Sequester Cuts as Drug Ad Disclaimer

These cuts are not for everyone.  In some liberals, these cuts can cause blindness, nausea, anxiety and even rectal leakage.  Do not take these cuts if you have allergic reactions to tea.  Consult your Senators before taking these cuts.  They may have alternative cuts that might reduce undesirable side effects. 

Defense Cuts: Scope Creep or Horse Cavalry Charges

Any consideration of DOD procurement has to start with the way the development projects are managed.  First, the way initial program requirements are set is to state every aspiration that exists for "the next generation" of whatever weapon system without too much consideration of what's available off the shelf.  Once that's done, constant changes are allowed throughout the development process.  They almost have to be allowed because of the wish list way the initial requirements are set.  So then the way the requirements dance around becomes a text book case of what is known in the project management trade as scope creep.  Scope creep is also known to be absolutely fatal to any development process.  Just one example, it seems that the ejection seat for the F-35 is a developmental item.  Why did we have to move away from the existing family of ejection seats?  Anyway, moving to a new seat didn't work out so now we are moving back to the existing family of ejection seats after spending all kinds of money on developing the new ones.  http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-16239.html  Can't we just decide we're going to field a system based on what's available now?  That way we wouldn't have to be flying planes that average 26 years old. http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/aging-array-of-american-aircraft-attracting-attention-0901/   For example, we are still flying B-52 aircraft.  The B-52 design originally entered service in 1955.  The B-52 bombers currently in service were built in the early 1960's.  If we didn't gold plate every bomber system design we try to build, we might have been able to replace them with something a little easier to maintain.  The current pattern seems to be we have outrageously advanced designs which we develop, but can’t afford to build.  So we either cancel them and get nothing, or build very limited numbers. Either way we have to use obsolescent weapons to make up the difference.

               On the other hand, extreme cuts in defense can kill a lot of people. Just one example, the last US horse cavalry charge was by the 26th Cavalry Regiment (Philippine Scouts) against Japanese tanks in 1942. They had few anti-tank weapons and ran out of anti-tank ammunition. They attacked tanks on horseback with grenades and pop bottles full of gasoline. Needless to say, most of them were killed. See http://hnn.us/node/139372 for more details.

               There has to be a middle ground between gold plated weapons too expensive to buy and not enough of the right kind of weapons. 

Retaking the Senate

Republicans need to retake the Senate in 2014.  To do this, GOP strategy should be to force the Senate Democrats to vote for Obama’s unpopular agenda over and over again.  The first step is the sequester.  Boehner should promise to carefully consider any bill cutting spending that passes the Senate.  Boehner should not negotiate with anybody, especially Obama who is the definition of bad faith negotiation.  Obama negotiates like Chicago Democrats do with Republicans, with a "take it or don’t we’ve got the votes" attitude.  He will not truly compromise on anything, especially budget cuts.  He wants budget and tax increases since he is a tax and spend liberal.  However, the Senate has a lot of members who have to face reelection.  They don’t want to be on the record voting for tax and spend, since it will not be popular in their states.  Democratic Senators from states Romney carried also don’t want to vote on the record for assault weapon bans or easy amnesty for illegal aliens.  Republicans should encourage them to vote on the record on these issues.  It will help us pick up about 7 Senate seats if they vote with Obama.

Obama Delivers Unemployment for Blacks

Forget for a minute the current president’s skin color.  Consider his results as they apply to the minority community that the president got to vote for him in overwhelming numbers.  The spread between black and white unemployment rates has increased under the current administration, both for teenagers and generally.  Black unemployment for both sexes aged 16 to 19 is currently 37.8 percent (seasonally adjusted).  Black unemployment generally is currently 13.8 percent (seasonally adjusted).   The comparable figures for whites are 20.8 percent for teenagers and 7.0 percent generally.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t02.htm  In 2008 under George W. Bush, black unemployment for both sexes aged 16 to 19 was 31.2 percent.  Black unemployment generally was 10.1 percent.  The comparable figures for whites in 2008 were 16.8 percent for teenagers and 5.2 percent generally. http://www.bls.gov/cps/race_ethnicity_2008_unemployment.htm  The difference between black and white teenagers is now 17 percentage points.  In 2008, it was 14.4 percentage points.  The difference between blacks and whites generally now is 6.8 percentage points.  Back in 2008 it was 4.9 percentage points. 

If the president was a white Republican, this record would be highlighted and denounced on front pages as an example of Republican racism.   If the president was a white Democrat, it would be regretted as a lack of progress, despite good intentions.  Since the president is black, nobody mentions it.  He is judged by the color of his skin, rather than the results of his policies.