Sec. Gates as people have been aware, has been trying to cut lots of excess defense spending that the military doesn't want, including trying to cut 100 billion from the defense budget over 5 years.
Many people assumed the tea party would be keen to support any reduction in defense spending. And perhaps, they will be.
Sarah Palin's trying to prevent that from happening:
Sarah Palin trying to increase defense spending
Defense spending could also be a theme of Palin's much-mooted return to the campaign trial in 2012.
"Sarah Palin is uniquely positioned to have an effect and it could also redound in her favor," Donnelly said. "She can lay claim to this issue in ways that give her legitimacy and credibility for her next political move as well."
Palin's drive to lead the charge against defense cuts on the right was on display in a June 27 speech at "Freedom Fest," a conservative gathering in Norfolk, VA, where she sent a clear message to Republicans that deficit reduction can't come at the expense of the military.
"Something has to be done urgently to stop the out of control Obama-Reid-Pelosi spending machine, and no government agency should be immune from budget scrutiny," she said. "We must make sure, however, that we do nothing to undermine the effectiveness of our military. If we lose wars, if we lose the ability to deter adversaries, if we lose the ability to provide security for ourselves and for our allies, we risk losing all that makes America great! That is a price we cannot afford to pay."
Palin also directly took on Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a Republican, challenging his drive to reign in procurement spending and reevaluate the need for certain huge weapons systems and platforms.
"Secretary Gates recently spoke about the future of the U.S. Navy. He said we have to ‘ask whether the nation can really afford a Navy that relies on $3 to $6 billion destroyers, $7 billion submarines, and $11 billion carriers.' He went on to ask, ‘Do we really need ... more strike groups for another 30 years when no other country has more than one?'" Palin said. "Well, my answer is pretty simple: Yes, we can and, yes, we do, because we must."
So let me get this straight, she attacks DEFENSE SECRETARY GATES for proposing eliminating weapons that the military doesn't need or want and people are thinking her platform for the 2012 election would be in preventing cuts to the military that many people say are needed. Read her attack. Because we "must"? WHY? Why do we need to spend money which the military doesn't even want?
Is there even a comparison between the two? One's a failed governor, the other's a prominent republican in the Obama administration who's got a long history with the military and Sarah Palin's "uniquely positioned"? My guess is that she's getting advice from prominent neocon Randy Schunemann. She should ask for her money back, because if folks think that she's got ANY credibility on taking Def. Sec. Gates on DEFENSE SPENDING, that's nuts. Plain and simple.