Consistency

by Eyck Freymann

There are a lot of things you can say about Ron Paul, but at least he's consistent:

As many frustrated Americans who have joined the Tea Party realize, we cannot stand against big government at home while supporting it abroad. We cannot talk about fiscal responsibility while spending trillions on occupying and bullying the rest of the world. We cannot talk about the budget deficit and spiraling domestic spending without looking at the costs of maintaining an American empire of more than 700 military bases in more than 120 foreign countries. We cannot pat ourselves on the back for cutting a few thousand dollars from a nature preserve or an inner-city swimming pool at home while turning a blind eye to a Pentagon budget that nearly equals those of the rest of the world combined. --Ron Paul

To the tea partiers who support the wars and advocate cutting spending, "Big Government" must mean the parts of the budget that go to Social Security, Medicare, and non-defense discretionary spending.

Oh, so no Medicare cuts. Apparently ditto for Social Security privatization. So "Big Government" is the remaining non-security discretionary spending. Problem is, that's $447 billion. A lot, but less than 15% of a $3.5 trillion budget. And Obama, defying liberals, capped this "Big Government spending" at 2010 levels for the remainder of his term. 

My question is: if we must cut spending, what programs must go? The National Cancer Institute? Air Traffic Control? VA hospitals? Flood control at the Army Corps of Engineers?

Which government windows must be smashed? Tim Pawlenty stands at the ready with a golf club.