I am not American, and that may help me assess the situation from another point of view.
America is too rich, that's a fact, However the whole financial system is a mess.
We all see America as the land where the rich guys who basically have so much money, are controlling policies for increasing the amount of money they have, which is so weird.
I think that Americans need to make a new revolution, not like that of Egyptians, but a revolution on the financial system.
America be ethical, and know that money without ethics will be the culprit behind the fall of the united states of America just like the soviet union having applied the communist financial system.
No one may read these words, however they are just some words of advice even to the no one reading them.

some really interesting suggestions I would never have thought of. However, I need the reasons for shutting down the war colleges and "ground forces" explained to me again...Really guys?

Also, shutting down the CIA is an interesting idea worth exploring. I have heard from several ex-CIA types that the agency should be eliminated and re-built as a more OSS type of outfit. (read; less pencil pushing bureaucrats, and wallstreet minded ladder climbers, more ex-soldiers and tradesmen, risk takers, and money makers) . However, the former ambassador represents the most cliched opponent of the agency. The state dept and the CIA never see eye to eye, and represent totally different cultures. The ambassadors argument is the classic state dept CIA critique of: " I lived with the people, I have seen the country, I know what's really going on". No, you dont...you know a portion of what is really going on, the CIA's job is to figure out the other part. Your argument , Ambassador, seems flimsy to me. Why not provide constructive criticism and offer alternatives? you simply have listed some CIA failures while providing an interesting personal story to "prove" your thesis...I could just as easily ramble off the many successes of the agency. Your argument failed miserably, but represented an interesting idea worth looking into.

Washington is a sclerotic dying Star being sucked into the Black Holes that are China and Wall Street.

What parts of Government should be permanently furloughed? Well that question will become moot when the pathological Federal Illusion implodes.

Just out of curiosity, what would be your rationale for cutting 75% of all congressional staff?
As you no doubt are aware, all 535 members of the House and Senate are must vote on bills addressing every issue, whether or not it is their issue of expertise. They must also attend committee and subcommittee meetings and many congressional hearings, be responsible for writing several bills at a time, attend fundraisers, make media appearances, meet with lobbyists and read their constituent mail. And this is just when Congress is in session. Members must then return to their districts, where they must campaign, meet constituents, and basically raise hell with federal government agencies if and when these agencies are seen as not treating said constituents fairly. This cannot all happen without staffers to do constituent mail, make all the phone calls, do research, attend hearings, organize events, and, yes, assist in the writing of legislation, and the reading of bills that are to be voted on.
It is clear to me that the hard work of congressional staff, whether in Washington or in the district offices, is crucial to the functioning of our legislative branch, and our democracy. What, then, is the downside of their work that would make cuts desirable?

Scares the ever living crap out of me.

Anyone who believes that strongly in government power should not be allowed to get anywhere close to any sort of real authority.

I'm no Republican but I was seriously disturbed by his comments. He seems to want to make everyone beholden to government.

@Galbraith - why not include DNIA, not much going on there and they're asking for 55 billion next year. If you were paid for positive results, in light of recent events (read intelligence failures) the IC would be hurting to get paid for perfomance.

@Ricks - agree regarding the mil education institutions, especially the service academies. We spend too much and get little in return when a majority of officers leave after five years, to greener pastures.

Another suggestion - cutting miltary bands and soldier shows, in lean times you cut unecessary fat - the argument they are a symbols of national pride, not personally buying it, it actually embarrasses me. And millions spent on NASCAR and other sports events - screams REALLY! Or the World Class Athlete Program. The list is truly endless.

Line item veto - DOD personnel receiving Combat pay (imminent danger) in certain countries....example; UAE, Oman, (GCC Countries (with few exceptions). How can you legitimately claim it, examine each individually country based on facts not a broad AOR approach.

Others not mentioned but might have been; Corporation for Public Broadcasting, AMTRAK, Congressional travel ban - limited to economy class.only.

Go Spartan go now....

The author is either affiliated with another country who wishes to eventually take over the US or he's incredibly naive. One thing is for sure, I am amazed at what a slanted, one-dimensional view of waste that he displays. More than half of his "suggestions" would handicap national defense. Why not simply suggest that the US eliminate the military all together and become like Costa Rica? Now a dose of reality: as the most powerful nation in the world, the US is also the top target in the world. An intelligence agency and effective national defense are vital. Anyone with a clue would understand this. Now, my comment is not to say that cuts aren't necessary here and there. For one thing, there are far more off-shore bases than necessary. Personally, I'd also prefer to see ground troops deployed in various Middle Eastern outposts to be redeployed to the US to deal with escalating violence near the US/Mexican border. But eliminating the CIA? Absurd.

Also passed over in the article were the REALLY wasteful departments which should be shut down - forever. How about the Department of Labor? The Department of Education? The Department of Energy? And, the Department of Homeland Security? All waste immense sums of money by doing tasks that could be done far more efficiently by other portions of the government - with about 5% of the labor. Let's start there.

let's talk to the Kurd villagers that Saddam gassed about that...
oh, we can't, they're dead...
sorry, i don't read columns that continue this lie...

good grief.

Not just a few of these folks are mad as mad hatters.

With few exceptions these cuts are all military based. How about we eliminate the National Endowment for the Arts? Or maybe the the subsidies that are taking critical food stuffs (corn) and turning them into under-performing motor fuel? The government has many facets. The entirety of budgetary cuts ought to be spread across the whole.

There are obviously hundreds of programs that need scrutiny - whether socail, IC, defense, and/or an earmarks freeze etc....The administration, and both parties, need to aquire the intestinal fortitude to start doing the right thing in regards to "going lean" across the board review of essential services and programs - call it governmental triage.

other thoughts -

Suspend/end the billlions we spend and send to countries with poor records on human rights or oppressive regimes - that are of no significant strategic interest to the US. Or even if they are continue to aid and abett terrorist organizations. All the while refusing to honor diplomatic protocols - such as issuing visa's to our diplomats or allowing diplomatic matierials from entering their countries (failure to follow the Geneva Convention) - despite the almost 9 billion in aid since 2002 (yeah it's Pakistan). Guess were buying good will. Not only Pak but many countries.

No offense to Pletka but USAID functions best independent of the state department... not to say it functions well... but it'd be worse under state. State is a whole lot more disorganized and disfunctional and it would simply muddle it all up. USAID does a very good job when its headed locally by someone with an ounce of sense and who isnt lazy- reduce DOD spending and increase USAID... bring back the American Cultural Centers and sponsored libraries- the soft power of diplomacy and especially USAID when properly applied is immense and much more effective then bombing people periodically.

I seem to recall a fellow named John Kenneth Galbraith, with whom Peter Galbraith may be acquainted, who also believed that the Soviet Union was on secure footing in the 1980's.

On a more serious note, I have to wonder why Galbraith doesn't even seem to fleetingly entertain the notion that that trillion dollars in defense expenditures might have had something to do with the disappearance of the Soviet Union.

The CIA has been spectacularly incompetent for decades, and has show a disturbing tendency to try to set policy when its members don't like the policies of elected officials. The best thing that could happen would be for the CIA to be disbanded and a new intelligence agency formed.

As for the rest of the article, I have to wonder about what I'm sure is only a coincidental agreement by most that the defense of the United States needs to be gutted.

Well, except for Michael Lind. Given the serious problems posed by the deficit, the debt, and the long term insolvency of the social welfare programs, all I can assume from Lind's advocacy for more spending and bigger government is that he's one of those people who expect the world to end in 2012, so, what the hey.

The state dept and the CIA never see eye to eye, and represent totally different cultures. The ambassadors argument is the classic state dept CIA critique of: " bwin I lived with the people, I have seen the country, I know what's really going on". No, you dont...you know a portion of what is really going on, the CIA's job is to figure out the other part. Your argument , Ambassador, seems flimsy to me. Why not provide constructive criticism and offer alternatives? you simply have expekt listed some CIA failures while providing an interesting personal story to "prove" your thesis...I could just as easily ramble off the many successes of the agency. Your argument failed miserably.How about we eliminate the National Endowment for the Arts? Or maybe the the subsidies that are taking critical food unibet stuffs (corn) and turning them into under-performing motor fuel? The government has many facets. One thing is for sure, I am amazed at what a slanted, one-dimensional view of waste that he displays. More than half of his "suggestions" would handicap national defense. Why not simply suggest that the US eliminate the military all together and become like Costa Rica? Now a dose of reality: as the most powerful nation in the world, the US is also the kasino top target in the world. An intelligence agency and effective national defense are vital. Anyone with a clue would understand this. Now, my comment is not to say that cuts aren't necessary here and there. For one thing, there are far more off-shore bases than necessary. Personally, I'd also prefer to see ground troops deployed in various Middle Eastern outposts to be redeployed to the US to deal with escalating violence near the US/Mexican border. It's bad enough that our politicians lack the courage and vision to enact and carry out policy interwetten that is in the long term best inteterst of the nation. If you give everyone with an internet-connected computer a say, then policy would be at the whim of whaterver way the wind blows. Remember this is the country that voted off Pia, Jennifer Hudson and Daughtry. When it comes to voting truly important things, I doubt enough people will be interested in and educated enough about the issues.