Republicans always talk about low-taxes, but when someone mentions cutting taxes on military-spending, Republicans are exactly the opposite. How can there be such a double-standard? Are Republicans in favor of 100% taxation on everyone, if every tax-penny goes to the military? I'm guessing, the answer is no. So I have to wonder, where does it stop? What amount of military-spending is acceptable? 99% taxation? 88%? What do you all think? What could Republicans be thinking, when they absolutely and unequivocally revoke any effort to cut taxes by reducing military-spending? Are they secretly planning a military takeover of the entire world? That sure would be difficult, considering all the nukes not in U.S. or allied possession. Where does the 900billion$ a year go, anyway? Is it really making anything safer for the United States? Isn't it true, if we cut military-spending in half, in only two years we could pay back our huge debt to China? Wouldn't that make us safer than wasting money on pointless foreign-bases, illegitimate foreign-wars, and the development of impractical new weaponry?

So I ask, Republicans, what tax-rate do you consider too high for military spending? You don't really think we should all simply work for the military, giving them 100% of what we make? Does society work for the military, or does the military work for society? If you think a 100% tax-rate is too high, clearly you are in favor of cutting 'defense' spending. Shouldn't military-spending directly correlate to what is necessary? You seem to have this notion that more money = safer, which if true would mean, by not imposing a 100% tax-rate on everyone, we are endangering the United States. So what is it, do you want to raise taxes or lower taxes?