During his July 19th “Conversations with Conservatives,” Raul “Castro” Labrador continued to lie about military spending, while still saying that he’s quite happy with sequestration unless corresponding spending cuts are made elsewhere. Labrador said that he’s “so disappointed” with Republicans who argue against sequestration cuts on economic grounds (i.e. on the grounds that they would cost jobs, while DOD weapon orders create jobs). He also claimed that one of the most important priorities for the federal government is to take care of the needy. He said that the federal government should spend money on the military to protect the country, but that it should also spend money on welfare programs to protect the needy and on education. He furthermore claimed that many Republicans don’t want to cut their favorite “sacred cows”, implying that defense was one of them.
But, as usual, he’s lying.
Republicans are arguing against the sequestration of defense spending – and other deep defense cuts – primarily because they would be disastrous for the state of the military and for national security, not on economic grounds. The jobs issue is a secondary one. Nonetheless, it is a fact that should sequestration go forward, at least one million jobs would be lost, because the skilled workforce that currently produces America’s warships, aircraft, tanks, and so forth would be laid off, along with up to 200,000 troops.
Furthermore, defense is not anyone’s sacred cow. If it were, Secretary Gates would not have been allowed to kill over 50 crucial weapon programs and cut an additional $178 bn from the defense spending FYDP; the New START treaty would’ve never been ratified; and the Budget Control Act, which mandates immediate $487 bn in cuts and a $600 bn sequester on top of that, would’ve never been passed.
So much for the “sacred cow” that gets butchered so many often.
As for Labrador’s claim that among the federal government’s priorities should be helping the needy and funding education, where in the Constitution or the Federalist Papers is this stated? Where does the Constitution say anything about helping the needy or education? Where does the Constitution authorize any welfare spending or foodstamp funding?
Nowhere. The Constitution does not say anything about that, and neither do the Federalist Papers. The Supreme Law of the Land does not authorize any federal “welfare”, foodstamp, or education spending. This means that these issues are reserved to the states, local governments, and the people. Yet, Raul Castro Labrador wants the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT to be involved in them. That means that he’s
not a conservative at all.
A true conservative would obey the Constitution and insist that such issues, and decisions on how much money to spend on these programs and by what criteria, be reserved exclusively to the states, local governments, and the people. A true conservative would insist that defense’s sequestration be cancelled, that defense be fully funded, and that all unconstitutional federal programs be defunded. But, of course, Labrador is no conservative, although he pretends to be one.
Last but not least, it is ridiculous for him to host events called “Conversations with Conservatives” and to call himself a conservative – and for the Heritage Foundation to call him that way and co-host these events – when he’s clearly a liberal who supports unconstitutional domestic programs and deep defense cuts that would jeopardize national security.
The opinions expressed on Ziggy’s Defense Blog do not necessarily reflect those of ReaganGirl.com.