Defense

Mitt Romney Likes the Defense Budget Just the Way It Is, Thanks

|

Holy Mitt!

Estimates suggest the United States could cut somewhere in the neighborhood of $1 trillion out of the defense budget over the next decade. But so what if there's a lot of waste in the defense budget? That doesn't mean we need to cut it! So says Mitt Romney, according to The Hill:

Romney said he would be open to redirecting spending within the Pentagon's budget to ensure that it's more efficiently allocated and to eliminate waste. But the overall budget won't face cuts.

"I'm not going to cut the defense budget," Romney said in a question-and-answer session on his Facebook page. 

The former Massachusetts governor acknowledged the defense budget contains "a lot of waste" and that "there's work that we have to do with the money that we have."

At this point, it's clear the former Bay State governor is not looking for small-government street cred: Last week, Romney gave a passionate defense of the Massachusetts health care overhaul that provided the model for ObamaCare.

NEXT: Reason on Mitch Daniels, Who Is One Step Closer to Running for President And Who Has Great Taste in Books

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. How can this tard be going left before the GOP primaries have begun? I’m totally confused.

    1. Well, except it’s the military we’re talking about, but still.

    2. He’s not going left. He’s angling for the GOP foreign policy hawk vote. In other words, he’s trying not to piss off neocons, which makes him suck even harder than he previously did.

      1. This. He’s securing the GOP base faithful.

        He’ll go left after [if?] he wins the nomination.

        1. What Epi and Paul said.

          Man, Mitt just sucks.

    3. Romney is the leading candidate in the Republican Party. There is no chance that Ron Paul will win the nomination because the vast majority of Republicans are big spenders, as are the Democrats.

      Voting in a ballot box will not change anything, but voting with your feet will. The country has accumulated unprecedented debt that cannot be repaid, a huge penalty that will burden you and other income earners for at least the next 40 years. Alternatively, imagine living with a responsible government like Hong Kong, in a Mediterranean climate like California. Unfortunately, no such Utopia exists; but Chile offers a combination of pleasant climate and fewer government burdens than many others. If you’re ready to shed the debt your government has imposed upon you, it is a good destination to consider:
      http://brophyworld.com/move-to-santiago-chile/

  2. The former Massachusetts governor acknowledged the defense budget contains “a lot of waste” and that “there’s work that we have to do with the money that we have.”

    Huh?

    1. CEO Mitt would say, we have to cut that waste out of the budget.

      CIC Mitt thinks it’s a swell idea to just move the money around.

      What exactly does this guy bring to the table, again?

      1. Impeccable logic, rolled-up sleeves, and boyish good looks!

  3. OT: Sorry for the threadjack, but I know you guys will appreciate this quote today in the NYT from Obama’s communications director:

    Comparisons in Chief

    “Sometimes I think the only president we haven’t been compared to is Franklin Pierce,” said Dan Pfeiffer, the White House communications director. “But I am not ruling out the possibility of that comparison sometime in the next couple of years.”

    1. IIRC, a lotta guys consider FP the worst president.

      1. … so I for one appreciate the quote. Thanks!

        (throws pebble at squirrel)

  4. Because what you really want in a President is someone who as much as admits:

    “I don’t care how much waste you find in the defense budget, I am not going to say the words ‘Cut the defense budget,’ no matter what, because I’m a two-dollar whore despite my magic underwear and am terrified of being accused of being soft on national security.”

    1. Did he really say he had magic underwear?

      1. The actual quote is newclear magic underwear.

        1. “newcular”

          1. It’s a tricky word.

    2. That’s everyone who could possibly be elected president.

      Utopia is not an option.

  5. I get a little nervous when people talk about cutting the military. There are about 700k civilian employees in the DOD. You could fire half of them tomorrow and nobody would notice – but that will never happen. As Obama said, nobody is more important than a (civilian) government employee.

    What will happen – less training, less equipment, disbanded units and longer deployments for those who remain, an even shittier National Guard, etc… and still 700k + civilian employees – who hire contractors whenever they need to do something.

  6. This why we’re doomed. If you try to trim just one cent off defense, Team Red screams and cries about how you want the terrorists and China to invade! And if you try to trim just one cent off entitlements, Team Blue screams and cries about how you want granny to eat dog food and children to die in the streets!

    Unfortunately those two things count for the vast majority of our spending.

    I say again, Doomed!

    1. And if you try to allow taxes to go back toward their normal levels by one cent, the libertarians screech about how you’re stealing their money.

      1. Define “normal”.

        1. nor?mal/?n?rm?l/
          Adjective: Conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected.
          Noun: The usual, average, or typical state or condition.

          1. Cute. I should have been more expansive. Define what is “normal” within the context of taxes.

            Bonus points: explain why anyone should support increased taxes when the government has shown itself to be categorically unserious about cutting back on expenditures. Increasing taxes is like giving an irresponsible child even more money: you’re just enabling him.

  7. Mitt Romney is a dead letter.

    1. HATE SPEECH ELIMINATIONIST RHE…

      Oh, wait – he’s Team Red, so it’s OK.

    2. “Mitt Romney is a dead letter.”

      “French letter”

  8. I’m like the white Obama.

  9. Seeing as Gary Johnson isn’t going to do much better than 1% of the vote in any GOP Primary I guess the #2 “libertarianish Republican” choice is Michele Bachmann, am I right? I await the flattering Reason coverage.

    1. Bachmann’s about as libertarian as Cobra Commander, so…no. But you can keep trying to push her if you want; just be prepared to be laughed at a lot.

      1. She’s the least establishment-beholden electable choice!

        I’m contributing and voting for Ron Paul in the primary but Michele is the only choice for the “leaners” that can’t stomach Paul.

        1. George W Bush was less establishment-beholden than any entering president since Reagan. How did that work out?

          Electing an intellectual cipher is even worse than a creature of the establishment, because at least you know what the establishment creature is going to do. The cipher’s actions depend entirely on who has her ear when a crisis hits.

          1. Yeah nothing was more “outsider” than a politician named George Bush.

        2. “Michele is the only choice for the “leaners” that can’t stomach Paul”

          Leaners?

          Leaning towards madness?

          1. Silly MNG! Leaning towards the Constitution!

  10. We’ve tried one Michelle (what’s an ‘l’ more or less) in the White House and it doesn’t seem to be working out.

    1. Michele can fill the White House with foster kids and govern from a Christian reality show. It’ll be fucking great!

      I can picture her now shuffling the kids around the desk as she vetoes the next Farm Bill.

  11. and yet, we are to believe Mittens is the serious candidate

    1. Unfortunately, he is — particularly with no widely respected national figure like McCain in the race, and now no Huckabee (who helped keep Romney from winning in 2008)….

    2. Serious like testicular cancer.

      Thinking about being given the “choice” between Shit Romney and the moderate liberal sell-out Obamabot 4000, I have use every liter of my will to prevent a bout of projectile vomiting.

  12. Last week, Romney gave a passionate defense of the Massachusetts health care overhaul that provided the model for ObamaCare.

    You guys are really beating this one trick pony for all it’s worth, aren’t you? Are you suggesting that ObamaCare would never have happened were it not for the Massachusetts experiment?

    1. Good point. The disaster that is MassCare is one of the reasons public opinion is entrenched against Obamacare. We should be thanking Mitt for sucking so bad on a state level.

  13. Mitt just broke Ron Paul’s money bomb one-day fundraising record, hauling in 10.25 million to kick off his 2012 presidential campaign. It was a fake money bomb (Mitt used 700 volunteer callers and coordinated a bunch of big donors making pledges), but an impressive showing nonetheless.

  14. Let me get this straight…

    Romney had 800 people working his call center, he raised 10,250,000 dollars from those 800 people, with a 2500 limit per caller, and he did this WITHOUT gaining any traffic on his website?

    Something is not right…

    Look at Alexa and Google Trends, interest in Mitt Romney of any kind remained stagnant during his fundraising blitz, which means that somebody is lying or nobody uses the Internet for information anymore.

    1. What’s more, if you compare Romney’s traffic to Ron Paul’s — Ron Paul dwarfs Romney in every way. When Ron Paul held his fundraiser, his web traffic shot-up, and when Ron Paul announced that he was running, his traffic exploded.

      Romney hasn’t been gaining any traffic to his website, but losing it, so … how is that possible?

      Are we to believe Republicans don’t use the Internet, that they only have landlines, that they don’t have their names on the *Don’t Call List*?

      Like I said, something is fishy…

  15. We might consider my question answered.

    “He actually didn’t raise (that amount),” Paul said. “I think he got $10 million in commitment. When our chart runs on the (website) ticker, it means the money’s in the bank.”

    If Ron Paul’s guess is correct, then Mitt Romney and his 10.25 Millions worth of donations was a complete fraud, so Romney has had the media hyping thin air, and this would explain why Romney’s website traffic is so non-existent: his entire campaign may be a total sham.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.