I apologize for the relatively long gap in posts.
The other day I went to a job fair that was held in a building where I work. Almost all of the employers there were from one government agency or another. Out of 60 employers, only 4 were from the private sector.
Anyway, I went around heckling the representatives from the various agencies – one of my favorites was when I walked up to the INS folks and asked, “So… what do you guys do?” And they responded, “We help people stay in America.” To which I retorted, “You mean you help illegals stay in America.”
For the most part it was an enjoyable experience for me – going from one booth to the next asking for a job that pays a ton of money without me having to do any work, asking if they had any jobs for a person with absolutely no skills except the ability to call in sick, etc… it was fun.
But one booth actually made me angry. I can’t remember the name of the agency, but when I asked what they did, the man said that it was their responsibility to regulate and oversee the disbursement of TARP funds.
I got angry, “They’ve created a whole new agency just to oversee bailout money?”
I got angry because this comes on the heels of me learning that the Air Force chaplaincy is getting cut by 1/3. At a time when their workload is at a record high, they’re doing away with a third of their chaplains.
It really pisses me off that whenever a conservative says, “We’ve got to stop spending so much…” The liberal responds with, “You’re right… let’s look at the defense budget to see where we can make some cuts.”
It is true that the defense budget is the “single greatest” category in the Federal budget. And I think it should be. Why? Because every political scientist since Plato wrote The Republic around 380BC, everyone who has thought about it has understood that one of the primary purposes of government is the defense of it’s people and the protection of it’s land. Having a people who are secure in their land is essential to literally every other aspect of societal and cultural development. Thus in the Constitution, when the Framers specifically discussed the military for the defense of the people, they weren’t being novel. They simply understood that a nation cannot develop and thrive if they have the specter of potential invasion hanging over their heads.
Incidentally, the Constitution doesn’t make provision for entitlement programs, federal law enforcement agencies, or agencies that want to see you naked before you can get on a private business’ plane. (By the way, I made that jab to the folks from the TSA – If I come work for you, when can I start making people get naked?) This is why conservatives typically are “pro military” – national defense is actually prescribed by the Constitution and is fundamentally prerequisite to the society being able to flourish. This is also while leftists, in the name of being “world citizens” and decrying the nation state as a relic of the past, typically wish we could just open our borders and disband our militaries.
So if cuts are to be made – and they need to be made – then start with bogus agencies started to oversee the distribution of a bogus bailout and move down the line… cutting funds from national defense, the one area actually spelled out in the Constitution, should come only as a matter of last resort.
That’s my take on it.
Written by,
Ben
Kay's Little Korner 