This makes sense -- you can't have "small government" and have military personnel in 140 countries.
But this paradox gives Teabaggers like Putz absolutely no cognitive dissonance.
Many people -- er, well, many pundits, anyway -- complain that the Tea Party movement is entirely oppositional: For a brief moment, the key buzzword was "nihilistic," though the connection between Turgenev and Tea Parties seems rather tenuous.But to Putz, "protecting the country" means waging endless costly wars, a defense budget of $700B a year, supporting a gargantuan national security infrastructure, and never cutting defense spending ever.
In fact, Tea Partiers seem quite clear on what they're for: A limited government, one that keeps its nose out of their business and focuses on things like protecting the country in preference to redistributing income.
"Limited government" my ass.