In response to:

How President Obama Lost His Shirt to John Boehner

Think Wrote: Jan 30, 2013 12:46 PM
A) Cutting defense ought to be in anyone's plan. We don't need the force we have to defend America or our sea lanes. If Europe and Japan and Korea want to be defended, each is wealthy enough to defend themselves rather than demanding American taxpayers continue to do so. We likely can cut defense by at least a third and increase DoD R&D spending simply by cutting back carrier task force Groups and sub fleets. The Cold War is over and we don't need squadrons of Boomers to attack Iran - or 10 carrier groups. B) One would hope that the Right is able to live with cuts to Defense that are, as pointed out, less-severe than post-WW2, post-Korea or post-Vietnam. It's not that big a deal. Ike was right and we need to recognize it - Finally.
petroleum engineer Wrote: Jan 30, 2013 4:20 PM
Cutting too deeply on carrier battle groups is a very dangerous move. We have a very different situation than we have had in the past - we need movable airfields. We also need a Naval force that can operate near shore for special ops and Marines.
I do agree there is a lot of waste in the military, but this terrible waste exist throughout government. We need someone who will take an axe to wasteful spending. The Congress sure aas hell won't act aggressivley on the problem.

The House, under the leadership of Speaker John Boehner, has precipitated a postponement in the debt ceiling fight until May. This represents a strategic choice by Boehner to make the Sequester fight, not the debt ceiling fight, the next major engagement. Much of the mainstream media now is accusing Congress of “kicking the can down the road.” They are missing the strategic implications.

In retrospect, at the Battle at Fiscal Cliff, Boehner took President Obama to the cleaners. He did it suavely, without histrionics. While Obama churlishly, and in a politically amateurish manner, publicly strutted about having forced the Republicans...