On July 4th Craig Bradford posted his thoughts regarding the defense cuts made by Robert Gates.  This article is a little more encouraging.  As you may remember, back in April Gates unveiled a $534 billion Defense Department budget which was suppose to do away with some costly weapons programs, one of which was the F-22 Raptor fighter which is “regarded as the most advanced fighter ever built.”  Well, many in Congress are fighting Gates to restore funding for the F-22, as well as the President’s special helicopter(you can cut the helicopter for all we care, but the F-22???), but President Barack Obama has threatened to veto any bill that increases funding for the fighter.

As Colonel Craig Bradford (USAF Ret.) told me, “that plane has kept many of our enemies at bay.”  Having studied up myself on the F-22 Raptor, I don’t think his point is debatable.  I also believe it is absolute naivete to assume that the U.S. doesn’t need a strong military posture in this day and time.

By August Cole

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, at a town-hall meeting in Fort Drum, N.Y., Thursday, is planning to cut back on some costly weapons systems.

CHICAGO — Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he was determined to forge ahead with changing the priorities of the U.S. military on the same day lawmakers voted to thwart a key component of his plan.

The dueling visions of what the U.S. fighting forces should look like looms as one of the major battles between the Obama administration and Congress. Mr. Gates unveiled a $534 billion Defense Department budget in April that would cut back or cancel costly weapons systems he believes aren’t relevant to the military’s needs. But some members of Congress are pushing back, restoring funding to weapons systems that Mr. Gates had sought to kill.

“The time has come to draw a line and take a stand against the business-as-usual approach to national defense,” Mr. Gates said in a speech before the Economic Club of Chicago. “If the Department of Defense can’t figure out a way to defend the United States on a budget of more than half a trillion dollars a year, then our problems are much bigger than anything that can be cured by buying a few more ships and planes,” he told a crowd of business executives.

Hours before Mr. Gates spoke, the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense moved to restore funding to three key programs, including a costly replacement helicopter for the White House and the supersonic F-22 Raptor fighter.

The F-22, built by Lockheed Martin Corp., is regarded as the most advanced fighter ever built. Many lawmakers believe that buying more of them is crucial to maintaining a military advantage in conventional threats that could emerge from countries such as Russia or China.

Mr. Gates thinks the 187 jets the U.S. currently has ordered are enough. He believes that more F-22s, with a price tag of $143 million each, would rob the Pentagon of resources it needs for current conflicts and a new fighter, the F-35 Lightning II. He has staked much of his political capital on blocking Congress from acquiring additional F-22s, and President Barack Obama has threatened to veto any bill that increases funding for the fighter.

However, some members of Congress appear determined to keep the project alive. The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense on Thursday added $369 million to the 2010 defense budget as a sort of down payment on 12 more F-22s, following a similar move in the House Armed Services Committee that passed in the House. The subcommittee, headed by Pennsylvania Democrat Rep. John Murtha, also went against the White House by allocating $485 million to continue work on the presidential helicopter, a project terminated by Mr. Gates earlier this summer. A third program Mr. Gates had sought to end, the development of a new engine for the F-35 fighter, received $560 million.

In the Senate, lawmakers are also trying to add funding back in for the F-22.

Georgia Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss, whose state includes the F-22s Marietta assembly line, said in an interview that he expected broad support to buy seven more F-22s for $1.75 billion. Opposing his efforts are Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D., Mich.) and Sen. John McCain (R., Ariz.).

In his speech, Mr. Gates lambasted supporters of the plane for coming up with “far fetched” usages in order to keep production going, such as hunting Somali pirates with an aircraft he believes has only limited use against advanced fighter planes. He also took aim at critics who say the Pentagon is ill-prepared for a big foe, explaining how the U.S. would stack up against China, whose air force would be outnumbered, and outclassed, by the 2,500 manned combat aircraft the U.S. expects to have by 2020.

The rising political stakes come during a week that is marked by some of the first defense-industry layoffs directly tied to the Pentagon’s crackdown on weapons programs. Lockheed Martin announced 600 layoffs tied to the Pentagon’s termination of the VH-71 program, while Boeing Co. said it was cutting 1,000 defense jobs because of a stop-work order on part of the Army Future Combat Systems program, and cutbacks to missile defense efforts.

I thought this clip of Governor Romney’s remarks to the Heritage Foundation on Missile Defense would be appropriate.

This news coming out about the House Judiciary seeking to Repeal the 22nd Amendment should be alarming to all Americans who have sought to uphold the principles in the Constitution(i.e.- a balance of power), since it was designed for the rights and protection of the people from Tyranny in our US Government.

Here is an open Congress summery:

H.J.Res. 5 is a Constitutional amendment to remove the limit on the number of terms one may serve as President. It effectively would repeal the 22nd Amendment, which was approved by Congress in 1947 and ratified by the states in 1951. Over the past six congressional sessions, several members of Congress have introduced similar legislation, including Sen. Harry Reid in 1989 ( S.J.Res. 36). As is likely the case in the 111th Congress, the resolutions have never proceeded out of committee. Furthermore, given its past history, it is not likely that such resolutions have been or are currently tied to any specific presidential session.

Although in these resolutions have never “proceeded out of committee,” and that “given its past history, it is not likely that such resolutions have been or are currently tied to any specific presidential session”,  I fear that with the glamour surrounding Obama, this could be something rather frightening to those of us who love the way the Constitution is -the way God gave it to us through the hands of wise and inspired men.

Here are some government website links below that confirm:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=hj111-5
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-hj5/show
http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/111_HJ_5.html