From the WSJ article you posted, one would expect deep draconian cuts in the defense budget. From what i've read, the defense budget has not been cut. If anything its gone up a couple billion. If thats the case, Boskin is terribly misleading (lying) with his WSJ editorial. Like you said, he doesnt provide sources.


>Not clear since he doesn't list his sources, but maybe these:
>
>http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/policy/securityspending/articles/030309_obamas_first_budget_ends_era/
>http://shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/03/03/obamas_defense_budget_sacrifices_us_primacy
>
>Interesting that others see it completely different:
>http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090305.COMARTIN05/TPStory/National
>
>
>>What is he referring to here?
>>
>>> It reduces defense spending to a level not sustained since the dangerous days before World War II
>>
>>>President Obama is returning to ....... draconian defense drawdown.
>>
>>
>>>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123629969453946717.html
>>>
>>>Snippet:
>>>
>>>It's hard not to see the continued sell-off on Wall Street and the growing fear on Main Street as a product, at least in part, of the realization that our new president's policies are designed to radically re-engineer the market-based U.S. economy, not just mitigate the recession and financial crisis.
>>>
>>>Martin KozlowskiThe illusion that Barack Obama will lead from the economic center has quickly come to an end. Instead of combining the best policies of past Democratic presidents -- John Kennedy on taxes, Bill Clinton on welfare reform and a balanced budget, for instance -- President Obama is returning to Jimmy Carter's higher taxes and Mr. Clinton's draconian defense drawdown.
>>>
>>>Mr. Obama's $3.6 trillion budget blueprint, by his own admission, redefines the role of government in our economy and society. The budget more than doubles the national debt held by the public, adding more to the debt than all previous presidents -- from George Washington to George W. Bush -- combined. It reduces defense spending to a level not sustained since the dangerous days before World War II, while increasing nondefense spending (relative to GDP) to the highest level in U.S. history.
>>>
>>>and:
>>>
>>>On the growth effects of a large expansion of government, the European social welfare states present a window on our potential future: standards of living permanently 30% lower than ours. Rounding off perceived rough edges of our economic system may well be called for, but a major, perhaps irreversible, step toward a European-style social welfare state with its concomitant long-run economic stagnation is not.
>>>
>>>Where is the supporting evidence for the standards of living statement? Everything I've read shows EU standards of living above ours.
>>>
>>>And Charles Krauthammer gives his 2 cents worth:
>>>
>>>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/03/a_dishonest_gimmicky_budget.html