4:59 am, May 23, 2015

FederalNewsRadio.com - Purpose of Comments statement Click to show

Hubbard Radio, LLC encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comment boards following articles, blog posts and other content can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior here. We encourage your thoughtful comments which:

  • Have a positive and constructive tone
  • Are on topic, clear and to-the-point
  • Are respectful toward others and their opinions

Hubbard Radio, LLC reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

  • 2
       

  • REAL BUDGET CUTS
    BeanerECMO
    1. It's only snipping around the edges; and, then, it's only decreasing the rate of increase of spending. The most expensive part of any business is people with their pay and benefits; especially the long term benefits; e.g., retirement pay and medical care. To cut the budget means to cut not only the rate of increase of spending to zero; but cut 5%/yr. for 10 years beyond the zero percent increase in spending. That is budget cutting and all federal, state, county and municipal agencies should follow suit. What does government provide as a product beyond those in security & defense? What effort does government do to produce 1 drop of oil revenue or 1 loaf of bread? They manage. Yes, much like MMS, USAID, DOEd, DOEn, DOC, NEA, NLRB, HHS (cut staff by 75%), HUD, EPA, OPM, FDA (yes, I know they are blasted if they do release/recall and blasted if they don't) et al. DEFUND THEM & ALL STATE EQUIVALENT AGENCIES!!! 2. I’m sure USAF & USN friends are a little happier with BHO's budget proposal regarding the Army & Marines versus USAF & Navy – not. We know the most expensive part of any business is the employee. Get rid of a lot of ground troops (e.g., their pay, allowances, medical and other benefits – both present and future; e.g., medical & retirement), and a lot of out year money is ‘saved’ (Of course, we know the money will be spent before it is saved - irrespective of party.). When a major crisis arises; ramp up recruiting; or dare I say it; institute the draft – hmmmmmmmmmmm. Just what Charlie Rangel has been wrangling on about for, lo, these many years.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Deja Vu
    CharlieS
    If memory serves, this is exactly the kind of thing that started with Clinton and was embraced by the early Bush administration under Donald Rumsfeld. Remember the "peace dividend"? Clinton decided we could cut the military and throw drones at folks. Rumsfeld came in and sort of extended the policy of having a lean and very mobile force. So, troops went into Afghanistan and Iraq without heavily armored equipment, which meant more death and injuries. We spent months and hundreds of billions to fix the light armor, etc so that our troops could fight in this new type of situation. So now, Obama wants to go back to how it was before? Did he learn nothing?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }