<div dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/this-week-lets-help-burli_b_4018161.html" target="_blank">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/this-week-lets-help-burli_b_4018161.html</a><br><div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr"><div><br></div><div><div>
<p style="line-height:21px;font-size:15px;font-family:Georgia,Century,Times,serif;margin:0px 0px 14px;list-style:none;border:0px;padding:0px">We have just a week left to <a href="http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/burlington-city-council?source=c.url&r_by=" style="list-style:none;margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;color:rgb(0,136,195);outline:0px;text-decoration:none" target="_blank">help Burlington, Vermont kill the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter</a>, the biggest taxpayer ripoff in human history. On Monday, October 7, the Burlington City Council will vote on a binding resolution that would block F-35 warplanes from being based at Burlington International Airport, which is owned by the city.</p>

<p style="line-height:21px;font-size:15px;font-family:Georgia,Century,Times,serif;margin:0px 0px 14px;list-style:none;border:0px;padding:0px">If the Council votes to block the planes from being based in Burlington, that won't kill the $1.5 trillion F-35 taxpayer ripoff by itself. But it will set a crucial precedent. It will prove that the F-35 is politically vulnerable. It will mark a historic defeat of pork-barrel military Keynesianism by citizen engagement. It would help change the national posture of Democrats on unnecessary military spending. It would help abolish the dogma that Democrats have to support unnecessary military spending when it takes place in their districts.</p>

<p style="margin:0px 0px 14px;list-style:none;border:0px;padding:0px"><font face="Georgia, Century, Times, serif"><span style="font-size:15px;line-height:21px">The dogma that Democrats have to support unnecessary military spending when it takes place in their districts is deeply ingrained. But there's no intrinsic reason why it should be true. Democrats wouldn't support federal spending for propaganda against birth control if it took place in their districts. Democrats wouldn't support federal spending to promote homophobia if it took place in their districts. Why should Democrats support federal spending for the taxpayer-ripoff, Social Security-cutting, job-destroying F-35, just because it takes place in their districts?</span><span style="font-size:15.555556297302246px;line-height:20.98958396911621px"><br>
</span></font><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:small;line-height:normal">[...]</span></p></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><div><br></div></font></span></div></div></div>-- <br>Robert Naiman<br>Policy Director<br>
Just Foreign Policy<br><a href="http://www.justforeignpolicy.org" target="_blank">www.justforeignpolicy.org</a><br><a href="mailto:naiman@justforeignpolicy.org" target="_blank">naiman@justforeignpolicy.org</a><br>
<div><br></div></div>