What Obama Should Have Said

"Listen people. When you sit at your one kitchen table and work out the family budget you are faced with choices. You only have so much money. So you have to decide between paying your kids' tuition or going on vacation. And you gotta go on vacation alone because you can't afford to take the kids with you. Which one are you gonna choose? If you're responsible and unselfish you're gonna pay for the tuition.

"Well people, it's like that in Washington too. We've only got so much money in the national budget. You can try to add some by raising taxes, but you're already paying too much. But you can't be foolish to cut the taxes of those most capable of paying either.

"Once you know how much you've got to spend you really have one big decision to make. Like the tuition or the vacation. You can be selfish or responsible. You can pay for national health care, university education, alternative energy and rebuilt infrastructure that creates jobs; or you can pay for wars against countries that don't threaten us, that kill countless innocent people and that will benefit only a small number of Americans.

"That's your choice America. What will you be? Selfish or responsible? Should we pay to fulfill the American promise of social advancement for the vast majority of Americans or should we maintain a vast military empire around the globe to protect and further the interests of a few?

"We can't afford both. We have to choose. That's what this election is all about. It is about this choice. It's about how we're gonna spend our money America.

"We spend close to a trillion dollars a year on defense-related costs. That's your money being spent. Do you know how much we could do with half of that money to fulfill the American promise: to give you health care, and education and environmentally safe energy? Plenty.

Story continues below

advertisement

"But as long as we keep lavishly outfitting a military of a size we don't need, social progress will remain a dream. Other industrialized countries have made the choice. Why can't we? They had their empires too. They had way too many wars. They're tired of war. They decided to spend their money on their own people instead of killing other nations' people.

"Aren't we tired of wars yet? Why do we think we still need them? Because we're afraid? We are the most powerful nation in history. Who are we afraid of? Don't the Republicans scare us with Orange alerts and non-existent WMD to justify transferring our money into the pockets of defense contractors, lobbyists and Congressmen? They have to make us afraid. Otherwise we wouldn't let them squander our money on their weapons.

"Well I say, be not afraid. Be not afraid. We can cut our defense spending in half and we'd still have a military fives times bigger than Russia's or China's. With those savings we can begin to deliver the American promise.

"China and Russia are rivals. They are not enemies. They do not threaten us. They do not want to kill us. Al Qaeda is an enemy. But they are not a nation. They are political criminals and we need to send the cops after them. The FBI and Interpol. Stop their financing. But not go to war.

"Be not afraid I say. We have a choice to make, like the one you make at your kitchen table. What are we going to spend our limited funds on: War or the people's needs?

"We can choose to improve the lives of millions of people or kill huge numbers of people. Do we want to support life on a mass scale or death on that scale?

"That's the choice you'll make this November.

"Thank you very much. And God help America."

www.politicalodyssey.com

Comments

[chinationreport]

Very well said. Unfortunately there are still too many Americans that are refusing to face the reality. In today's global world, the US economy is totally linked with global geo-political situation. Every step US makes on the world stage, whether militarily, politically, has impact far beyond the original scope. The snowball effect is certainly beyond John McCain's comprehension. His hockey mom who just got her passport to travel abroad won't help much either. I recently wrote this essay to talk about China in 2030 to give a prediction of China's future from a different perspective. You might find it interesting (or maybe not). http://www.chinationreport.com/ChinaIn2030.html

[timm0]

That would resonate with you and a few thousand other people. I DO think we need to slash military spending, but there's no campaign offensive or defensive value to focusing on that issue. It's a budget option that will best be debated in congress.

"Independents" feel that mccain will be better commander in chief by a modest margin. Coming out with a promise to cut defense budgets is aid and comfort to the mccain campaign that they can only achieve right now through outright lies and smears.

There is no way to educate the millions and millions of people out there about our defense budget in one part of a speech. You have to be as politically tone deaf as humanly possible to even consider it.

You have impressive investigative journalism credentials. But speech writing and campaign management is not quite your strong suit.

[Joe Lauria - Huffpost Blogger]

I wrote this in the spirit of "that will be the day" and slightly tongue in cheek ("God help America") But we are in a lot of trouble until the day comes when a major party candidate can put this stark choice before the American people.

[timm0]

There are other choices, Joe. Like, what if we made the defense budget cap an annual referendum vote? Could we propose separating the tax streams for defense and other programs (like how social security is done)?

Those are the debates you need to start first. People understand what social security costs because we pay that tax and see how big it is every paycheck. Do the same thing for defense and you've leaped 90% of the way there without trying to wage some unwinnable war of rhetoric on the issue.

[researcher]

again excellent post

americans want to be world leaders and to do that they want a mega military

plus most are convinced that these industrial military jobs are needed for jobs

as I have said time and time again on here until we change the system little change will occur

capitalism must self destruct and we americans must live through that self destuction

paradigm shifts are rare and obama does not offer a paradigm shift

not one word on cutting mega military expenses

he wants to get elected and to mention defunding the military to some degree would cost him the election

americans in their hearts are imperialists years of conditioning capitalism conditioning

bankruptcy will end american imperialism of 700 bases around the world and wars for profits

growing up on a small farm in the midwest I never dreamt that my country would become an imperialist country never in a million years never say never.

peace

people and media make fun of mike gravel without realizing he spoke truths

he is in very good company look at history

[SolarPowerGuy]

Hey there, Joe,

I had exactly the same thought as I listened to Obama. He had an opportunity to convince us progressives that he really was serious about ending America's militaristic mindset. He didn't take it.

One quick note on something you wrote:

"We spend close to a trillion dollars a year on defense-related costs."

I disagree! We spend close to a trillion dollars a year on the military, all right. But when it comes down to it, how much would we have to spend in order to adequately DEFEND the United States? A third of that, maybe?

Most of America's military budget is earmarked for meddling in OTHER countries. A small fraction of that overseas military expense might be justifiable for humanitarian purposes (e.g., Bosnia), but not even that money qualifies as money spent on the defense of America.

Most of our overseas military dollars are spent for less noble reasons -- scheming against any possible future enemies (China, Russia) -- and, of course, securing America's access to resources not found within our own borders.

[JonRaymond]

Defend us from what exactly? Iraqi school children?

[SolarPowerGuy]

Ummm, that was more or less my point.