already possess? Exactly what is wrong with the Trident missile system? It can travel farther than the United States is wide, it can release multiple (>7) warheads, and they have only been in service for about 20 years. We still fly Airframes from Vietnam for Christ’s sake.
Report Post »therealconservative
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 6:49pmYour right. Bill Gates and the late Steve Jobs ‘NEVER CREATED ANY JOB’S’, those heartless SOB’s doing all the work themselves and not even thinking about giving some poor guy/gal a job.
Report Post »Country
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:50pmThe people wanted our troops out of these countries and many military people are backing Ron Paul because he is wanting to reduce the cost of defence. This is the result.
Report Post »Eric_The_Red_State
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:41pmPut them all on the border —- about one every 20 feet —– with guns -
Report Post »AxelPhantom
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 11:26pmHey Ericson, that you?
Report Post »CatB
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:41pmFeeling safe???
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwaAVJITx1Y
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:39pmCan’t argue with any of these things; the government needs to shrink and our military is as good a place as any to start. Now that these cuts are underway, how about we turn to shrinking entitlements next?
Report Post »Eric_The_Red_State
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:42pmOur military is not our government
(yet)
Report Post »bernbart
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:45pmYes I am entitled to my SS and Medicare because I paid onto the system for years.
Report Post »JRook
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:48pm@Eric_The_Red_State The military is absolutely a branch of government and military personnel are government employees. Locked is correct. We need to shrink everything equally until we have a balanced annual budget. Congress should then be able to only increase any particular section of the budget by cutting money from somewhere else or increasing revenue. As far as the longer term deficit, it represents past spending and paying it off should be handled by a tax surcharge on the upper 5% income bracket.
Report Post »13th Imam
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:58pmThe Takers have escaped the asylum again. Hide your wives and children.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:00pm@Eric
“Our military is not our government”
No, the military is paid for by our government; “cutting back the government” means cutting back our spending. I pray you were trying to make a joke or something, because I really didn’t think someone could be so ignorant.
Report Post »Blackhawk1
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:05pmbernbart
I will bet that you already received what you paid in. If you are currently collecting your entitlements you are not getting one penny you paid in, you are collecting money that I am currently paying in. That’s why it is a PONZI scheme. You liberals don’t understand the simplest things. Maybe you should go have a free CT scan and see if there is any brain activity going on in your head.
Report Post »DYNA
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:07pmStop subsidizing people who are here illegally like Obamas brother and sister. Make the other nations pay for our military services rendered unless it is mutually profitable. Stop intervening on behalf of those whose paganism is actually part of the problem and stop inviting them to come here to reproduce the same problems they left.
Report Post »The military is really the only baseline for having a central government.
Blackhawk1
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:10pmJRook
If you want to balance the budget get rid of the liberal Ponzi schemes your party came up with. Social Security and Medicare suck up more of the budget than the military and don’t come with the BS that people paid into it and they are entitled to their money back because anyone that has collected Social security and Medicare for more than 5 years has already got every penny back that they paid in.
Report Post »DYNA
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:15pm@Blackhawk1
To validate your point, around 1995 the General Accounting Office reported that the average Social Security recipient was receiving 3 times what they actually paid in.
Report Post »@leftfighter
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:24pm@bernbart
So what are you gonna do when you don;t get it because it was a ponzi scheme and is out of money (like Clinton predicted but nobody, including Obama, did anything about)?
I’ll bet you riot, proving once and for all that the useful idiot dolts like you who think everything will be given to them are the real violent people (as if we didn’t already know).
Report Post »SgtB
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:28pm@ Bernbart, You claim that you are “entitled” to SS and medicaid. Well, guess what, you got hosed by your own arrogance and ignorance. Anyone EVER who expected to be able to live off of a Ponzi scheme has only himself to blame. The money that you paid in as FICA taxes went to pay off the current crop of retirees. The overage that you paid in then went into a “trust fund” where you trusted it would be safe. But did you know that your money was converted to federal bonds? In case you don’t follow me on this, federal bonds are issued when the federal gov’t takes your money and uses it with the “guarantee” that they will pay you back. So all that money in the trust fund was spent by your own elected officials on all of the social engineering that you allowed to happen under your not so watchful eye. You screwed yourself and now you want the next generation to bend over and take it so that you don’t have to. Well, you can take that attitude and die with it.
Report Post »DYNA
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:48pm@SGTB
So when some suggested in the 1990s to provide options other than Social Security ,and the liberals stopped it by protesting that Social Security money is “safe in a lockbox”, what they really meant is, do not look in the box, because someone took the money and replaced it with taxpayer IOUs.
Report Post »SgtB
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 8:45pm@ Dyna, Exactly. That is the way the system was set up from the beginning. They used the excess to support growing deficit spending. Anyone with half a brain would know that if you took 15% of your income and save it and invest it from the time you are 18 to the time you are 65, you will have enough to retire. This even works for people at the poverty level. Assuming a minimum investment of $1500 per year over this time span with an average of 8% interest the total would be over $800,000.
Of course, this only works if you don’t live under a fiat currency system that steals the money out of your checking account through inflation. If we had a solid currency and people taught their children to just save a little each month, there wouldn’t even be an argument for taxpayer funded retirement.
Oh, and did I mention that they have borrowed against the trust fund? That means that they leveraged debt with debt. How did the older generation EVER let this kind of thing slide? I guess ignorance is bliss or something like that.
Report Post »KickinBack
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:38pmAny money “saved” by the defense cuts will only go toward the continued expansion of government. More entitlement programs. More regulations. More departments. More useless research studies. And everyone of them will be deemed essential to the country and will be near impossible to remove.
Report Post »loveoursoldiers
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:43pmThe shrimp on the treadmills will be happy
Report Post »bernbart
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:46pmObama has reduced government.
Report Post »Blackhawk1
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:15pmObama reduced Government????Where? Maybe in his new consumer protection agency? No that is another additional agency. Maybe Moochelles 50 personal staff members could be cut. Obama has GROWN the Government, not reduced it. Please stop with the liberal propaganda you are hearing at MSNBC.
Report Post »therealconservative
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 6:38pm@BERN
Obama has done nothing but increase the size of government.
Report Post »loveoursoldiers
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:37pmThis is disgusting. Obama hates this country and is doing anything he can to weaken us.
Report Post »13th Imam
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:35pmWith the addition to the unemployment numbers from these laid off soldiers, the Rates should Necessarily Skyrocket. As we are at about 16%, SIXTEEN PERCENT, actual unemployment, lets say Half the 100,000, or 50,000 will increase the figure to 17-18%, .This is directly put on Barry and the DEMOCRATS shoulders, as droopy as they are. It is Transparent that DEMOCRATS Hope that there will be a radical Change in the Lazer-Like focus in the decline of AMERICAN Jobs, Jobs, Jobs.
Report Post »Anonymous T. Irrelevant
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:33pmAnd where will they find jobs, now? While Obama cuts our National Defense, he won’t touch handouts for the lay-abouts, baby-making machines, and druggies, not to mention Planned Parenthood, un-feasible green energy, whatever ACORN is called now, etc.
Report Post »CatB
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:39pmHe will put them here ….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwaAVJITx1Y
Report Post »bernbart
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:40pmTHE evangelicals are the baby making machines. And most welfare is received by whites, disabled and older.
Report Post »bernbart
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:43pmObama has put a in place a jobs program for the military in case you have not been listening. Of course making the military a jobs program is welfare.
Report Post »Blackhawk1
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:22pmbernbart
In case you haven’t heard it on the lame stream media. Obama hasn’t successfully come up with a jobs program that has worked yet, that’s why his butt is being kicked out in November.
Report Post »HKS
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:30pmYou mean the gub-ment is going to add to the un-employment rate?
Report Post »CatB
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 4:38pmThey will probably hire at least that many and maybe more for Obama’s National Security Force …
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwaAVJITx1Y
Report Post »Blackhawk1
Posted on January 26, 2012 at 5:19pmThese 100,000 will never add to the unemployment rate. The labor statistics will do what they did to bring down the rate from 9.8% to 9.4%. They just decided that 2 million jobs were no longer available. Just don’t figure the number into available jobs and problem solved.
Report Post »