Obama’s Defense Budget Increase
Apr 2, 2009 Political
I wrote recently that Obama was cutting the military budget and the lefties out there informed me that programs were being cut, not the operational budget which Obama has actually increased. We do not know if he has increased it because the people in the Department of Defense (DOD) had to sign non disclosure statements. The public report was a 4% increase but how do we really know this is the case if people were sworn to secrecy? It seems strange to me that the most transparent administration in history (just ask them) would do something like this.
Let us assume there was an increase and that it was 4%. It is now clear why that increase was needed and it is clear that it was not for military operations. An increase was needed so that Obama could use military aircraft to ferry around his 500 person entourage. The Washington Times reports that Obama’s trip to Europe has strained the Air Force because more aircraft were needed to fly all the additional people to Europe. It has so taxed the Air Force that the service had to use private contractors to accomplish its mission to resupply our forces in Afghanistan.
The large delegation traveling with the president in Europe required moving several transports, including jumbo C-5s and C-17s, from sorties ferrying supplies to Afghanistan to European bases for the presidential visit, said two military officials familiar with the issue. They spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid any misunderstanding with White House officials.
The Air Mobility Command, part of the U.S. Transportation Command, was ordered to provide airlift for the president’s entourage of nearly 500 people, including senior officials, staff, support personnel, news reporters and some 200 Secret Service agents for the European visit, which began Tuesday in London.
Airlift for the traveling entourage also was used to move the president’s new heavy-armored limousine and several presidential helicopters used for short transits.
To make up for the shortfall, the Air Force had to increase the number of Eastern European air transport contractors hired to fly Il-76 and An-124 transport jets into Afghanistan loaded with troop supplies, the two officials said.
The airlift crunch comes at a particularly difficult time, as the military is stepping up deliveries of supplies in advance of a surge of 21,000 U.S. troops.
Couple this with Nancy Pelosi’s demands on the Air Force and her use of it as a personal airline and it is no wonder that the budget would need to be increased.
Why did he need 500 people with him? Why was it necessary to take resources away from our war fighters in order to send him and this huge contingent to Europe?
For you liberals who make claims about the military budget and how Obama is so supportive, keep this in mind before you make any claims:
One official said the problem was not only the vehicles and helicopters that were needed for presidential security, but also the unusually large number of people traveling with the president. The official said U.S. taxpayers are paying twice for airlift, once for Air Force jets that are not available for a war zone and again for foreign contractor aircraft that are. [emphasis mine]
No wonder Obama would need to increase the military budget. Taxpayers now have to pay two times for the Air Force to accomplish its mission.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: air force, defense budget, europe, Military, Obama, waste
Absolute Abuse of Taxpayer Money
May 1, 2008 Political
WCBSTV has uncovered a story that is beyond belief and it involves the waste of taxpayer money by members of the House of Representatives. It seems there is a loophole that allows them to lease vehicles at the expense of taxpayers and there appears to be no limit as to how much they spend on the lease. Taxpayers also foot the bill for registration, insurance and the GAS. No wonder these chowder heads are not concerned about the price of gasoline. It is not bad enough we have to pay a fortune to fill our vehicles but we also pay to fill theirs.
Charlie Rangel of New York drives a Cadillac DeVille, and taxpayers are charged $774 per month ($9288 a year) to cover the lease.
Then there was Congressman Jose Serrano, getting out of his Buick LaCrosse, which he leases for $317 per month. And how about this one: Congressman Gregory Meeks was recently seen waiting for Congressman John Conyers to step out of Meeks’ Lexus LS460, which Meeks leases for $998 per month.
Charlie Rangel justified his extravagance by saying that his car is an office and that his constituents appreciate driving in comfort. I wonder how many of them are comfortable enough to have someone else paying for their cars? Rangel’s explanation was absolutely pathetic and it, along with the other members and their expensive leases, shows the contempt members of Congress have for the American public and our hard earned money. If Rangel’s car is paid for by taxpayers and he uses it as an office (his reasoning for havng the car) then it begs the question, has he ever conducted campaign business while in the car? If so, did he violate the Hatch Act?
The story tells of several members who lease much less expensive cars as if we are supposed to hail them as great people looking out for our money. Some people stated that they should all drive cheaper cars.
Wake up people and ask the right questions. Why in hell are they driving cars we pay for? Why are they not paying for their own vehicles just like the rest of us do. This is why these idiots think people are entitled to benefits paid for by others (health care, mortgages, education); because they get extravagant things paid for by us. To top it off, that jackass Rangel is always pushing for tax increases. How dare this maggot waste money and then demand more?
This also points out the hypocrisy of these idiots with regard to the environment. The vehicles mentioned are larger ones that use a lot of fuel. They are not “green” and they leave large carbon footprints. At the same time these jackasses are asking us to conserve they are driving around in gas guzzlers that we pay for.
This is absolutely criminal and everyone of these jackasses should be removed from office immediately. It is high time Americans revolted against this kind of abuse and the attitudes exhibited by people like Charlie Rangel. Perhaps we need to organize and refuse to pay taxes until ALL wasteful spending is eliminated and ALL members of Congress are replaced. They must all resign or they don’t get one stinking cent. We need to throw tea in a harbor and take back this country.
I am at the point where I absolutely hate every stinking one of the members of Congress. They are criminals and they abuse us every chance they get. They waste our money and then take more of it and they do not bat an eye. They come up with excuses as if they are privileged elite and how dare we peons ask them about their abuses. Rangel’s response demonstrates that he is out of touch. It is not like these people don’t make enough money to afford a car. They only work 100 days a year and they get $167,000. They are worthless, ineffective, and smarmy.
I am sure that members from both parties do this but it is worth mentioning that the ones mentioned are all Democrats. You know, the party OF the people…
It is absolutely ironic that the only people who would not have been missed were spared death on 9/11.
Tags: Congress, extravagance, fraud, jackasses, waste