Obviously this can’t be balanced, it necessarily creates a deficit.

I would not support Obama’s domestic freeze. I would oppose earmarks instead. How and why we spend the money matters. There are serious domestic problems that can’t be ignored. We need to address these problems effectively as a nation, not creating dependency on one or the other party through earmarked spending. We’re wrecking our economy by tearing down what has worked in the past, and businesses and capital are leaving. We need to get enterprise moving. Cutting unnecessary spending and regulation like illegal affirmative action programs is better than just cutting taxes because it contributes to a coherent growth strategy, making us better able to bear the temporary burden of defending ourselves against our attackers and building international cooperation.

MCCOLLUM POSITIONS

I disagree with her statement that "Military and domestic spending, entitlements, tax giveaways, and revenue increases all must be part of any deficit reduction solution. Future war spending should be paid for since wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have already added $1 trillion to the national debt." She clearly does not understand the purpose of our action to defend the nation against terrorism. If we're just spending to feed the military and defense contractors, then I would oppose it. But if the military can justify defensive actions to protect against terror, we need to fund it but not to perpetuate an enlarged military or security organization. We need to seriously address and resolve these situations, but must recognize this is a temporary situation that we must be dedicated to resolving.

COLLETT POSITIONS

I agree with Collett that "Decreasing the deficit should not come at the price of our national security." But we must define our purpose in fighting terror. We must not spend this kind of money to socially engineer either the military (by having gays or lesbians openly commanding military units or putting women in combat) or countries like Afghanistan and Iraq, forcing them to put women in parliament or send girls to school (often through minefields or combat danger) to please American constituencies.