Mr. Bush's Dangerous Budget
by Bill Shein

Like many Americans, I reacted to President Bush's $2.9 trillion budget proposal — which suggests we spend $625 billion on the military in 2008 — with outrage, shock, disbelief, hives, uncontrollable sobbing, fits of panic, a sudden high fever, utter confusion, and a bizarre pasty feeling in my mouth.

While it's possible my reaction was due to an unrelated flu, the bottom line is this: Why must President Bush continue to woefully underfund our nation's growing war machine? Because by proposing only $625 billion for military spending, the president left billions — perhaps trillions — of dollars on the table.

Sure, the president's budget sends a few more bucks to the Pentagon by slashing or eliminating useless programs that provide heating assistance, food and health care for the nation's old, poor and infirm.

And his 2008 blueprint wisely shifts funds from homeland security (border and aviation security, first responders, and other money-wasters) to current and future overseas war-fighting. Why? Because the best defense is a good offense — as the hundreds of thousands killed in Iraq would surely say if they were still alive.

But with such inadequate Pentagon funding, it's clear the president isn't paying attention to the never-wrong strategic insights of his vice president, Dick Cheney. A few weeks ago, Cheney urged Americans to settle in for a war that could last "20 or 30 or 40 years" — a period of time during which Cheney, as a once-and-future defense contractor, will surely profit handsomely. Hey, he's earned it!

In the very short term, when we attack Iran, move troops into Venezuela, occupy North Korea, and conquer Barbados — hey, why not? — our massive war machine must be humming on all cylinders. And when the Pentagon announces that its expensive and cleverly nonspecific "Global War on Terrorism" has been elevated to an even-more-expensive "Intergalactic War on Terrorism and Extraterrestrial Zombie Warlords," there will simply be no room in the federal budget for anything besides war.

Look, I've seen the plans for the Ronald Reagan Moon Base, the Adam Smith Center for Interplanetary Laissez Faire (located on Mars), and the Baby Einstein Toddler Boot Camp, which will prepare our children for permanent war. Clearly, in 2008 we need to direct the entire $2.9 trillion budget to the Pentagon. And when the president's policies further destabilize the planet and fuel the fire of anti-American extremism — part of his recently announced "Super-Double-Ironic Strategy to Fight Anti-American Extremism" — we'll probably need even more.

So if the old, infirm, and those unfortunate enough to be poor in America want food or health care, well, they should do their patriotic duty and sign up for the armed forces — food and health care included! After all, even Democrats in Congress have agreed to the president's plan to permanently expand the size of the active-duty military. Two birds, one bunker-busting stone, baby!

Speaking of babies, the president's budget wisely underfunds a program that enables states to provide health care for very poor children. That way, when the soul of a soon-to-be born American child is floating around in the pre-life ether, it will simply choose to be born into a wealthy family — a wealthy family growing ever wealthier thanks to those most-excellent tax cuts.

While I'll leave it to Congress to rework President Bush's budget to fully fund our military, let me suggest one idea: The $13 billion proposed for humanitarian foreign aid should instead be spent by the Pentagon to build new military bases in poor countries. Then we can hire starving foreigners to staff the bases that protect American interests abroad. Because as someone once said, "Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. But hire him to work at one of our more than 700 foreign military bases, and we can now guarantee that he eats for 20 or 30 or 40 years."

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Bill Shein thinks you know what he really means.

(This column originally appeared in the Berkshire Eagle newspaper on February 10, 2007. Read Bill's previous column, "Eulogy for a Friend" ).